In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

UK: British anti-hunting activists print 'hit list

Josey1Josey1 Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
edited September 2002 in General Discussion
British Anti-Hunting Activists Print 'Hit List'
By Mike Wendling
CNSNews.com London Bureau Chief
September 05, 2002

London (CNSNews.com) - The names, addresses and phone numbers of more than a hundred British pro-hunting advocates have been published on the Internet by an anti-hunting group that says the hunters "deserve everything that's coming to them."

The list included several prominent British pro-hunting activists, celebrities and members of the royal family. Access to the Urban Alliance webpage was blocked, however, after reports of the "hit list" surfaced earlier this week.

Before the site went down, the Urban Alliance posted names of hunters and urged supporters to "hunt them down and give them a piece of their own medicine."

"Excellent stuff. The only good hunter is a dead one," read one message.

The website came to light as hunters, farmers and others are gearing up for a march on London on Sept. 22 to protest government policy towards rural areas. A spokeswoman for the Countryside Alliance, the group organizing the march, said Thursday that officials were keeping an eye on radical anti-hunting groups.

"We've contacted all the people on the list and warned them that there are some people out there who are quite unhinged," said Jill Grieve. "But the countryside is full of pragmatic people who aren't flappable -- we're not going to be too bothered about these threats."

Grieve said the Countryside Alliance has been in contact with London police and that the group didn't expect any trouble on the day of the march.

"Every time we have a demonstration there are a few 'antis' there," she said. "They talk a big game but they just can't deliver."

The Countryside Alliance is, however, warning members to make sure their property is secure after hints that radicals may be plotting break-ins and vandalism while rural landowners are demonstrating in the British capital.

"If you really want to stop the (Countryside) Alliance, don't go to London to boo them, get out into the countryside and hit them where it really hurts - in their own backyard," a message on the Urban Alliance site said.

Newspaper reports linked the Urban Alliance to the larger Class War organization, a London-based Marxist group that advocates violent revolution.

A Class War spokesman admitted Thursday that his group was in contact with the Urban Alliance but denied that the website was overtly threatening.

While not condoning attacks on hunters, the spokesman said "S*** happens." He said members of his organization would hold a counter-demonstration on Sept. 22, but denied the group was planning to attack pro-hunting protesters.

With the British government set to decide this fall on legislation that may ban the traditional sport of foxhunting with dogs, the debate has heated up on both sides. Legitimate groups have held protests in London and elsewhere in Britain, but several radical groups, both pro- and anti-hunting, have turned to direct action in recent months.

In July, a group called the Countryside Action Network clogged British motorways with a rush-hour slow convoy. Another group calling itself the Real Countryside Alliance is thought to be behind vandalism at the offices of four anti-hunting members of Parliament.

On the anti-hunting side, The Observer newspaper reported that envelopes with razor blades glued inside and designed to slice open fingers were sent to leading members of organized hunts two weeks ago. Nobody was hurt in the attacks.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=\ForeignBureaus\archive\200209\FOR20020905f.html





"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Sign In or Register to comment.