The Animal Protection Party on Direct Action
Since the launch of The Animal Protection Party (previously SPEAK Political), we have received a large number of press enquiries regarding the accusation that animal rights activists are behind the recent spate of parcel bombs, and whether or not we condone this activity. With this in mind and the fact that we will undoubtedly be asked the same question over again, we feel it is necessary to make our position on direct action clear.
At The Animal Protection Party we are not responsible for the actions of the animal rights movement as a whole. Neither will we answer for it. However, we realise that as an animal rights based political party our views on direct action are of interest and will be sought.
Some animal rights activists engage in direct action as a means to fight the animal abuse that is endemic in our society. This takes many forms but can sometimes involve breaking the law. At The Animal Protection Party we believe that some struggles are above man-made laws and therefore in certain circumstances it can be acceptable to break them.
It should be remembered that laws are not necessarily a universal standard that is etched in stone. Rather they are fluid in nature; often created with the protection of powerful vested interests in mind and changed at the whim of whoever is in power at the time. It is for this reason that the very act of bringing about change can often lead to conflict with the law.
For instance, it was the 'law' that underpinned both apartheid in South Africa and the atrocities of the Holocaust. It was the 'law' that refused women the vote, and it was the 'law' that said that Rosa Parks could be arrested for not giving her seat to a white man. Of course any reasonable person nowadays would say that those laws were wrong. At The Animal Protection Party we are fighting for a time when existing laws protecting the institutional abuse of animals will be viewed in a similar way, and we are confident of winning the battle.
We place life, both human and non-human, above property. Therefore, while we will not condone direct action, we will not condemn it either, providing it does not take the form of violence against living things. All too often the topic of direct action is bandied about without a discussion of the context in which it exists. We prefer to discuss the subject rather than indulge in sound bites that achieve absolutely nothing.
At The Animal Protection Party we believe that politics has become more about hollow words rather than anything meaningful. Therefore we refuse to be caught up in the game of condemning acts of non violent direct action all for the sake of political expediency. The public are tired of political spin. They want a political system that is based on truth and democracy; a system that values the voter and, more importantly, values their opinions. Therefore, we aim to present the truth based on real evidence and not indulge in political posturing. At The Animal Protection Party we are confident that once the public have been given the opportunity to hear all the facts they will come to their own informed decision as to who are the real criminals.
Animal Experiment in the UK 2006
All animal experiments up by 115,834 to 3,012,032
Experiments with no anaesthetic up by 109,200 to 1,856,200
Poisoning experiments up by 27,400 to 420,500
Experiments on mice up 106,022 to 2,067,071
Experiments on rats down 18,359 to 406,168
Experiments on birds up 1,272 to 114,428
Experiments on guinea pigs up 1,165 to 30,184
Experiments on sheep up 7,048 to 36,377
Experiments on cattle down 13,776 to 5,334
Experiments on cats up 24 to 524
Experiments on dogs down 25 to 7,595
Experiments on primates down 448 to 4,204
Experiment on fish up 41,212 to 274,066
Radiation experiments on all animals up by 2,769 to 11,968
Inhalation experiments on dogs up 702 to 732
Experiments on GM animals up 77,900 to 1,035,343
Animal Protection Party Blog
The fights ahead
Thank you for all your considerable help during the election campaign and for all your work to support compassionate candidates. The result was bad but by no means as bad as it might have been!!
Well that was fun!!
Dr Evan Harris stood on the podium five years ago and romped home with a 7,683-seat majority. A safe seat for the Big Pharma front man and useful to them to help peddle their potions. These are all tested on animals, passed as ‘safe’ and often go on to do people harm or lead to more drugs which are tested on animals and so on. At around 4.00am yesterday morning following a number of tense recounts of the Oxford West votes, Evan Harris took the platform for the result along with Keith Mann but was rather less buoyant than previously. Let us not forget we don’t ask for votes for the Animal Protection Party instead we ask for voters to tick any box other than the target, for example Evan Harris. And they did, wiping out his majority!
http://www.fromdusktildawn.org.uk/News/2010/april/keith_talks_to_oxford_radio.html
Now we have to campaign harder than ever during the coming months. My own personal view is that David Cameron will not bring forward a vote on the Hunting Act unless he can be sure of winning that vote and getting the Act repealed. If he brought it forward and lost then the hunting of animals with dogs, that he and his hunting chums so love, would have gone for ever.
At the moment a vote count amongst MPs suggests that David Cameron would probably lose a free vote on the hunting issue. He will probably try to overcome that problem by solving the so-called "West Lothian" question whereby Scottish MPs can vote on issues that apply purely to England. If they are barred from doing that, so that Scottish MPs supportive of the hunting ban cannot vote on the hunting issue, then the mathematics would change significantly.
To support their campaign to repeal the Hunting Act the hunt dirty tricks department will soon go in to overdrive. We all know that our opponents think of nothing other than restoring their sordid pastimes in full to our countryside and they are wholly and completely callous. We need to be alert to the following actions that they are suspected of planning:
Hunters and shooters may work together to create a stream of wounded and injured foxes. There could be a sudden surge in shot or snared foxes found in our countryside. Hunt supporters will then look to their friends in the media and the veterinary profession to whip up the hysteria for repealing the Hunting Act. They will point to the newly found injured foxes and raise the (false) cry: there are "no injured foxes in hunting" and "it is time for hunting to come back"!
Another angle they are suspected of exploring is the sudden "failure" of hunts. Ever since the hunting ban we have been told that hunting is more popular than ever. Our own local Harrier pack was welcomed by a "record crowd" last Boxing Day. But that doesn't play well when it comes to pressurising MPs to make the Parliamentary time to repeal the Hunting Act. So now we will probably see a sudden about turn. The hunts will suddenly have become impoverished. The new message will be: "we cannot continue like this; the Hunting Act must be repealed or we will have to close down and kill all the hounds"! And make no mistake these people really are callous enough to close a few hunts down and kill all their hounds just to prove this point! It will exert tremendous pressure on MPs particularly the new ones who have no knowledge of the ways of hunters. Can you imagine something like Countryfile (ever the best friend of the hunters) with a five minute piece of a Huntsman in tears over the deaths of all his precious hounds? This will be extreme psychological pressure. If it sounds far fetched remember that in the past there was at least one hunt that was forced to close down where the hunt supporters who had puppy-walked the hounds pleaded that they could take "their" hounds back and look after them but the hunt refused the offer preferring instead to slaughter all the hounds. Apparently at that time they saw the slaughter of all the hounds as some kind of threat to the public about what would happen to all hounds should hunting ever be banned (a hollow threat as it turned out!).
We must to be alert to every cruel and callous plan that our opponents can conceive.
We need to write like we have never written before to our MPs, particularly to the new ones. Often they just have no idea as to what hunting is about. Here at the ACIG and the Animal Welfare Information Service we have guides and pamphlets that highlight the cruelty inherent in bloodsports that we would be pleased to send you, for you to pass on to your MP. We need to tell the politicians and we need to prove to them that we really care about this issue. We also need to let them know that we care about badgers and we do not want them culled at huge expense just to appease a bunch of ignorant and cruel farmers.
You may have seen that during the election campaign we sent these "Action for Compassion" circulars from the Animal Cruelty Investigation Group and circulated letters to the press from its sister group the Animal Welfare Information Service. The senior group is the ACIG and we are pleased to welcome people as new supporters in return for any donation, this includes foreign currency, coins and notes, old and new and unwanted or broken jewellery. We can exchange this for cash for our funds. We also welcome donations of unused UK postage stamps. Finally we greatly appreciate donations of any small items (easily posted) that we can sell on stalls to raise funds. In view of the coming battles ahead new support would be greatly welcomed!! Please help us in our campaigns for compassion and decency in our treatment of animals. We do not bombard our supporters with literature as we only mail twice a year, in August and February.
Please take a look at our web site to see the successes we have been able to achieve since we started in 1989. Thank you.
Mike Huskisson
Let us also remember that this defender of great evil has been prominent in inciting the savagery inflicted on our companions inside the windowless chambers of Oxford University. Remember Tipu Aziz brain damaging little Felix and the others for TV? Harris and Aziz marched with placards through the streets of Oxford alongside the vivisectors and assorted chums demanding more of this terrible, misguided exploitation of our fellow earthlings! How much of human society really wants more animals to be used in this way? We believe that most people have evolved beyond this and view children in a similar way to animals and as Evan Harris hasn’t we joined up some dots for his constituents and forged allies to achieve our stated aim.
