Recent content by Paul T

We're talking about a television award Giles, not an election. Anyway, you've changed your tune. Earlier you argued: 'the winner had more supporters than the other candidates.' Now you're arguing the vote fairly represented the views of all people who could be bothered to vote. Which is it to be?

Don't worry Giles, I've got used to your obtuse postings. No, you've misrepresented my views. I'll try to put it more simply for you - this poll gives no indication of the views of most Channel 4 News viewers; it doesn't even indicate the views of most Channel 4 News viewers who could be...

Yes, carry on taking the tablets. I wonder how many identities eccentric Giles has on this forum.

No, it merely indicates the winner was able to muster more lackies to vote for it than the other candidates - are you really that dim you can't see the difference? I'm sure you're only too well aware of the score, the CA urges its assorted bunch of misfits to deluge the poll via its websites...

Viewers, not cannonfodder of a failed campaign group, I should imagine.

All this shows is that the CA is desperate to win anything, absolutely anything, and it got its supporters to vote for itself. Most of them probably have never heard of Channel 4 news, let alone watch it. Apparently Mallalieu and Hoey were booed by the audience, most of whom no doubt recognised...

Unsubstantiated comments about sabs may or may not be true, but I was asking ED why he is so full of bile and hatred. Afterall, we can all see this reflected in his post.

Why has the CA and others launched a legal fund if they're getting their legal advice free? Surely they're not obtaining money from their supporters under false pretences, are they?

Why are you so full of bile and hatred?

I can understand, from your cynical and twisted perspective, that may seem the case to you, but I'm satistified the prosecutions actually aren't about obtaining publicity, they're about upholding a law which prevents animal cruelty. Viewed from this perspective, a definitive judgement would be...

Your rant against the RSPCA has nothing to do with the point, which is there is a pool of funding available to overturn Cottle's judgement in the High Court. Your comments demonstrate your complete ignorance about the continuing co-operation between LACS, IFAW & the RSPCA. There's little...

Just think what money they plan to waste on the ECHR challenge in Strasbourg! They'll have to flog a whole load of super tacky badges to fund that.

"I shoot deer willy-nilly, I also shoot them nilly-willy, filly-dilly, hilly-billy, milly-pilly, and gilly-tilly." A comedian called Soggy Brains! I bet you're a real side-splitter at stand up. Tell me old Soggy one, which management practices do you employ?

"The LACs almost bust." About as inaccurate as your other postings. You really should make up your minds. One minute anti organisations are supposed to be awash with money and the next they're skint - of course it all depends what suits your argument best at any given time. I guess you...

I'm glad you agree with me that with or without the hunt ban, deer have been/are being shot willy-nilly without any evidence-based approach concerning the need, effectiveness and humanity of such an approach. You still haven't explained what you mean by 'wildlife management' though.