The FB 'mob' are at it again

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am confused, so the witch hunt on the one that cannot be named, had some justification? If it did, why are the fb lot still being called witches? I still dont know why Little Tinkers is classed as a problem though, they seem totaly genuine.
 
zebedee said:
I would certainly not condone the way the 'Witches' went about exposing the situation at BER, but as it turns out they were right,
Click to expand...

how so? as i understood it it was a unanimous decision by the trustees to close the sanctuary after the proprietor herself suggested it at the trustees meeting. Havent read anywhere that the FB accusations were found to be true, unless people are interpreting the closure of B** as a victory for the FB campaign ergo the accusations must be true. if im wrong im happy to be corrected tho :)

But back to the current victim, i sincerely hope that the police take action against the person(s) involved in the threats and harrassment. There's more than enough real cruelty to horses and animals, and children for that matter, that these vindictive people could turn their attention to if they really cared, without trying to destroy the lives of genuine people trying to make a difference to a lucky few.

ETA - BTW i have no connection to either B** or LittleTinkers. It just seems to me that there are ways to bring attention to badly run sanctuaries/cruel practices (WHW, RSPCA etc) without having to resort to texting, setting up social network 'campaigns' etc.
 
Last edited:
Genuine in the sense that she herself is also guilty of mud slinging whilst claiming to be a victim???

I think their halos are slipping

Surely the authorities involved would not be involved and sighted there so often if there was not a problem or do they now have time for social visits on top of an already busy workload?
 
Last edited:
the outsider said:
I understand that this is regarding another sanctuary, but it was stated in the post by Zebedee that although not condoned the witch hunt was right and there were problems at the "one that cant be named". That is what I was referring to on that point.

However before people start or should i say continue with the constant mud slinging, they should look at their own behaviour. They are far from angelic themselves!
Click to expand...

The "One that cant be named" is not the rescue that has voluntarily closed down. I think some of the people involved in the FB group are the ones who ran or were involved with one of the "one that shall not be named" rescues. Geddit?:D
 
juliebasset - good luck :) - dont let thm get you down,

please forgive me if I am wrong, but didnt you try and adopt/foster/rescue a welsh section A from the very people who are troubling you know? Maylee's Queen - or something like that? I remember seeing it on F2R, and then later it said Julie can no longer take May lee,

if I'm wrong i apoligise,

Good luck; you're doing a great job :) x
 
dozzie said:
The "One that cant be named" is not the rescue that has voluntarily closed down. I think some of the people involved in the FB group are the ones who ran or were involved with one of the "one that shall not be named" rescues. Geddit?:D
Click to expand...


:eek:no totally confused now. i thought the one that had closed down was the one that cannot be named and does apparently have issues?

I thought the one that could not be named was BER

I am going to be shot now for mentioning it i can see it coming :D
 
the outsider said:
Surely the authorities involved would not be involved and sighted there so often if there was not a problem or do they now have time for social visits on top of an already busy workload?
Click to expand...

not necessarily. The lady who owns the yard next door to mine has regular visits from the RSPCA regarding her elderly mare who is underweight and struggles to put and keep weight on. She is under the supervision of the vet & has her teeth checked regularly. She is in a field with 4 other horses all in good condition. Her field is next to a main road with lots of foot traffic. so consequently people see the thin mare and, quite rightly, report their concerns to the RSPCA.

The RSPCA officers have told the owner (in my hearing) that they continue to visit to make sure all is well and to offer advice if it is needed, but are satisfied with the way the owner is treating the mare. The owner is quite happy with this as she sees it that rather they check and find no case to answer rather than not check and leave an animal suffering.

So i think things are not always as they seem and it's wrong to make assumptions because that way things can escalate out of control. As has already been proven in 2 other threads on HHO, a picture tells a thousand words. but the words aren't necessarily correct :o
 
wasnt the talk that one of the trustees was going to take pictures if so have they been published yet?