Harris couldn’t hold back from moaning to the audience during his losers’ speech of the “dirty” nature of the Animal Protection Party campaign and told of his hopes that this approach wouldn’t become a regular feature of British politics. It only added insult to his injury when we reiterated that this is exactly what we intend to do!
“Science lost one of its strongest parliamentary supporters with the surprise defeat of Evan Harris, Professor David Nutt, who resigned as chairman of the Government's drugs advisory committee, said that it was a sad day for science and the Government.” The Independent
To further strengthen this important step forward we have established connections with people who once might have had less respect for our kind of thinking than they now do. Many of who have expressed their admiration for our efforts, one Oxford candidate, a Green, was big enough to state that he believed that we had a greater case for standing than he did. And it is perhaps worth noting that the personable Nicola Blackwood, the Conservative who has replaced Evan Harris, is against repealing the Hunting Act. Harris however voted very strongly against the ban. What a gem!
Vauxhall proved a difficult territory to infiltrate despite the inspired efforts of Jim and the team. Here we focused on Hoey’s ties to hunting and her constituency failings but other issues won the day there. We none the less positively communicated with a great deal of people.
In Hampshire we exposed the sickening brutality they call ‘essential medical research’ killing 70,000 animals a year in Wickham Laboratories to test Botox and Sarah Coats pulled 255 rural votes, beating the Independent candidate Graham Quar, Wickham Laboratories solicitor.
It’s another no-go area for the progressive campaigner but we went to Huntingdon, one of the Tory's safest seats. Jonathan Djanogly suffered a surprise 2,000 cut to his majority and Carrie Holliman was given 181 of the votes and a lot of friends from people who were pleased that we directly challenged the Conservative on both HLS and his excessive expenses.
We have laid the foundations for the future. This was our first time out and no doubt mistakes were made. However, we will learn from them so that we can be even more effective in the future. There will always be those who will work obsessively to undermine initiative, but they are weak and are swimming against the tide. Everyone else can feel proud of what we have achieved here. We know we are.
Keith on Radio Oxford before the count…
Oxford Mail after the count…
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/general_election_2010/oxwest/8152627.ELECTION__Conservative_topples_Lib_Dem_Harris/
The Times Online. A terrible night for Science
http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2010/05/election-2010-a-terrible-night-for-science.html
The Independent…
Science lost one of its strongest parliamentary supporters with the surprise defeat of Evan Harris, Professor David Nutt, who resigned as chairman of the Government's drugs advisory committee, said that it was a sad day for science and the Government
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/time-for-a-rethink-for-science-lobby-1968210.html
Although we at APP do not tell people who they SHOULD vote for, only who they shouldn't we'd also like you to bare in mind what the conservatives would do if they got into power. Just received this letter from our friend Mike Huskisson and think it has an important message for all you animal lovers out there:
Dear Supporters, friends and contacts,
Action for Compassion!
Now is the time for us to dig deep for our cause! There is a report in the media today outlining how the Conservatives plan to have a "bonfire" of Labour laws after they win on May 6th. None of us have to think too hard to know which law will take pride of place at the top! And all the hunters will doubtless dance around the fire in their delight. But please be careful that we are not railroaded into failure at this late stage. All is not lost yet. Momentum and perception are vital. The hunt loving media are playing their role perfectly. They wrongly tell us that Labour are demoralised, disheartened and finished. They wrongly tell us that the Liberal Democrats are also a spent force; like some shooting star they burned bright but are now fading. For the hunt loving media only David Cameron is on the roll to victory. They are trying to talk it into truth and if we believe them we have lost.
For us to make real progress for animals we need to do as much as possible of the following:-
We need to encourage and cajole all our supporters to vote and to vote tactically.
We need to tell anyone and everyone exactly what David Cameron plans to inflict on our wildlife should he win. There are voters out there who just have no idea that he will bring back the likes of say hare coursing. Unless we tell them people will be fooled into voting for him in blissful ignorance.
We need to campaign to the last minute of the last day. This election is so tight that seats will be won or lost by just a few votes. Helping those last few supporters to get to the polling station on May 6th could make all the difference.
Most importantly we must never ever give up. You know that I have spent most of my life trying to help animals in the hunted field. I have seen hunted animals in the most dire of circumstances but they never give up. No matter how the odds are stacked against them no matter what number of hunters and dogs squeeze around them they never give up And sometimes they can survive and get away from the most impossible situations. For so long as there is life there is hope.
Our letter writing campaign continues. Here is the latest that I have sent that was e-mailed to some 250 local and national papers last night:
Dear Sir,
UK voters prefer conciliation to strife. Hunting wildlife for recreation, with packs of hounds, was imposed here by French conquerors after 1066 and has always caused strife between pro and anti hunters. There has been violence and tragically even deaths. The Hunting Act 2004 offered hope that this conflict could be ended. Hunting was allowed much as before, but hounds were forced to hunt humane alternatives to live quarry.
Hounds could meet, supporters could dress up in finery and cross-country gallops could continue. Only the kill was absent. It seemed the perfect compromise. Not a ban on hounds, horses or hunting, but a ban on killing for fun. A ban founded in compassion not class. With cruelty removed increasing numbers have taken to hunting. But the compromise has proved fragile. In the privacy of the countryside hunters can do as they like and some have flouted the new law. Now politicians with wisdom and compassion are needed to advance the process. Amendments to the Hunting Act to help our police keep hunting legal are needed. This would benefit most who hunt and all country dwellers. Repealing the Act, as the Conservatives plan, would be a disaster.
Yours faithfully,
M.J. Huskisson
Please join in with this letter writing campaign. Supporters up and down the country have flooded their local papers with letters and it has made a difference. It is now too late to get a letter in most weekly papers before the election but letters to daily local papers can be e-mailed to them up to the end of Tuesday (they need to be on the Editor's desk no later than Wednesday to be considered for publication on Election day).
Please also support the excellent "save-me" campaign that is being run by Brian May from Queen. You can find his site at: http://www.save-me.org.uk/
A final thought. Whatever happens on May 6th it will not be the fault of animal welfarists. We have all only ever done our best. There are three levels of concern in our society. The first is that people want to get the very best for themselves and their loved ones right here right now. The second stage is when they look to improve the future to make the world a better place for their children and their children in turn. The third stage is when people have the altruistic outlook to seek to improve the welfare not only of other people but of other species. I have listened to and read so much in this election debate but it is nearly all in the first level of concern. People only seem concerned about which politician will give them personally the most right now. Little regard is given to the second level, the likes of climate change and sharing and conserving world resources. Our area of concern, the third level, doesn't get a look in! The crazy thing is that we all know that politicians will make just about any promise to electors to win their support before an election but what will they actually do after it? About the only thing we can be rock-solid certain of is that a victorious David Cameron will give his hunting chums anything and everything they want.
Please....stay strong and keep campaigning! Thank you. Please also forward this to anyone you know who might support our campaign for compassion.
Kindest regards,
Mike Huskisson
Well, well have we stirred one up! Working on the principle that our society needs to extend its compassion to all living beings and that the enemy of our enemy is our friend, we set about exposing Big Pharma apologist Dr Evan Harris with a view to losing him his power base in Oxford. You can see what Harris represents here for anyone who hasn’t yet digested this character.
We have leafleted the entire population in this area and rallied other groups who have issues with Harris. Harris, a bully, claims to be an “extremist for free speech” and not surprisingly labels those who defend animal rights as ‘terrorists’ and ‘extremists’. But when the tables are turned he isn’t so cocky.
We have joined up the dots on his links to our ill-health, to dangerous drugs and some quite horrific animal abuse and we have set about losing him his seat in Parliament. So what does he do in response to us utilising the ballot box? He calls in the police! See here. He claims he needs protection but what exactly does he need protecting from?
The truth would seem to be something of an issue for the unpleasant Evan Harris. One issue his predominantly Christian voters don’t approve of is his view on abortion and his desire to liberalise the process. We have highlighted his enthusiasm for extending the time limit on abortion beyond the seemingly arbitrary 24-week time limit of today.
Personally I find it quite abhorrent that a child of that age can be legally killed, but it doesn’t shock me having seen what goes on inside the animal labs where age is no barrier to savagery. My best friend was born premature, uncomfortably close to this ‘cut off point’ but she is my world. She is a beacon of light for our species and is here for a reason. Harris is rattled by the attention he is now getting as he seeks another 5 years of bringing forth the darkness and is doing what they all do when having to defend the indefensible - he is failing miserably.
