NETCU SUPPORT PSYCHOTIC VIOLENCE

Sarah Whitehead is a brave and caring person. When concerned neighbours went to her for help as they were concerned about a beagle she acted and rescued that poor little soul from horrendous abuse. We would like to emphasise that this creature was not a much loved family pet as has been portrayed in the local media but a punchbag who was thrown about, denied adequate food, permanently muzzled, repeatedly punched and kicked and tied to a radiator. The RSPCA and the police are often as much use as a chocolate fireguard in this sort of case unfortunately so the choice was to allow the abuse to continue or to intervene. Being a decent person Sarah took the dog who is now safe although NETCU are asking the public to help return the dog to be violently and repeatedly attacked. We stress this is not the case of just not walking a dog or one incident of loss of control, this was sustained torture. It is of no concern to them that this individual dog was the victim of a crime they could not care less if the children in the house are the next targets (if they are not already), no all NETCU care about is stopping people from campaigning for animal rights. Sadly for them whatever they do to us compassionate people will always take a stand and defy them.

Animal rights people had plenty of opportunity to take Nellie Chris Brown’s dog from Hillgrove farm as the great soppy Labrador would often come and sit with activists and often steal food! Out of the hundreds of activists who had the pleasure of meeting Nellie not one person thought to take her away because despite everything she was very much loved by the Brown’s and spoilt rotten, no-one would have found her a better home and in fact Mr Brown once recoiled in horror at the very thought of Nellie going to the same laboratory as he sent the cats when it was put to him how disgusting his business was it really seemed to hit home. One got the impression he would have rather sent his wife Katherine rather than Nellie! There are hundreds of dogs, cats and other creatures needing homes Sarah would not have rescued this dog unless the dog was suffering.

Where are NETCU when scum steal much loved family members, threaten to harm them and/or actually harm them for example ripping off an ear, blackmail the family for thousands of pounds and return a terrified wretch only when the money is paid? Where are NETCU when dogs and cats are abducted by vermin who use them to train other dogs for fighting, leaving pet dogs and cats shredded to pieces? Where are NETCU when animals disappear taken to be skinned for the fur trade? They are not at all interested. Indeed no police force is. Google “stolen dogs” http://www.dogslost.co.uk and it becomes apparent that it is volunteers who are left to pick up the pieces the police can not be arsed.

We at NW are outraged that the police now that they have got their little victory i.e Sarah locked up for 2 years are so keen to return an innocent soul to hell. We urge that no-one assists them in this matter and in fact if anyone wishes to make their feelings known (please be polite the staff know nothing about this so educate them with courtesy) please phone Kent police on 01622 6539933 or Crime Stoppers on 0800 555111(it’s free!).

Please write and show your support to Sarah!

Sarah Whitehead #VM7684
HMP Bronzefield
Woodthorpe Road
Ashford
Middlesex TW15 3JZ
UNITED KINGDOM

WEST MERCIA USE DIRTY TACTICS TO SUPPRESS CIVIL LIBERTIES

An activist was arrested today for criminal damage. It is alleged that she wrote something in the earth as she and her friends sat outside Sequani on a Sunday chatting. We are told that one person held a BUAV banner there was no shouting. Despite this activists were outnumbered 3 to 1 with 2 Evidence Gatherers filming them constantly. After an hour the activists went off to the Malvern Hills for tea and cake, some even walked up to the beacon whilst Sequani called in security staff from their days off and demanded an outrageously exaggerated police presence. Is it possible that they are jealous that we had a better day than they did and that they are a bit grumpy as a result?

WATCHING THE DEFECTIVES WITH OUR TRIPLE EYES

Dear old shac watch how we laugh at their funny antics!! Quite a few of their posts have been very inaccurate this week can anyone spot the mistakes? There may be a prize for the first person to correctly identify where they have got it wrong (if we can be arsed to sort one out that is). Never mind. A word of warning to vivisectors and their chums though; we all know that you think you are above the law but the fact is you are not oops!

Fat Chris thought he would send us this picture (below) and say he isn’t being quiet…

Patience is a form of action – Auguste Rodin

OPERATION RYAN

A postman has been sentenced to 4 years inside with the help of NETCU. However as he had only plead guilty to 19 charges including a hoax bomb, sending packages full of white powder and racist hate mail, with 140 other offences taken into consideration he only got 4 years. Clearly NETCU think that Sean Kirtley is much worse all those antics standing outside a lab with a banner and crossing a road hence the far worse sentence including a 5 year CRASBO. Maybe what they are trying to tell us is that if we behave like Mr Azevedo that we will get lesser sentences than if we continue to peacefully protest? Interesting perspective.

Shac Watch… extremists exposed?

We love the editor(s) over at Shac Watch so much that we thought we might do a little follow up on the previous Shac Watch, Really, No Really article.