I would think if they were published then everyone could agree on the facts there is, or is not a problem.

it still all seems very cloak and dagger and is such a shame that both sides seem to be willing to continue their ragings at each other when the real issue here is the welfare of horses
 
the outsider said:
wasnt the talk that one of the trustees was going to take pictures if so have they been published yet?

I would think if they were published then everyone could agree on the facts there is, or is not a problem.

it still all seems very cloak and dagger and is such a shame that both sides seem to be willing to continue their ragings at each other when the real issue here is the welfare of horses
Click to expand...

Apparently any concerns should be emailed to those involved. The general response seems to be along the lines of 'mind your own buisness'.

I did ask the question as to who would be making sure that horses previously owned by BER would not be sold on by their new 'owners'.

I never got a reply.
 
talk about cloak and dagger stuff- this is going the same way as B--R,and im sure few people know the whole truth- meanwhile little sanctuaries and big ones who genuinely care for their animals are getting harassed- vwho is what and what is who, to presume is totally wrong.
 
the outsider said:
wasnt the talk that one of the trustees was going to take pictures if so have they been published yet?

I would think if they were published then everyone could agree on the facts there is, or is not a problem.

it still all seems very cloak and dagger and is such a shame that both sides seem to be willing to continue their ragings at each other when the real issue here is the welfare of horses
Click to expand...

why? it has been closed down and the horses will be rehomed. I think to be honest that is all that matters. the horses.
 
In all honesty i had questions to i had no personal intrest in BER but when a horses welfare is at stake then it riles me. A bit of digging, and continually probing answered my questions. and in all honesty no matter what may or may not of gone on IMO itss all a twisted can of worms the ones that are behind the fb groups etc are bunch of pretty twisted people that from what ive seen really dont care if they hurt humans or horses (not ment in a physical way)
HHO and its members have tried in the past to do something to stop them trading and the way they go about things, in some ways they did get somewhere, but unfortunalty thoose in question still do what they were doing.

little tinkers to me seem like the next victim in line, which is such a shame, and i hope they continue to hold their own and do what they do. they should never of been subjected to this.

as far as Ber goes the horses have been put first no matter about any of the other stuff they will be cared for. I dont think any one could want any more.
 
Last edited:
ChasingTheDream said:
juliebasset - good luck :) - dont let thm get you down,

please forgive me if I am wrong, but didnt you try and adopt/foster/rescue a welsh section A from the very people who are troubling you know? Maylee's Queen - or something like that? I remember seeing it on F2R, and then later it said Julie can no longer take May lee,

if I'm wrong i apoligise,

Good luck; you're doing a great job :) x
Click to expand...

you are correct .lttletinkers did offer the little a pony a home as F2R could not sell her, however do to a personnel falling out with the admin on the site they were no longer prepared to allow littletinkers to give the pony a home and further more we were not told the truth about the little pony like the fact she had been running with a shetland stallion and was possibly in foal, a stallion which admin on F2R was rehoming as a gelding until she saw him covering the little welsh mare

littletinkers is still prepared to give the pony a forever home if its still needed
 
Surely the authorities involved would not be involved and sighted there so often if there was not a problem or do they now have time for social visits on top of an already busy workload?[/QUOTE]

excuse me outsider are you incinuating that the RSPCA are regularly sighted at littletinkers because of concerns of the ponies and donkeys welfare, because i can assure you this is not the case and i would be very interested as to know who has been saying such things

littletinkers is currently fostering 2 ponies from the RSPCA until homes can be found for them, this would not be the case if the RSPCA had any welfare issues with the sanctuary

i am happy to pass on the number of our local inspector if you would like to discuss any problems that you or anyone else has with regard to the welfare of LT residents
 
Mogg said:
how so? as i understood it it was a unanimous decision by the trustees to close the sanctuary after the proprietor herself suggested it at the trustees meeting.
Click to expand...