He told BBC Radio Oxford today (29/4/10) that he is not happy and claims we have defamed him in our leaflets, although he was reluctant to be specific about exactly what it is he claims we are mistaken about. Jonathan Djangoly in Huntingdon is equally unhappy with our campaign there and reckons his solicitor is involved, but more on him later. Kate Hoey is blowing the same hot air. Our response: BRING IT ON.
Let’s talk about the disgusting cruelty and fraudulent science you defend, let’s look at a 24-week old baby and discuss its future and allow us to analyse the fluoride and the vaccinations. That’s what we are here to do.
Harris now claims he is not seeking to extend the abortion time limit and that we have lied about him. Earlier this week, before we set out our stall, you could go to Dr Death’s Lib Dem website and read in his own words how it was
“high time that applications were made to carry out the research” on “clinical grounds for abortion for foetal abnormality after 24 weeks.” here
He also welcomes “the current consensus view that foetal pain was very unlikely before 26 weeks and that this was not in any event relevant to abortion law reform.”
If you do a Yahoo search for Evan Harris Abortion and try to follow the links to the evanharris.libdems.org.uk abortion stories, which were linked to his page before we arrived in Oxford, you will find these have been removed from view in apparent haste and replaced with something quite unrelated. here
The cached links do still have some of the original stories for now but we have them all saved anyway. Might one assume they have been hidden by someone? What is clear is that we have him running from the truth. The information that he is now trying to hide is still publicly available for all to see. here
Given that Harris is denying what we say the conclusion seems foregone. How can we trust anything he has to say when he confidently states his opinions one minute and then the next is trying to cover them up?
Interestingly an Oxford Mail story on the 24th 'Animal Rights election candidate served time for arson' had attracted a string of comments and it was clear the debate was going in the wrong direction - from arson onto vivisection. Two days and many comments later all existing contributions and the right to add more were taken away.
The Animal Protection Party v The Wickham Labs.
The APP Hunt the Hunt Hag at the General Election.
The APP v HLS – Kick them in the Djangoly's.
Every home in these areas will get our leaflets through their letterbox explaining, for example, of the horrors befalling 500 animals each day in the name of product testing at their local Huntingdon Life Sciences and the MP's role in this. We have activists on the streets and are knocking on doors. In just four weeks we hope to get our message out to over one million people who happen to be in key campaign areas. This in itself is a significant achievement but it needn’t end there. The potential remains for us to unseat one or more of these characters and send a strong message to others like them who defend the indefensible.
The election process dictates that potential candidates need 10 local residents to sponsor them. In each of these constituencies by knocking on doors and telling residents that we are standing in their area to unseat their current MP we have gathered the names we needed in a single street. Think about that. Ten random members of the public in Huntingdon have given their full backing and their personal details to APP activists who'd knocked on their door. And Oxford and Wickham and Vauxhall. Most of what most people hear about people who care for animals is that they’re extremists but when they hear it from the horse’s mouth, so to speak, it doesn’t sound quite the same. We believe that compassion is at the core of our society however much human behaviour is manipulated and in four years time we aim to do this on a much greater scale.
If you can help leafleting in any of these areas any time in the next few weeks or can help fund this effort please check in and help us inform as many people as possible of what we are trying to do and why.
Tel: 0844-800-9031
Email: info@animalprotectionparty.com
So finally, 2010. The General Election is now just around the corner and for the next few months we will be busy promoting ourselves within our chosen wards.
Initially, The Animal Protection Party was set up to test a new political ideology, to fight anti-animal incumbent MPs who had a small majority. It was hoped that this campaign would unseat our chosen MPs and in doing so promote the animal rights message. Since we launched, several organisations have taken this principle on board, notably several welfare and lobbying groups like the League Against Cruel Sports and other political campaigners such as Animals Count.
However, we believe this General Election will be like no other. There are too many issues for people to contest, the Iraq War , Afghanistan, the economy (particularly the bankers), the issue of Parliamentary expenses and the possible repeal of the hunting act, to name but a few. Against this background many parties, independents and lobbying groups have already registered their intent to stand or support candidates in seats with small majorities. Put this together with the unpopularity of Labour (shown in most opinion polls), and it could render our role superfluous.
So what do we do? Do we take the easy option, stand next to the, ‘Keep Our Local Hospital Open’ candidate, get a 0.1% of the overall vote and pick up a ‘just glad to be here' award or do we stand in an area where the animal abuse is so overwhelming that we expect to get beaten up rather than win anything?
As with most animal rights activists, our mantra has always been to go ‘where angels fear to tread.’ And with this in mind we have decided to attack the major animal abusers no matter what their majority. We will stand in Oxford, in Huntingdon, and in Vauxhall against Kate Hoey, a Labour MP who also acts as chairperson for the Countryside Alliance. We will also stand in several other areas of key animal abuse still to be confirmed.
For some people this may be political suicide. For us there are only opportunities. In a recent article in the Times Newspaper the journalist reported that there were 900 staff working at Huntingdon Life Sciences yet our research shows that there over 80,000 who live in that area and are registered to vote. Surely even on an educational platform these kind of odds are worth taking risks on.
We will be employing old school tactics. On the box campaigning, distribution of leaflets, knocking on doors and running stalls in high streets. If you want to join us then please get in touch, you will be most welcome. Remember a lot of these places have become no go campaigning areas since the erosion of civil liberties but we have certain rights as a political party and those rights will be put fully into force as we take on the real demons of animal abuse. Our time has come
In reality these ludicrous ideas are not something I would countenance for one minute and I will beg anyone else that cares enough to speak out against the use of exploitation and violence whoever the perpetrator is and however it’s dressed up to sound less awful. Currently we are in the middle of an intensified campaign by animal industries to sweeten up the abuse of animals and its to be expected that the cute face of animal abuse, the likes of CIWF and the RSPCA are part of this, but there are others falling into this trap. TV chefs Jamie Oliver and Hugh Fernley-Whittinstall are also part of this process of softening up calls for animal rights with their pleas for different exploitation practices. The political party Animals Count are doing it too as they call for a reduction in the distance that infant animals are driven to the slaughterhouse to a maximum of 200 miles and to “improve animal welfare by raising farming standards”. Ask the RSPCA for a look round their ‘welfare friendly’ farms and they’ll direct you to their website and to a cartoon of some chickens playing football! You have to see this stray from reality to believe it! http://www..supportchickennow.co.uk/freedomfood/index.html Alternatively take a step into reality and see what they don’t want you to see; http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4
Aside the semantics of getting these hapless creatures to a profitable killing weight, slaughterhouses are amongst the most awful places on Earth and should not exist, period. The time has come to stop pretending there is a nice way to exploit animals and prematurely extinguish their short lives. It seems to me even more unreasonable to treat an animal well, thus gaining its confidence and trust, and then send it to an awful death in a truck full of family and friends.
It is at best naïve to think that we are doing these animals a favour by ending their short lives closer to the farm they grew up in than was the case for their parents. Naïve, cruel or stupid, giving such tacit agreement to this process means the short life is extinguished, the journey there is awful, the death throws violent, the significant environmental damage, waste of vegetable protein, excess consumption of water and so on and so forth remains the same. However, the conscience of the exploiter is somehow clear! This is the last thing in the world that any compassionate soul should be engaged in encouraging. Decent people do not do deals with the devil, not now not ever.
Our demands are being watered down deliberately by calls for refinements in animal abuse and as a result the numbers of animals going through the process of exploitation will only increase. According to one newspaper report, nine days after the launch of the “Good Veal” campaign, (RSPCA, CIWF) veal sales at one English supermarket chain rose 45 percent! Who benefits from this? The animals that are no longer here or those yet to be born? Neither. Free range eggs sound lovely once you overcome the realisation that it is the glutinous period of a hen you are eating, and that it comes from birds who have no freedom to choose and whose lives are snuffed out violently as infants. Once we have persuaded the consumer to buy only free range and organic animal body parts, then what? How do we then request a boycott of these products of cruelty that we have encouraged everyone to buy? Advocates of ‘freedom’ and ‘compassion’ in animal farming are advocates of violence and engaged in a conspiracy to commit atrocities. Ignoring for a moment the campaign to promote the killing of free-range chickens lets not forget that for the most part rabbits, cows, sheep and horses are also ‘free range’ and their short lives end as awfully as any that are destined to be eaten. Free range is not the way ahead.
It is our duty to lead the way and teach others what we have learnt, not to find ways for them to carry on the abuses with a clear conscience. We are not here to promote cruelty, obviously! Those who do are the enemy of the animals.