So… they have been busy haven’t they, sadly things have descended into a tangled mess of half facts and ill researched information with some supposedly “personal details” of activists all of which is held together by a sharp new design (apparently our wheatgrass comments hit a nerve…)

What do we know about the Shac Watch authors then…

1. They aren’t police, if they are they are the must be the worst most ill informed community support officers ever.

With all of the research (googling really) that has gone into some of the information on SW it is obvious that there are some glaring omissions which would have been known by any officer actively policing animal rights protests.

2. They are in contact with people who work in the vivisection industry, specifically the Medical Research Council.

So when the report went out about activists being held at MRC Harwell how did they know the name of one of the activists? It wasn’t published anywhere and the security at MRC Harwell were on an information lock down as we found out after posing as a freelance journalist.

3. They fulfil characteristics of a new extremist organisation

Taken from Wikipedia’s Purported characteristics of extremism:

  • A tendency to Character assassination
  • Name calling and labelling
  • The making of irresponsible, sweeping generalizations
  • The failure to give adequate proof of assertions made
  • Advocacy of double standards
  • A tendency to view opponents and critics as essentially evil
  • Advocating some degree of censorship and/or repression of their opponents and critics
  • Identifying themselves by reference to whom their enemies are
  • Widely use slogans, buzzwords and “thought-terminating clichés”
  • Claim some kind of moral or other superiority over others
  • A tendency to believe that it is justified to do bad things in the service of a supposedly “good” cause
  • An emphasis on emotional response, as opposed to reasoning and logical analysis
  • Hypersensitivity and “vigilance”
  • An inability to tolerate ambiguity and uncertainty
  • The personalization of hostility
  • A tendency to assume that the system is defective if one is defeated

How long before they don balaclavas and are bricking our windows I wonder?

4. Sadly they are not the protectors of freedom.

I mean, we have no problem with them publishing contact information of activists which is already publicly available on the internet, but editing peoples comments on the Shac Watch site is clearly a pathetic attempt to stifle free speech. It shows a sad disregard for debate and even more sadly they cant take sarcasm as they have deleted a few of our comments in the past rather than respond in kind, it would seem they simply didn’t have the intelligence to respond to most posts even with so much time on their hands.

Who dunnit?

In closing then, we are thinking… Oxford Student? Too stupid to be a professor (we hope!) Maybe the egg throwing idiot? Or maybe a security guard for a lab or breeder. An “Oxford observer”, This could all even be the work of a real life vivisector as we know now it is easy to make the false assumption that those who partake in animal research are at all intelligent, some are clearly off their rockers.

Who knows? If you do know why not drop us a line though… it would be a reet laff to find out!

warn [at] riseup.net or ring us on 01452 539673

A message to Shac Watch from WARN…

We are assuming that the ‘G’ key was broken when you did the WARN is dead article as you clearly had lost your main research tool. We are just glad you care about us so much! We expected a better standard of research from you! P.S. When will we get a copy of the Shac Watch Manifesto / Credo? are we allowed to beat humans up if we join your terror cell?

OPERATION OVERKILL AS 11 POLICE FORCES SNOOP ON ANIMAL RIGHTS GATHERING AT FRIEND FARM ANIMAL SANCTUARY KENT

No doubt supremely jealous of animal rights folk meeting together, socialising , drinking lots of tea, helping on the sanctuary and of course workshops the police decided to get their own national gathering together. Being too wimpy to actually camp local hotels (so our sources tell us) burst at the seams with police at the bar, at the gym and comparing camera lens sizes with one another at every opportunity.

The Netcu “briefing document” was very much in attendance but we only caught glimpses and they would not let us have a proper read of it. Now remember this “briefing document” (we believe) was heavily criticised by West Mercia police professional standards as legally wrong, officers made unlawful arrests after referring to the handbook and the force had to pay out £25,000 to Sequani activists. The handbook obviously said that it was lawful to arrest someone for failing to give a name and address under section 50 of the Police Reform Act 2002 on suspicion of behaving in an “anti social” manner simply for being present on a peaceful demonstration and indeed an activist was arrested in Cheltenham a week ago by officers with this document in their possession. Aggravated trespass and Section 42 7A Criminal Justice and Police Act (failure to comply with police direction to leave “home demonstration” ) have also resulted in unlawful arrests at Sequani in which the flawed advice of this handbook featured prominently. So if any police officer would like to send us a copy (you know where we live) so that we can correct the mistakes and stop any further embarrassment then feel free. Alternatively keep making unlawful arrests we could do with the cash.

Kent police were joined by Essex, City, the Met’, Surrey, Hertfordshire, Cambridgeshire, South Yorkshire, Central Scotland, Hampshire and Thames Valley a fifth of all forces in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Local officers had all leave cancelled which on father’s day was (we think ) rather cruel and sincerely hope that they go on strike, leave Kent police or at least write lots of scathing blogs www.coppersblog.blogspot.com (maybe one of them will send us a copy of the netcu handbook). Their chums from around the country prowled around East Peckham photographing people and other stuff in an attempt to gather information and to intimidate. They failed miserably.

