"they" are fighting for the same thing "we" aer- LIBERTY AND LIVELIHOOD

Media coverage? Oh come on! the anti-war demos got ongoing positive media coverage. The Bush visit demo got round the clock reporting.

This hunting thing has been a big issue in the media anyway.

Of course getting into the house of commons and onto the floor is a pretty big thing, the other times like the purple powder incident got massive coverage as well. But so has batman superdads at buckingham palace.

I agree with the point that there's no point in just doing A-B trot march things, they do have their place, but there's a lot more that you can do as well - as indeed many people did during the bush demos and others - but you're off target with your main point re media coverage.

ok as above why arnt the media reporting on the counter demos? we need to get active out there to stop the blood hungry ca

--
anarchkit

I wondered why the counter demo was but could only see about half a dozen other antifash among a sea of nazi halfwit scum. the police appeared to be treating them a lot better than they were treating people at DSEI. i.e. no reaction to smoke bombs going off earlier on and generally joking and helping the 'murder-for-fun protestors' and letting them wander around wherever whereas......etc etc. etc.

Where were the sabs, animal action, shac etc etc. or was it too hard for you.?????

Massive banner against the CJA on the roof of Palace of Westminster, Michael Hesseltine's garden dug up in anti-open-cast-mining protest.

That's the stuff that stayed fluffy - and 'our side' (what hunt scum call 'the anti's' in the context of hunting) also are bigger and more creative if it gets violent too - I don't expect this one to still be 'live from the scene' on thursday's breakfast tv news like it was with the trafalgar sq rave a few years ago.

I hope all you who are against hunting are vegetarians ?

Because otherwise I would consider you to be either hypocrites or stupid.

And don't give me that "eating meet is necessary, its the taking of pleasure that is wrong" excuse.
Eating meat is also for pleasure. Stop doing it and we could feed the world.

i am a happy carney-vorrre and think that banning hunting is yet another attack on essential personal liberty.....
cruelty in the countryside? intensive farms- why don't the ranting nutters and government do something abuot that! I would NEVER eat any product of intensive farming- preferring locally produced, organic and - preferably- rare breed....
liberty!

It's a false argument to say that folk who oppose fox hunting and eat meat are hypocrites I'm afraid, Freddy.

There's a massive difference between killing for food and ripping a living animal
to shreds for pure pleasure.

You'll have to do better than that.

Cruelty to animals will not be tolerated by 98% of the population, you've lost the argument, you lost the vote. Get over it!

freddie has a good point.

eating meat is killing for pleasure since eating meat is unnecessary (proven fact since there are generations of health vegetarians and vegans) so it is being done for pleasure ("I couldn't give up my bacon sarny"). The killing might happen out of sight in the closed doors of a slaughter house and not by the person eating the meat, but the consumer has paid for the killing, they have meerly contracted out the work to a professional killer.

the same is true of the fur industry which few people support. the killing of animals for fur takes place for vainity and pleasure (at least in most cases where wearing fur is a fashion statement rather than a way to keep warm in extreme conditions). the killing is rarely done by the person who will gain please and warmth from wearing the fur.

in hunting (which in the case of fox hunting with hounds, is clearly done for pleasure because it can hardly be argued to be an efficient way of controlling fox populations what with requiring dozens of people on horses that cost thousands of pounds to look after every year, plus a fleet of 4x4 vehicles and stables, etc etc), it is at least true to say that the hunter who get the pleasure are honest enough to do the killing themselves... right?
no. of course not. in most cases it is the hounds that do the killing for the pleasure of the hunters. in some cases it might by the huntsman or his hands, but not the paying members of the hunt.

so, where does that leave us. the meat and dairy industry is certainly far more cruel (at very least in terms of scale of numbers) than fox hunting which manages to kill something like 15,000 or 20,000 foxes at best (compared to about 20,000 to 25,000 by game keepers and 250,000 by drivers of cars). Meanwhile, the tens of thousands animals live, suffer and die everyday for people pleasure at the dinner table (or more likely these days, in the streets outside a McDonald's or the like).

so while some people hurl abuse at fox hunters and the countryside alieance, perhaps it would be a good idea to think about the way in which we all shun responsibility for the cruelty inherent in allowing us to live as we do.

why do you think the coverage was so wide?
'oooh, look. the police are attacking those posh people, they're attacking middle england. hmm, that can't be right. my god they're bleeding! the police are out of control!
bet those middle england protesters did nothing wrong at all.'
is this had been any other demo the press would have leaped all over us.
'disgrace, domestic terrorism' etc
but cuz it's middle england having a day out, and god knows they're our and eveyone else's betters, everyone sides with them.

thing is with all that blood on those fox hunters faces how could they tell if they'd been attacked by the police?
surely that's an ordinary day out foxhunting for them.