In a 2002 article on their Center for Media and Democracy website, authors and social activists John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton described the activities of a PR firm involved in the dismantling of movements concerned about environmental human and animal rights problems.
“Their favourite method,” wrote Stauber and Rampton, “is a ‘divide and conquer’ strategy heavily dependent on co-optation: First identify the ‘radicals’ who are unwilling to compromise (vegans in this case - ed) and who are demanding fundamental changes to redress the problem at hand. Then, identify the ‘realists’ - typically, organizations with significant budgets and staffs (see CIWF, RSPCA - added) working in the same relative area of public concern as the radicals. Then, approach these realists, often through a friendly third party, start a dialogue and eventually cut a deal, a ‘win-win’ solution that marginalizes and excludes the radicals and their demands.
“Next, go with the realists to the ‘idealists’ who have learned about the problem through the work of the radicals. Convince the idealists that a ‘win-win’ solution endorsed by the realists is best for the community as a whole. Once this has been accomplished, the ‘radicals’ can be shut out as extremists, the PR fix is in, and the deal can be touted in the media to make the corporation and its ‘moderate’ non-profit partners look heroic for solving the problem. Result: industry may have to make some small or temporary concessions, but the fundamental concerns raised by the ‘radicals’ are swept aside.” [Emphasis added.]
There is one simple answer to so many welfare, environmental and health problems and that’s the vegan option. Excuses, half measures and compromises are letting the animals down and doing nothing to stop the rot caused by human activity.
Keith Mann August 2008
There has been a slight technical hitch which is the reason for the delay in bringing this next article to you, we are sorry for that:
WHERE IS THE ANGER?
A personnel opinion by Ian Pedler
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->
It is well over four years since the implementation of that farce known as the Hunting Act 2004, which masquerades as an attempt to abolish blood sports. Four years in which nothing has changed. Red deer, foxes, hares and mink are still being killed, only now the perpetrators have become victims of class warfare, bigotry, prejudice, or the subject of some half-baked concept of Labour’s revenge for the 1984/85 miner’s strike. Most of the regional and national press now portray their efforts to continue with their sordid activities as the actions of “rural freedom fighters”, while the passing of the Act is viewed by that same press as a vicious attack against the very concept of democracy – “a perfect example of the tyranny of the majority over the minority” to quote The Times. The squalid blood sport publications (Shooting Times, Countryman’s Weekly, Horse & Hound, The Field etc.) scream with vitriol against the compassionate people who still speak out against the cruelty, while those same people are divided against themselves in the throes of a fratricidal civil war that threatens to tear the animal rights movement apart. The League Against Cruel Sports (LACS) is at loggerheads with Protect Our Wild Animals (POWA) over how to approach the failure of the Hunting Act, with LACS pretending that everything is fine and all the Act needs is a ‘bit of implementation from PC Plod, while POWA want ‘reckless clause’ amendments to strengthen the Act. All of which is equally pointless given that the Brown Government has about as much intention of touching the blood sport issue again as the Countryside Alliance (CA) has of finding a soul. While the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), in silent company with the RSPCA, have disappeared up their own backsides, half pretending that the Hunting Act was never actually anything to do with them anyway.
The blood sport lobby meanwhile appears to go from strength to strength, with every passing day giving testament to their ability, not only to circumnavigate the law, but change the very concept of compassion. For now we see, thanks to the CA’s newly appointed Claptrap Commissar James Barrington that many in the animal rights movement are little better than “religious fundamentalists who ignore the scientific evidence”, which apparently shows that blood sports are not cruel, while completely ignoring the fact that “animal welfare is very close to the hearts of most hunting people”. This disingenuous rubbish has been trotted out in vast quantities since the start of the year, accompanied in many newspapers with colourful pictures of heart-warming traditional Christmas card scenes of the good and the great moving off from the local meet intent on promoting their brand of ‘animal welfare’. Nowhere is there the slightest evidence as to the end product of this ‘welfare’, the pregnant deer disembowelled at the end of the hunt, the shredded fox, the screaming hare on the coursing field, with attempts to redress the balance in the press meeting with a wall of silent indifference from most editors.
The self-righteous indignation of these people was sent into over-drive with the death in March of Warwickshire hunt supporter Trevor Morse, a man whose loss to humanity will be greatly missed when you consider “his first love was hunting, followed by shooting”, and that “he had only missed two or three days (hunting with the Warwickshire) in the past twenty or thirty years”. Tales of violence-obsessed antis filled the pages of the hunting magazines, attempting to portray the hunt monitors as former saboteurs by another name, with that nice Mr Barrington taking the opportunity to reiterate that most antis were anarchists in nature with the blood sport issue giving them “a rare chance to confront the people they despised, the people who were hunting, and had little to do with animal welfare.” The prize though must go to 18th March issue of The Countryman’s Weekly for asking: “The dreadful question now lurking in the back of our minds is what will people like those who are seemingly intent to injure and kill people who disagree with their dogma do if the Hunting Act is repealed?” No reference here to the hundreds of saboteurs and hunt monitors battered into hospital admissions by the legions of hunt thugs who have operated for years with virtual immunity from prosecution, much less concern for our people, such as Mike Hill and Thomas Worby, who have been killed while attempting to save the hunted animal. The case of Christopher Marles, who battered hunt monitor Kevin Hill half to death, followed by a brutal attack on monitor Helen Weeks a year later hardly rated a mention from the hunting community. It was only the fact that Marles was under a two-year suspended prison sentence for the Hill attack that prompted the authorities to jail him for six months following the Weeks attack, with the Exeter Crown Court Recorder Ros Collins informing him “You acted like an arrogant, cowardly drunken lout…” Tell us something we don’t know!
Another factor in the blood sport fanatic’s favour is their unerring ability to constantly sing from the same hymn sheet, with seldom a word of internal dissent to break the surface of total unity in defence of killing for sport, with the antis quite often unable to agree on the time of day. Stag hunters, fox hunters, hare coursers, shooters, along with every other brain dead Johnny who delights in killing for fun maintain a united-front against the world, backed with an endless supply of money supplied from the aristocracy down to the lowest form of animal abuser, namely terrier men and gamekeepers. While their message is conveyed via some dozen or more weekly magazines devoted to their love of killing, coupled with open access offering free publicity on demand from most of the media, with our only ‘right of reply’ consigned to the Dear Mr Editor letters page of the local journal, while as far as I can see the one radical publication on our side would appear to be HOWL four times a year!! Their political wing, the Tory Party of David Cameron, have already pledged to repeal the Hunting Act after winning the next election, while our side appear in total disarray. Already the Vote OK bandwagon is primed and ready to roll when the election date is announced – where is our political voice?
With so many odds stacked against us is it not now time to take a serious look at where we go from here? To stop tinkering with the Hunting Act 2004, an Act that in my opinion was never intended to work, merely to enable the Blair Government to buy time from their back-benchers and allow enough time for the heat to be taken out of the issue, while the animal rights movement divided against itself. Read the Act. The first third abolishes blood sports, while the remaining two thirds give every excuse, clause, exemption and legal loophole to allow hunting to continue until such time as a future Tory government repeal it. What we have achieved is a situation that once this Act is repealed no other government in our lifetime will ever touch the issue again, allowing the right to kill for sport to continue in perpetuity.
Do we wait for the Act to go, for go it will, or do we prepare for the inevitable and accept that the time has come to stop believing that a nip here, or a tuck there, will change anything? It is my firm belief that the HSA must again take the lead as the radical edge of animal rights. Never forget that it was the hunt saboteurs back in the winter of 1963 who kick-started the process which grew into the movement we know today, with every success that we take for granted a direct result of those very first direct actions against the West Country fox and stag hunts.
Right now the animal rights movement has come to a crossroads, transfixed in the head-lights of the oncoming juggernaut like the proverbial rabbit, unable to decide whether to sit tight or run. It can go down the road of conciliation with those who derive so much pleasure from killing for fun and keep writing the letters to the Honourable Members in the hope that they will spare us a few seconds from filling in their expenses forms, or it can start the fight back. I know which road I would rather it travels.
Ian Pedler is the author of "Save Our Stags: The long struggle against Britain's most controversial blood sport".
With the Hunting Act in total disarray and the likelihood of its repeal at the hands of a future Conservative Government looking more certain every day, the publication of former stag hunt saboteur Ian Pedler’s new book Save Our Stags: the Long Struggle against Britain’s most Controversial Blood Sport could not prove more topical.