Kent traffic police were given any passing motorist to play with as traffic controls (featuring deck chairs for the officers) were set up a hundred yards in both direction in order to annoy local people and to stop every animal rights car. Strange how just by pure “coincidence” that random traffic stops are becoming routine when there are animal rights people in the vicinity because they have done this outside Sequani as well. Please note well producers were not given to anyone, the police phoned through to the insurance company directly and if the computer said no then some vehicles were impounded! Needless to say making sure that MOT, road tax, insurance and other stuff like tyres are all correct is fundamental to ensuring that the police do not get the pleasure of handing out fines/ points on licence/impounding vehicles etc as they will try very hard.

Whilst the police were on the main civil the size of the operation and its intent must be challenged. Photographing people including children attending a private legal event was intended to provoke and intimidate. The police are paid by the ordinary person through forcible taxation to at least pretend to protect the public from crime not attend boys weekends away. Questions should be asked by those who reside in each of the forces involved (especially Kent police)as to why public resources were diverted from the public to oppress ordinary decent people either as residents of East Peckham or as activists. For instance Julie Spence Chief Constable of Cambridgeshire is often bemoaning the fact that her coffers are bare so why were 4 of her officers in Kent for an entire weekend? Who on earth decided that it was a good idea to a) alienate their own officers by cancelling leave for no reason b) try to antagonise animal rights people c) antagonise the local community d) invite a fifth of all forces to join in the jamboree e) spend what must amount to hundreds of thousands of pounds on this farce? Maybe they should be demoted to CSO status?

Complaints should be made either via Kent Police professional standards or the IPCC

www.ipcc.gov.uk

Mark and Marion are doing the most wonderful job running their sanctuary and are an inspiration please look up their website and do what you can to help the animals in their care

www.friendsanimalrescue.org.uk

HI FIDELITY!

5th March 2008

I was alone at home on the night of Thursday 7th November 2007 and on the phone to a friend when I heard something being delivered in my porch. I went to investigate and found 4 letters from Fidelity International addressed to 3 other people and SHAC. As I returned to my front room I was aware of a flash and when I looked through the window 2 men were staring at me, one was short, slightly plump and bald, both wore sunglasses which was odd as it was 19.10 and very dark. They ran into the darkness from whence they came and obviously wanted to try and intimidate me by concealing their identity. I had no opportunity to tell them that they had got the wrong address. I phoned the police a few minutes later to report this incident especially as until 4 years ago in spite of the fact that I had never even heard of Fidelity they obtained a Protection from Harassment Act injunction against me, I was forced into an undertaking or else my home would have been at risk from court costs. I consider this to be an act of attempted intimidation because of my beliefs and consider that Fidelity are actually harassing me. I certainly have not been outside the house of any Fidelity employee photographing them through their front windows.

Furthermore I it is not my responsibility to serve these papers and therefore they have not been received by those they were addressed to. As they are legal papers I have burnt them so that they do not fall into the wrong hands.

I left a message on …. and someone called John called back the next day and left a message saying he had no idea what the injunction was about.

On Monday 11th February 2008 I spoke to Peter at Fidelity who had no idea about any injunction, harassment or SHAC . When I spoke to the switch board they were also somewhat bemused hardly the reaction of a company laid siege to a campaign of harassment. Pc Robbins (West Mercia police) kindly also phoned them and Peter promised to investigate this matter.

The papers I noted were from Burnenn solicitors based at 50 Lothian Road, Edinburgh, (only found after several phone calls as they did not bother with supplying an address or contact number). I spoke to Claire on 12th Feb 2008 who was also looking into this matter.

Today due to the fact that neither Claire nor Peter had been in touch I rang them again today. Claire told me that she had sent off an email requesting details and that no-one had responded. I left a message on Peter’s phone.

Today I also spoke to a court official who told me that I should have returned the papers although there was no return address and the 2 thuggish process servers ran into the night. I wish it to be known to the court that Fidelity and their solicitors have abused the law in order to try and intimidate and threaten and that these papers have not in any way been served on the defendants. I also wish to complain about their underhand behaviour and gross incompetence.

Yours Faithfully

Lynn Sawyer

The General Department,

Court of Session,
Parliament House,
Parliament Square,
Edinburgh,
EH11RQ.

Update 14th April 2008

Neither Fidelity, Burnnen solicitors or the Edinburgh High Court have bothered to contact me. I must admit I am not exactly too bothered about my enemies turning up and trying to photograph me, after all as (when they were legal) home demonstrations were common and consisted of standing outside someones’s house with banners and often megaphones. What sickens me is the hypocrisy of these people. If it is morally acceptable to come to me at home and photograph me do not whine if animal rights activists do the same to vivisectors. The reason I have complained is that an animal rights person turning up at a Fidelity worker’s house taking photos would face prison as opposed to indifference. The police are not even bothering to investigate the same “crime” when perpetrated by animal abusers. Another case of large corporations getting preferential treatment.

Update 12th May 2008

Still no-one has bothered to contact me. I think therefore it’s official Fidelity International have no problem with men turning up outside the homes of lone females and photographing them. If animal rights activists were to do this to an employee of Fidelity (NOT advised) then Fidelity would be hypocrites to complain!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.