I've since heard that the trustee who went up to the 'Sanctury' to sort things out has resigned.
Make of that what you will................
 
Yes that is true...... My written resignation was sent via email on Monday 13th September 2010 and was accepted by the remaining two trustees by reply email on Tuesday 14th.

So there you go it is now announced publicly
 
Surely the authorities involved would not be involved and sighted there so often if there was not a problem or do they now have time for social visits on top of an already busy workload?
Click to expand...

excuse me outsider are you incinuating that the RSPCA are regularly sighted at littletinkers because of concerns of the ponies and donkeys welfare, because i can assure you this is not the case and i would be very interested as to know who has been saying such things
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone meant Little Tinkers, not the way I read it anyway.
Everyone knows there are no problems at Little Tinkers.
 
Taboo1968 said:
Yes that is true...... My written resignation was sent via email on Monday 13th September 2010 and was accepted by the remaining two trustees by reply email on Tuesday 14th.

So there you go it is now announced publicly
Click to expand...

That confirms what I'd heard, do you want to say why?

Also as what I'd heard about your resignation (which I am very very sorry to hear about - I thought you did a great job going up there the way you did) I suspect the rest of what I've heard is true as well.
 
zebedee said:
That confirms what I'd heard, do you want to say why?

Also as what I'd heard about your resignation (which I am very very sorry to hear about - I thought you did a great job going up there the way you did) I suspect the rest of what I've heard is true as well.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the kind comments Zebedee................

As I dont know what you have heard, I cannot possibly comment on that, and I think its best that the reasons for my resignation are kept to myself. That way, no one can point the finger at me regarding my discretion.
 
Taboo1968 said:
Thank you for the kind comments Zebedee................

As I dont know what you have heard, I cannot possibly comment on that, and I think its best that the reasons for my resignation are kept to myself. That way, no one can point the finger at me regarding my discretion.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I'm sure people will draw their own conclusions from your response.
 
JulieBassett - reading your website, I don't think anyone with an ounce of genuine "knowledge" could possibly have issues with what you do. There will always be misguided people who report things such as "ponies can't see!", but there is a world of difference between misguided genuine referrals, and malicious complaints. By the time the authorities have had several about one individual or organisation, and found them without substance, they can pretty much see between the lines. I have said before, and no doubt will again, animal welfare agencies are fighting the same battles and prejudices as Social Services. Everyone wants them to do their job, but, how DARE they even think it is necessary to visit ME? They don't know most people from Adam, and have to, absolutely, follow up referrals. You will know this from the close, working relationship you have with the horse welfare agencies. Certainly, with SS, a child would only be taken into care after all other avenues had been well and truly traipsed down - working with families, other agencies, support, etc etc. Unless, of course, it was an "immediate and urgent concern". I cannot imagine animal welfare is much different.
Both human and animal welfare agencies are so underfunded, and short staffed that there has to be a damn good reason to remove child/animal from home, as well as the firm belief that remaining in it's familiar surroundings, with familar people, but under improved, supervised conditions, is preferable to uprooting. If those under "supervision" are educated into providing better conditions (current AND future), surely that is a better outcome, since it breaks the cycle. Far better than straightforward removal and prosecution, and more longterm. In both cases, the ultimate aim is Protection and Prevention, not just Prosecution.
Julie, keep going, and don't bow down to bullies.
Also, defamation and libel has now been accepted in civil law as being the responsibility of the poster, not the medium, ie FB, HHO. There was a case of MEP who was harrassed on FB, anonymously, and called "bigot" "nazi" etc. Woman was traced through IP,taken to court, convicted, and ordered to pay MEP £10,000.
That would buy a lot of hay ;)
 
Once again we've entered into the realm of suspicion, anonymous accusation, gossip, guessing, and insincere ambiguity.

So, once again we bring it to a close with the caution that any further contributions of this nature may result in participants being sanctioned.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top