The author has witnessed most forms of animal abuse since first joining the League Against Cruel Sports as a ten-year-old in 1957, but the one constant has been his life-long hatred of West Country stag hunting. He was active with the Hunt Saboteurs Association from its inception in 1963, then the founder of the Save Our Stags Campaign, while also serving as an Executive Committee member of the LACS until resigning as an active campaigner in the late 1980s.
His professional life has been spent in the field of mental health social work, at which he is still employed part-time. When not harassing animal killers he pursues his other interests of world travel and early American history. He lives in the West Country with his wife Josie.
The book is £12 post free (cheaper than the net) from: Black Daps Press, PO Box 1447, Paulton,
Bristol BS39 7WT
The author is happy to take part in talks, debates, exhibitions, interviews etc. In fact any event that will highlight the continuing cruelties of West Country stag hunting.
Telephone or email to arrange.
Email: ianandjo@pedler.fsnet.co.uk
Web site: www.saveourstags.co.uk
Today I'd like to bring you a book by our friend John Fitzgerald called "Bad Hare Days".
Here's a review of his book by Andrew Knight BSc, BVMS, CertAW, MRCVS, FOCAE
Fellow, Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics.
There have been very few books that have made me lock myself into the bathroom, bolting the door to ensure I simply could not be interrupted. None, in fact, until Bad Hare Days. Oblivious to the demands of life outside, I read on spell-bound, horrified yet enthralled, by this incredible true-life story.
As a young man John Fitzgerald’s accidental witnessing of the secretive and brutal killing of a wild hare led to his revulsion of the cruelty inherent within the traditional Irish sport of hare coursing. His campaign to educate the Irish public and politicians about such cruelty was entirely understandable, 100% legal, and motivated by compassion.
Until the publication of this book, few would have believed the depths of hatred and vilification that such a campaign could provoke, in a supposedly modern society. Most disturbing of all, was the prolonged harassment of the author by Ireland’s now notorious Garda Siochana, or national police force. The sordid role of the Gardai in these events was disturbingly similar to that of a secret police force, tasked with the harassment or suppression of political dissidents.
Repeatedly arrested at dawn, and taken to locations kept largely secret from his family and friends, the author endured the most appalling psychological interrogation techniques, all aimed at securing false confessions, and implicating others. The use of such blatantly unethical and illegal techniques has deeply stained the honour of the Gardai.
The author is to be commended for surviving these prolonged interrogations, with his resolve intact to continue his campaign against animal cruelty. Bad Hare Days provides a vital warning for social activists of any persuasion about what might lie in wait for them, should their campaigns become more than a minor irritation to the powerful.
By publishing his gripping story, John Fitzgerald has cast a spotlight upon a profoundly rotten core of our society. Such corruption severely undermines public confidence in Ireland’s justice system, and must be rooted out.
I'm sure you all are as excited as I am to get hold of this book so here is a little taster:
(excerpt)
…The picket proceeded in a peaceful manner, with the buzz of gentle conversation distracting us from the cruelty inside. Our sole purpose was to protest for two and a half hours and then leave, having made our point.
But the mood changed after about twenty minutes of silent walking up and down the public road outside the venue.
A woman who was a member of our campaign group emerged uneasily from the field, flanked and followed by more than twenty coursing fans, who were roaring threats and obscenities at her. She had obviously been identified as an observer...a spy from the enemy camp.
The men in pursuit of her were raging. Slowed down by their Wellingtons, they still moved with considerable agility. An intense anger drove them. The cause of this became apparent when a burley fellow, his fists beating the air, shouted: “Ye’ll pay for what ye did at Ballyknock coursing field”, a reference to one of the venues sabotaged the previous week.
Many of them wielded axe handles or sticks, and a few were armed with makeshift batons…short lengths of hosepipe. They spilled out onto the busy Cork to Dublin road, blocking traffic from both directions. We had been walking close to the ditch along the road, allowing the cars and lorries to pass unimpeded.
They were hell-bent on confronting us. Despite pleas that we were there simply to protest peacefully, the fans began shouting at picketers and pushing them.
A woman in her late forties fell to the ground close to the gateway, having been poked and prodded forcefully with an axe handle. “You’re a bunch of ignorant thugs”, she screamed at them…an unwise but understandable retort.
As she rose to her feet, three men surrounded the woman, raining punches and kicks on her. Seeing this, half a dozen protesters ran to her rescue, throwing their placards behind them into the ditch on the side of the road opposite the field entrance.
As the protesters attempted to ward off her attackers, and extract her from the melee, other coursing fans threw themselves at them. All hell broke loose.
We were set upon by scores of frenzied men in green anoraks and Wellingtons. They lashed out savagely with fists, feet, hosepipe, and sticks.
These attackers were joined by reinforcements from inside the venue. They poured out through the gateway, screeching in demented, bloodcurdling accents…
More excerpts can be found here:http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=435073338&blogId=504901505
Bad Hare Days can be acquired from Borders UK, Waterstone UK, Fishpond (Australia), Bestsellers.ie (Ireland), among other book outlets, and from Amazon UK at:
There's a storm brewing in the AR world...
by Chris Freeactivist (A)
In the past few weeks a battle has been raging between two very similar camps of activists both have relatively the same goals, this conflict is causing a division in the animal liberation movement which makes us look weak in the eyes of our enemy.
In the one camp we have the devout followers of Gary Francione a professor of Law & Philosophy who has developed the abolitionist approach to animal rights a truly revolutionary look at the way in which we view animals as possessions, and a well needed self evaluation and criticism of welfarist campaigning within our movement. He promotes total vegan non-violent information distribution as a form of activism and has in recent months actively shunned activists who support direct action in the struggle to liberate animals. Franciones non-violent approach stems from his Jainism beliefs.
In the other camp (not referring to animal welfare campaigners) there are those who act within a radical framework, they in most instances support direct action against the institutions that inflict the torture of the sentient beings which both camps seek to liberate. They actually accept and agree with Franciones theory on animal exploitation but are willing to risk repression, imprisonment and in some cases death in the struggle for animal liberation by using an array of tactics.
I should point out at this point I am not an advocate of non-violence as a sole tool against the capitalist violence and oppression which I see on a daily basis, I support the use of any and all methods of direct action against those who seek to crush the life out of my community and all of its inhabitants and fully support militancy when it is required.
As is almost always the case, those who support direct action are most willing to campaign alongside those who do not and rarely would one shun the other, that is not usually the case with those who dislike confrontation, in fact I have been screamed at by other activists for filming just police officers in the past!
In recent weeks acts of sabotage from the Francionian camp towards certain social networking groups who condone direct action, have created a rift which in my opinion has been detrimental to the efforts of all. These acts of elitist sabotage are reprehensible!
Who do these people think they are to tell us how we should fight? They are nothing more a tool of the state if they spend ANY time at all trying to sabotage and denounce activists for taking action which they are comfortable. I am neither master nor slave and will not answer to anyone or conversely expect anyone to answer for my actions. If someone wishes to campaign peacefully so be it. If someone wishes to burn a McDonalds to the ground so be it, you are not responsible (unless you did it) and do not answer for the actions of others.
Francione seems to have no grasp on the historical failures of pacifism, for this reason he is doomed to repeat historical mistakes as he tries to throws flowers and leaflets into the machines which exploit in a desperate attempt to stop exploitation.
I have serious doubts as to whether his efforts extent to any other social issues, he talks frequently of sexism but only in order to denounce PeTA. He talks of rape often in his essays, but would he allow women to take control of there own lives and use violence to stop or prevent sexual assault or would his non-violent approach end patriarchy also?
It is vital that activists expose themselves to other struggles in order to gain a better understanding of our society and how it affects all things.
It is my belief that a vegan infrastructure can be developed (e.g. vegan outreach, information networks, cafes, community gardens and free ethical medical centres) in order to support a militant struggle to break down the industry and state which exploits every animal, human and resource on this planet.
One cannot exist without the other. It is pointless destroying slaughterhouses if people don’t feel like they have a viable alternative to animal products and products of exploitation. It is also pointless creating a vegan infrastructure without the destruction of the machine than exploits, as they will always have more resources to distribute propaganda in order to convince the population that exploitation is either non existent or not as bad as we think.
Our next blog contributor works for the RSPCA. He would rather not reveal his name on this occasion for political reasons and not because the RSPCA would not agree with what he writes. An excellent article which certainly shows anglers in a true light.
