Oh Dear - look at this - it's all getting very pathetic. These senior citizens should be at home in the warm with a nice mug of coco, not making fools of themselves in support of a terrorist fraud.
If you are responsible for these people - shame on you - if you are these people then you are certainly old enough to know what you are doing is morally and socially unacceptable.
SHAC is a disgusting fraud - anybody associated with it is either too stupid or too twisted to realise that.
10 comments:
Of course it's these foot soldiers that SHAC needs, the easily led who provide the money, hold the banners, shout outside buildings while the top of SHAC sit back and monitor the bank accounts
Is that Joan Court on the left?
Oh, how the society of friends breathed a guilty sigh of relief when she declared that she'd become a Buddhist, oh how the monasteries of Tibet and Burma cringed.
Medawar begins to connect talk of some activists spiking the drinks of other activists, to discredit them, for money, with tales of Lynn's strange behaviour.
Before anyone accuses "big Pharma" of a conspiracy, bear in mind that Boat Lane, Evesham, is a run-down collection of mostly low-value, older properties on an unsurfaced road, but in what a developer would see as a prime "riverfront" location on the River Avon.
It wouldn't surprise Medawar if Lynn was not the only resident of Boat Lane to experience bizarre trials and tribulations over the next few years. So much easier than offering everyone a fair and attractive price for their properties, in the clear knowledge that they are to be redeveloped for significant profit.
Over many years, the ALF's backers have often found the money to buy properties adjacent to targets which have been forced out of business, which, inevitably, results in the site being redeveloped, which might make a bungalow near the main access, to speak hypothetically and not of Wych Farm, suddenly quite strategic.
How awful that the same person that once wrote that animal abuse is socially unacceptable now writes that shac direct action is socially unacceptable.
See:
http://medawarshacwatchisleeziggynortonprick.blogspot.com/?zx=992c0ebc3c12c07d
defamatory of both Mr Lee Norton (who is now understandably concerned) and myself.
In effect, Mr Beaven is attempting to use Mr Norton as a hostage in order to obtain Medawar's real identity.
He ain't getting it.
How awful indeed. Especially as that person is an abusive homophobic, woman hating nutcase...
What's this crap about shac being "paid" to attack Novartis? Seems Novartis is paying shacwatch!!!!
Who's supposed to be the homophobic, woman-hating nutcase? The one who's made Mr Norton's lady friend frightened for his life? Medawar would concur with that one!
Perhaps the problem is that SHAC direct action is frequently violent and illegal, which makes anything socially unacceptable, with the possible exception of Association Football.
Yes, they always deny violence, but then they justify the violence in the next breath, and much of what they do is uncontestably violent or threatens violence.
The madman who claims that Lee Norton is Medawar, is rumoured to have gone to Holland.
The guilty flee where no man pursueth!
"Old and disgusting"? Oh god...
Post a Comment