Thanx 'Old Grey Fox'.......
The image of the angler peacefully enjoying the tranquillity of the river-bank, appreciative of aquatic wildlife, waiting patiently for a fish to take the bait, but as content to return home without a ‘bite’, is fading fast.
I confess never to have understood the fascination of fishing. When I was a boy my father took me out on a mackerel-fishing trip off the Dorset coast. It might have been the beginning of a lifetime as an angler if the boatman had not thrown the only fish I caught into a basket - still alive. I sat horrified with tears in my eyes as I watched its interminable death-throes, too shy to tip it back into the sea or even to ask someone to put it out of its misery.
Since that time I have considered fishing to be cruel, but until recently have never quite placed anglers to be in the same camp as fox hunters, stag hunters, hare coursers and game shooters. While walking in the countryside, if I came across someone fishing, I might nod and mutter ‘Morning’, whereas I could never disguise my contempt for hunting with dogs or guns. That’s all changed now.
In 2005 the National Federation of Anglers demanded licences to kill up to 3,000 cormorants a year because the birds had the cheek to catch fish to eat – fish which cormorants need to eat for survival, but which anglers catch for amusement and normally don’t intend to eat at all! The Labour government, these days as eager as the Tories to court the shootin’ and fishin’ lobby, caved in and granted the licences – much to the consternation of conservation bodies. Labour MP, Martin Salter, claimed that cormorant numbers had increased by 70 per cent since 1989 and that they “eat so many fish that they threaten other predators such as herons”, an allegation for which I have been unable to discover the slightest evidence.
In my local Countryside Park earlier this year, the usual notices were erected announcing the ‘Fresh Water Close Season’ from 15th March to the 15th June and threatening a potential fine of £2,500 for transgressors. The Close Season is for the purpose of allowing fish to spawn, and is a clear recognition that impaling fish on metal hooks, is not exactly conducive to their reproduction. When I visited the park in April however, there were still dozens of anglers sat in their little green tents, each with two or three unattended rods protruding into the lake. I discovered that the local angling club had negotiated a deal in which the close season would only apply to the nearby river, leaving anglers free to continue fishing in the lake, whereas the year before, the close season applied to both.
What amazes me about this addiction to fishing is that one can see anglers arriving in the car park, with literally thousands of pounds worth of equipment - rods, bait, chairs, stoves, alarms, radios, tents and keep-nets, all loaded onto special trailers or wheel-barrows to be wheeled out to the lake and assembled by fishermen totally clothed in camouflage outfits appropriate for some dangerous war-theatre – all to outwit and capture an animal with a brain less than the size of a moth-ball!
Angling is still portrayed as an uncontroversial and worthwhile activity and increasingly encouraged amongst children perhaps as a way of keeping kids off the streets and channelling their energies into persecuting fish rather than local residents. News from East Anglia, however, illustrates that anglers are becoming less jealous of that reputation. The Eastern Daily Press, April 15tth 2009, reported that anglers are complaining about otters, by far Britain’s most favourite wild animals, now reviving in numbers since becoming a protected species in 1978. The anglers in the area are demanding that the government (i.e. tax-payers!) provides funds to erect fences to stop otters eating fish which anglers want to catch for sport. One fishing writer, Ian Chillcott, goes further and is already calling for a cull of what he describes as these ‘little murdering blighters’ and Richard Lee, editor of Angling Times admits that illegal killing of otters by anglers has already started.
On May 29th 2009, The Daily Telegraph reported that three families of beavers from Norway were to be be released in Scotland – the first official reintroduction of the mammal in Britain since it was exterminated by hunters 400 years ago. A cause for celebration? Not for anglers! Led by bloodsports enthusiasts Sir Ian Botham and Fiona Armstrong former ITN newsreader, and Robin Malcolm, chief of the Clan MacCallum, (who describes beavers as “destructive, nocturnal rats”), have condemned the scheme formulated by the Scottish Wildlife Trust, the Royal Zoological Society for Scotland and the Forestry Commission as “recklessly irresponsible”. Botham and his pals claim that the beavers could “devastate the angling industry” despite the fact that beavers are exclusively herbivorous!
Fox hunting and shooting enthusiast David Cameron has promised that a Conservative government will lift the 36 year-old protection of badgers and restore legality to fox hunting, hare coursing and stag hunting with dogs, bloodsports banned by Labour in 2005. There are also increasing numbers of wild boar in some parts of England which at present can be shot, but upon which some extreme hunters would love to unleash the hounds. With anglers now labelling cormorants, otters and even beavers as ‘vermin’ and the hunting lobby eager to legally unleash up to 50,000 hounds, terriers, greyhounds and lurchers onto foxes, hares, mink and deer, it is clear that the election of a Conservative government will be a disaster for British wildlife. David Cameron’s so-called ‘compassionate conservatism’ will rapidly descend into something more akin to ‘medieval barbarism’.
Thanx to John for the first contribution to our blog....
Decline of the Greyhound Racing Industry.
By John Ratcliffe.
The greyhound racing industry is in severe decline as the public become aware of the cruelty and death that is an inherent part of it but which has been kept well hidden for decades. As attendances at races fall off and stadiums close down due to financial pressures, the industry is desperately doing all it can to attract new punters. They are advertising in the media and offering all kinds of temptations like free drinks and free race cards, even free meals. They are targeting businesses to get them to have their office parties at "A night at the dogs". Stag nights, hen nights, all are valid targets for them. They are also claiming that they have cleaned up their act and the atrocities that have been brought into the open in recent times by the media are not now a part of their business.
Please don't believe any of their claims; the dogs are still suffering and dying just as they always have. How could it be otherwise? What are they going to do with the thousands of greyhounds that reach the end of their racing career every year? They will tell you that all the dogs go to good homes and live happily ever after, but where are all these homes coming from? Anyone who has ever tried to get any animal into a sanctuary will know that they are always full with long waiting lists, they can't find homes for the dogs they already have without the addition of thousands of ex-racing greyhounds needing homes.
The industry will also try to refute our claims that greyhounds are suffering on a massive scale by telling you that they look after their dogs well because it's in their interest to do so; they want their dog to be fit and healthy so that it will be able to win races. Well at least they are admitting here that their concern is of a commercial nature, but they entirely avoid the point that we are making by saying this. We are not claiming that they don't give their dogs adequate care whilst they are in the racing kennels; what we are trying to bring to public attention is what happens to the dogs when they leave the relative safety of those kennels, when they are no longer able to race to provide money for their avaricious owners because of age or injury; when they are no longer a viable asset to the business.
We have not yet even mentioned the worst, most disgusting part of this whole issue. The vast over breeding of greyhound puppies, mainly in Ireland to supply the relatively small number of dogs required by the racing industry each year. It is estimated that 20000 to 30000 puppies are produced every single year to replace the 8000 or so that leave the tracks and go to an unknown fate. What happens to the surplus? Many won't have the chase instinct and be killed at a few weeks old. Others will chase but don't make the required standard and they too will be "disposed of". Some will be sent off to Spain and other countries that have minimal or no animal welfare standards. At the end of all this sifting out will be left the 8000 that end up on the tracks in England and Ireland, until they too cease to be profitable for their greedy owners, and so the cycle continues.
Every Saturday evening many of us stand outside greyhound racing stadiums handing out leaflets to the punters going through the gates. The leaflets tell them all about how greyhounds are dying to entertain them. We hope that these people will read the leaflets, maybe the next day, and decide never to support this vile industry again. At the end of the evening we find some of our leaflets torn up and thrown on the ground but these are only a small fraction of all that we have given out. We have had people turn their car around and come back out after reading our information, vowing never to go to a greyhound race again. We have even had people donate money to our cause. We have also had abuse from the hard cases; the ones with no feeling or care for anything only money. We will never get through to these people because they are devoid of an element in their soul, something called compassion.
We will continue to stand in all kinds of weather outside the gates of the racing stadiums until greyhound racing ceases to exist in the United Kingdom and Ireland. We will also support our American friends who are having many successes in getting greyhound racing abolished there too, there are now only 9 states in USA that have live greyhound racing, and the worst by far of these is Florida. Please never support Florida by going there for a holiday. Will you also help us here in England by telling all your friends and colleagues never to support greyhound racing by having a night at the dogs. Please see my web sites for more information. http://www.greyhoundmuses.com and http://www.nightatthedogs.org
Visit http://www.greyhoundmuses.com and http://www.nightatthedogs.org Poems, stories and information about the king of all dogs, the magnificent Greyhound.
LATEST NEWS
Many of you have not been receiving the email updates we send out.
Why is this?
We don't know exactly but we do know that for quite a while now we have been having various communication difficulties such as: emails to and from us not getting through, our Myspace page being deleted and our Paypal account being frozen. We are also fairly certain our telephone calls are being listened in on which given the nature of the quasi-fascist state we now live in isn't much of a surprise anyway. Big Brother really is watching.
Therefore we have decided that the way forward for communicating with you all is via the blog here which we intend to build up. This will work in tandem with our Myspace and Facebook pages in giving you all the information on what is happening with the party. This will be run by Tracey (who already runs the Myspace and Facebook pages) and will be known to many of you already.
What we are hoping to achieve with this blog is to have more in-depth articles on both animal rights issues and politics. Hopefully you will not only enjoy reading these, you will also want to contribute. If this is the case then please contact Tracey on:
tracey@animalprotectionparty.com
On another note, existing supporters who would like to change their old SPEAK political badge for the new Animal Protection Party badge can do so by returning the old one to us with a 62p stamp and we will forward a shiny new badge to you forthwith.
Also, after the general election which will probably be next May, we intend to start yearly membership fees. This was always the intention but we felt we didn't want to introduce yearly dues before we had fought our first election.
This is a very exciting time with less than a year to go until the next general election. We are now close to finalizing the list of MP's we intend to stand against. We will then be contacting local groups who can galvanize support and promote us as a political organisation.
We are also putting together various internet marketing devices such as e-flyers, which if you get one, please pass on to as many people as possible.
Thanks for your support thus far. We hope it continues.
Regards
Carrie
PS. See a recent interview with Keith Mann here:
http://vimeo.com/5350792
SPEAK Political Becomes The Animal Protection Party
On Saturday 18th April 2009 at Viva’s ‘Incredible Veggie show’ in London SPEAK Political was re-branded as The Animal Protection Party. Since we are no longer allied to SPEAK Campaigns there was little point in retaining the SPEAK name. Also, The Animal Protection Party is more easily identified as being a sister organisation to The Animal Protection Shop.
Not only do we now have a new name, but we also now have a slightly wider focus. Rest assured that our emphasis remains animal rights, but we think it is obvious that we should also involve ourselves in related areas such as human rights and freedom of speech. We believe that by doing this we can attract (in fact need to attract) people who are disaffected or victimised by the current quasi-fascist government. The more people we have involved the more chance we have of making a difference so we hope you will embrace these new changes as we have.
We know it wont be to everyone’s liking, but we all need to do some research on the ‘New World Order’ agenda and consider what this means for everyone, both human and non-human. We suggest it is meant to stop whatever campaigns we seek to advance and change the world for the better. No country is independent of the global elite and the fascist agenda they are rushing through while most of the world struggles to survive, or sleepwalks into Prison Planet Earth. THERE IS NO IGNORING THE BIGGER PICTURE! All animals will suffer if we do.
Unless Gordon Brown sees something we don’t, we believe he will wait until the last possible moment before calling the election. Even so that only gives us just over a year. A year to put together 100 candidates, it may be difficult, even unrealistic so early in our development, but it isn’t impossible especially if you all get involved and we pull together in a common cause. If we don’t act now we’ll get the country we deserve.
Ronnie Lee Joins SPEAK Political
Let’s start with the bad news. Sadly we have lost the second Animal Protection Shop we were after in Welling High Street, South-East London. Things seemed to be going well until the landlords decided they didn’t want us. We’re doubly sad because of the great location the shop was in, right next door to the local McDonalds.
It seems that where we saw an excellent opportunity to re-educate people, the landlords (who own the whole block) saw only potential problems. This is the third shop in the same area we have failed to get, and signals to us that we should probably cast our net further a field. Never mind, we shall redouble our efforts and persevere.
In another interesting turn of events this month we have seen the emergence of agent provocateurs once again working in our midst in the form of a supposed political union. With no working contact number or email (they obviously don’t want to break cover and show themselves), this organisation has made their website look similar to SPEAK Political’s and is issuing the message that to win political favour we must support the well meaning MP’s by using tactical voting.
While SPEAK Political will not stand against a well meaning incumbent, we cannot rely on this method in an age where so many outside forces are working to make politicians look the other way.
This technique of supporting and lobbying sympathetic MP’s failed the Christian Fundamentalists last week over the Abortion Bill, and it will continue to fail the animal rights/welfare movement in the future, as it has in the past. Maintaining the status-quo benefits only the establishment, not the animals.
To further prove the point, in the same week MP’s rejected an amendment to the Human Embryology Bill that would have outlawed the creation of ‘human-animal’ hybrid embryos.
This supposed free vote gave the scientists and drug companies everything they wanted and proves that our democracy is so weak at present that MP’s will back the will of even a failing Prime Minister like Gordon Brown. So many years of dictatorial government means that MP’s (even well meaning ones) do exactly as they’re told, not what they believe.
We always like to finish on a high and this is no exception. Part of the ethos of SPEAK Political is to bring the animal rights movement together to realise it’s true potential. In order for this to work we need as many of the leading figures and thinkers of the animal rights community to get on board.
Things continue to move forward nicely on this front. In recent months we’ve brought you the exciting news that both Keith Mann and Dave Wetton have joined our ranks. Now it gives us great pleasure to announce that Ronnie Lee has joined us too.
As one of the countries leading animal rights activists for nearly forty years Ronnie really needs no introduction. That a figure with his reputation has seen the potential offered by SPEAK Political shows that we really do mean business.
Questions have already been asked of us regarding our alliance with people who some see as controversial. We repeat our mantra that we will not allow our enemies to tell us who our friends can be. Why? Because if we do we’ll lose the very essence of what this organisation is all about. It is about non-appeasement, and it is about determination to get the job done. And unless we embrace the passionate people who have worked on the frontline of the movement, we cannot do what’s best for the animals.
London Elections
First off we want to apologise for not being in touch for a while. The fact is, we are so busy at the moment that finding the time to update you is a problem. However, we realise that from the outside this can leave our supporters feeling that little is happening with SPEAK Political which couldn’t be farther from the truth. With this in mind, in future we’ll try to be more forthcoming.
Recently it has been suggested that we involve ourselves in various campaigns, as well as the London local elections. We have resisted this because it would defeat the whole point of SPEAK Political which is based on making an impact at the British general election. This is where the REAL power is brokered and as tempting as it might be to get things going early, there’s no point in deviating from our chosen path.
Rome wasn’t built in a day and neither will an effective political party. The Greens have spent thirty years being largely ineffectual, the animals can’t wait another thirty while we do the same. We know that some people will question what we are doing, but now is not the time to lose our nerve. We’re building something big from the ground up, and this means we must remain ruthlessly single-minded and not be swayed from our objectives. We want to make a real difference for animal rights, not collect the ‘just glad to be here’ award at a local election! Please stay with us on this and keep the faith.
On a more positive note, we’re pleased to announce that The Animal Protection Shop is going from strength to strength. The shop is getting busier all of the time, and you really feel we are beginning to establish ourselves amongst the local community. We hand out a lot of animal rights leaflets and have discussions with previously uninterested members of the public on AR issues every day. It’s basically like having a street information stall that the police can’t interfere with. In fact, we feel the education aspect is almost as important as the fundraising, something Joseph Stalin realised when he said "Ideas are more powerful than guns, we would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas."
We’re also acting as something of a hub for local animal rights activists, as well as a point for people to bring in donations of blankets, etc for a couple of local animal sanctuaries we support. Things are going so well that we’re currently in the process of opening shop number two which should be open within a couple of months.
We’re also building up the infrastructure of SPEAK Political. This is a slow process and unfortunately there aren’t any short-cuts. New members join all the time, and even more importantly, so are new candidates. Last time we wrote to you it was to announce that Keith Mann had come on board. This time we’re pleased to announce that an equally respected animal rights activist has joined our ranks. Dave Wetton needs little introduction as one of the pioneers of the Hunt Sabs, as well as being active in many other aspects of animal rights. You can read more about Dave’s exploits during the early years of the HSA in Keith’s book From Dusk ‘til Dawn: An insider’s view of the growth of the Animal Liberation Movement (2007), or here: http://www.huntsab.org/history.htm
Keith Mann
In this revolution no plans have been written for retreat. Dr Martin Luther King, Jr
In 2007 animal rights activists have seen many colleagues incarcerated on jumped up charges with little or no evidence to back them up. The authorities have attempted to shut down some of the movements most high profile campaigns in an attempt to break both our spirit and our resolve. To this end they have failed miserably. History has proven that a popular uprising is not easy to crush, and time will prove that the animal rights movement is no different.
However, what this has shown us is the need to think differently. Sun Tzu believed that to win any battle you had to be like a river and have the ability to change course depending on whatever obstacles lie ahead. The animal rights movement must do the same. We need to have the courage to reinvent ourselves and think outside the box. Times move on and so must we, because what has worked in the past wont necessarily work in the future.
SPEAK Political was set up because we believe the political arena is the obvious next step. With traditional methods of protest being made ever more difficult by an increasingly draconian state, we believe our argument has never been more compelling.
This is a view shared by a growing number of progressive thinkers, and with this in mind we are pleased to announce that Keith Mann has come on board as both a candidate and a spokesperson for SPEAK Political.
Keith needs no introduction to anyone involved in animal rights being one of the most dedicated, respected and high profile activists operating in the movement today. He is the author of From Dusk ‘til Dawn: An insider’s view of the growth of the Animal Liberation Movement (2007). A shrewd thinker, it is Keith’s belief that the movement must diversify in order to remain effective that has led to his involvement with SPEAK Political.
These are exciting times. 2007 was the beginning for SPEAK Political. In 2008 with Keith on board we intend to move things forward at pace.
The Animal Protection Shop
Running a political party and fighting elections is an expensive business. To fulfill the big ambitions we have for SPEAK Political we need money. Lots of it. We know we can't rely on the big welfare groups to support us (let's face it, they're afraid of their own shadows), so that leaves us with two options.
1) Look for rich sponsors.
2) Raise our own money.
The problem with option one is that when people give you a lot of money, they expect to exercise a certain amount of control in return. This is not something we can ever accept as this would almost certainly lead to a watering down of our message. Therefore, raising the money ourself is the only viable option.
After a lot of thought and consideration we hit upon the idea of charity shops. charity shops are an excellent way of raising money which is why so many organisations have them (Oxfam have around 700 and counting).
To this end we have set up a sister organisation called The Animal Protection Shop which will operate what will eventually become a chain of charity shops to raise money for not only SPEAK Political, but also the wider animal rights movement.
The reason you haven't heard much from us lately isn't because we've been kicking back and taking it easy, far from it, we've actually already opened the first Animal Protection Shop near our headquarters in Bexleyheath. At the time of writing this we've been open for two months and things are going exceptionaly well. Infact we're already looking for a suitable site for our second shop.
This is a viable option for making large amounts of money and is definitely the way forward. Infact, we're already looking at another couple of locations for future shops. Watch this space.
Initialy most of the profits will go to SPEAK Political, as setting up a new party, putting in place infrastructure, getting publicity and support, etc. is expensive. During election years most of the money will also go to SPEAK Political to cover the costs of putting up candidates (£500 a time), printing leaflets, printing posters, canvassing, etc.
However, in the years between elections we plan to give money to both individuals and grass roots groups.
For too long the big organisations have sat on their piles of cash doing very little with it leaving the grass roots do most of the work whilst operating on a shoestring. All that has to change, and we intend to see that it does.
Death of Hans Ruesch
It was with great sadness that we learned of the death of Hans Ruesch on the 27th August 2007, aged 94. Considered by many to be the father of the modern anti-vivisection movement, he authored the seminal books ‘Slaughter of the Innocent’ and ‘Naked Empress’ both of which are essential reading for anyone interested in learning the truth about vivisection, and we would encourage all of you who haven’t read them yet to do so. We had hoped to get him involved in some way with SPEAK Political, but alas that will now never happen.
The Elephant in the Room
Vivisection Hits Fifteen Year High
I was appalled to read the figures released by the Home Office on 23 July 2007 which show that animal experiments in the UK during 2006 reached a fifteen year high of over three million. This makes us number one in Europe for vivisection and should be a wake up call for all of us involved in animal protection.
There’s an elephant in the room that we all have to confront. That is that as a movement we are failing. We are failing both ourselves and the animals, and if we continue to be led down the garden path we will continue to fail in the future.Now that might be a bitter pill for many of us to swallow (myself included), but we have to face up to the facts in front of us; VIVISECTION IS AT A FIFTEEN YEAR HIGH! Not only that, but it has been rising year on year since Labour came to power in 1997. What do you call that if it isn’t failure? Any of us who still support the Labour party should hang their head in shame.
It’s time for us to look at ourselves. Really look at ourselves, and ask what’s going wrong? I got involved in the movement to see an end to vivisection. Not to see bigger cages and better conditions for the animals being mutilated! Yet I’m ashamed to admit that for years I’ve given money to organisations that seem to have lost sight of that.
As a movement we’ve become myopic. We scratch and claw for every piddling little victory whilst allowing the big picture to completely elude us. At our present rate of achievement, in another 100 years we wont have moved on much from where we are now. No wonder so many of us drift away disillusioned.
I joined SPEAK Political because they seem to offer something different. I was intrigued yet sceptical when I approached their stall at a recent event in London. But after an illuminating ten minute chat I signed on the dotted line, and would implore anybody who wants to see real change to do the same.
SPEAK Political is a new organisation with an untested ideology and it may not work, who knows? I do know that it’s got to be worth a try because despite our best efforts things aren’t getting better for animals in this country, they’re getting worse. That means that all our marching, protesting, petition signing, letter writing and emailing isn’t getting the job done. It’s time for a fresh approach. It’s time for SPEAK Political. Mike Kearns
The Home Office list of animal tests carried out in Britain during 2006 can be found in the side bar after ‘SPEAK Political on direct action’.
David Jones Tory Shadow Minister for Wales
We received an email from Kathy Musker recently which gives us an insight into the contempt in which politicians hold both their constituents, and anyone involved in animal rights or welfare. It’s an eye opener for all of us because Kathy isn’t an ‘animal rights extremist’ as the media like to portray us, but an ordinary person who cares deeply about animals. She writes:
I contacted Europeans for Medical Advancement some time ago about my MP, David Jones, refusal to sign the EDM re the validity of animal experiments. He refused as he always does. His reply was the standard Tory response which a number of Europeans for Medical Advancement supporters had received, and I advised him that I was very disappointed to get this standard response which obviously infuriated him that I had found him out! I have asked him 4 times since moving to his constituency last October, to sign animal related EDM's, all of which he refused.
He then told me that he had done an internet search on me , merely because my requests were about animal related subject matter. I was outraged at this and complained to the Director of the Welsh Conservatives who ignored my complaint. However, I pursued it relentlessly and finally, some three months after sending the complaint, I received a reply stating:
However, I can do nothing reference David’s Google search on the Internet regarding you. I have spoken to David who, like myself, frequently uses the Google search facility to ensure that those to whom we communicate are genuine. This is fairly standard practice these days, both in politics and in business.
This would appear to be a very poor way to explain this stance. How does doing a Google search on someone's name ensure they are genuine in any way? I am on the electoral role, would this not be a better way of finding out if I am genuine (and what does ‘being genuine’ actually mean) or not? Why does my MP feel the need to investigate me merely because I write perfectly politely about animal issues? This extenuation fools no one.
I find it appalling that it is standard practice to have a search done on you just because you write to an MP about animal issues and feel this needs exposing. As a hard working tax payer, a qualified nurse who spends her life looking after the elderly and rescuing animals in my spare time, and someone who has never even had so much as a parking ticket, I resent the implication that I needed ‘searching’. All he found in his search was some letters I had written to various newspapers and some petitions I had signed, all perfectly above board as there is nothing to find! Is this ethical and is this a good way for our well paid MP's to spend their time, snooping on law abiding citizens???
Glastonbury Festival
The weather might not have been as good as Barcelona, but a big thanks to everyone who came to see us at the Glastonbury Festival. Some good friends were made, and alliances forged. Yes it was wet and muddy, but that just meant that lots of people sheltered in our marquee and took the time to find out what we were up to. We even chatted to left-wing political legend Tony Benn who was in the Green Field giving a speech.
Anti-Bullfighting Demo in Barcelona
Several representatives and supporters of SPEAK Political attended the recent anti-bullfighting demonstration in Barcelona. The event was a resounding success with around 5000 people in attendance, making it the best attended animal rights event ever in Catalonia.
Also, thanks to everyone who responded to our recent email alert carried out in conjunction with the event. The Catalonian authorities received loads of mail from the UK and are now very aware of our opposition to this most barbaric of ‘sports’.