http://gameconservation.org.uk/

Now, why would I not agree with this?


Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident. 
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

In article , 
amacmil304@aol.com writes
>http://gameconservation.org.uk/
>
>Now, why would I not agree with this?
>
I'm sure you do agree with it, Angus, if only because of your obsession 
for criticising non-existent organisations, like your "fake" 
conservationists.

-- 
Malcolm

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:45:18 +0000, Malcolm
 wrote:

>
>In article , 
>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>http://gameconservation.org.uk/
>>
>>Now, why would I not agree with this?
>>
>I'm sure you do agree with it, Angus, if only because of your obsession 
>for criticising non-existent organisations, like your "fake" 
>conservationists.


You didn't understand the question - once more :-))

Remember this?

_______________

Malcolm Ogilvie aka Dr Thick is confused about his measure of
intelligence.

A Macmillan:  "Do you think you don't have limited intelligence?"

Dr Thick:  "What a contorted question. The answer is yes. What about
yourself?"

_______________


Seems you have a terrible problem with negative questions.


Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident. 
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:24:32 +0000, amacmil304@aol.com wrote:

>http://gameconservation.org.uk/
>
>Now, why would I not agree with this?
>
>

The RSPB have recently admitted it's pro hunt stance by allowing
shoots on their land following the recent exposure by National Press
that the RSPB has 11 wildfowling shoots on various reserves. It's time
we questioned where the money we give to protect wildlife is really
going!

THE GAME CONSERVANCY TRUST
 
Perspectives On Animal Abuse ®
Turned on by guns? Enjoy killing animals for fun?
Join the Game Conservancy Trust today. 

The GTC: conservationsts or animal abusers?
The Game Conservancy Trust has the legal status of a UK charity. The
Trust seeks to promote the hunting, shooting and killing of living
creatures for fun.
The Game Conservancy Trust employs a payroll of 50 'scientists'. The
Trust combines 'research of game ecology and farmland wildlife' with a
truly grotesque taste for Orwellian doublespeak. Thus hunted animals
are 'harvested' [i.e. killed] using 'practical management techniques
which will benefit game and wildlife' [i.e. kill them]. The benefits
of being shot at and terrorised for human amusement are obscure, not
least to the victim.

What unites serial killers from Albert ('The Boston Strangler')
DeSalvo and David ('Son of Sam') Berkowitz to Charles Manson and
Jeffrey Dahmer is their early love of tormenting and killing non-human
animals. Fortunately, most animal abusers don't go on to become serial
killers. Nor do they typically end up practising pseudoscience in the
manner of the Game Conservancy Trust. But the coarsening and
brutalising effects of killing for pleasure are all too apparent.

Using their 'scientific' results, Game Conservancy Ltd advises
farmers, landowners and other ill-named conservationists on different
ways to kill animals for human amusement. Indeed bloodsports
enthusiasts continue to massacre as many of our fellow creatures as
they think they can get away with before finally hunting becomes a
criminal offense.

With a cynicism that almost beggars belief, the slaughter of other
sentient beings for fun is described by the Game Conservancy Trust as
'conservation'. (sic)

Do 'sportsmen' have no shame?




a n i m a l - a b u s e :
The Game Conservancy Trust
British Field Sports Society


H O T L I N K S

Animal Rights FAQ

The Animal Liberation FAQ
http://www.animal-rights.com/index.html
Hunt Saboteurs Association
http://hsa.enviroweb.org/hsa.shtml
League Against Cruel Sports
http://www.league.uk.com/
The Last Twisted Molecule On Earth
http://www.hedweb.com/animutop.htm
The Quarterly Review of Doublespeak
http://www.netins.net/showcase/clevad/double.htm
The Countryside Alliance for Animal Rights
http://www.countryside-aliance.com/

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 08:48:02 +0000, amacmil304@aol.com wrote:

>On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 07:48:17 +0000, Malcolm
> wrote:
>
>>
>>In article , 
>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:45:18 +0000, Malcolm
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>In article ,
>>>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>>>http://gameconservation.org.uk/
>>>>>
>>>>>Now, why would I not agree with this?
>>>>>
>>>>I'm sure you do agree with it, Angus, if only because of your obsession
>>>>for criticising non-existent organisations, like your "fake"
>>>>conservationists.
>>>
>>>
>>>You didn't understand the question - once more :-))
>>>
>>>
>>>Seems you have a terrible problem with negative questions.
>>>
>>Your problem is that you believe in non-existent organisations like the 
>>Game Conservancy Trust.
>
>See you snipped my previous response :-))
>
>
>_________________________________________________________
>
>You didn't understand the question - once more :-))
>
>Remember this?
>
>_______________
>
>Malcolm Ogilvie aka Dr Thick is confused about his measure of
>intelligence.
>
>A Macmillan:  "Do you think you don't have limited intelligence?"
>
>Dr Thick:  "What a contorted question. The answer is yes. What about
>yourself?"
>
>_______________
>
>
>Seems you have a terrible problem with negative questions.
>
>
>________________________________________________________
>
>
>Well it seems they believe in your so-called "non-existent"
>organisations or they might have changed their web address.  
>
>http://www.gct.org.uk/
>
>But again, Malcolm you fail to comprehend the issue.

Looks like  GCT might be changing it's legal name after a failed
business. Much like Ogilvie, himself a failed businessman when he
tried to sell magazines that no one was interested in. Probably due to
the fact he no doubt just cut and pasted stories from other peoples
work as he did with Konters book on grebes!

See http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn

>I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".  
>What I have said it they are fake conservationists - a term which
>isn't an organisation - because of the environmentally damaging
>activities they indulge in and encourage in others.
>
>Simple, Malcolm but obviously too complicated for simple Malcolm.
>
>And that's not abuse :-))
>
>That's fact.

In article , 
amacmil304@aol.com writes
>On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:45:18 +0000, Malcolm
> wrote:
>
>>
>>In article ,
>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>http://gameconservation.org.uk/
>>>
>>>Now, why would I not agree with this?
>>>
>>I'm sure you do agree with it, Angus, if only because of your obsession
>>for criticising non-existent organisations, like your "fake"
>>conservationists.
>
>
>You didn't understand the question - once more :-))
>
>
>Seems you have a terrible problem with negative questions.
>
Your problem is that you believe in non-existent organisations like the 
Game Conservancy Trust.


-- 
Malcolm

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 07:48:17 +0000, Malcolm
 wrote:

>
>In article , 
>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:45:18 +0000, Malcolm
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>In article ,
>>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>>http://gameconservation.org.uk/
>>>>
>>>>Now, why would I not agree with this?
>>>>
>>>I'm sure you do agree with it, Angus, if only because of your obsession
>>>for criticising non-existent organisations, like your "fake"
>>>conservationists.
>>
>>
>>You didn't understand the question - once more :-))
>>
>>
>>Seems you have a terrible problem with negative questions.
>>
>Your problem is that you believe in non-existent organisations like the 
>Game Conservancy Trust.

See you snipped my previous response :-))


_________________________________________________________

You didn't understand the question - once more :-))

Remember this?

_______________

Malcolm Ogilvie aka Dr Thick is confused about his measure of
intelligence.

A Macmillan:  "Do you think you don't have limited intelligence?"

Dr Thick:  "What a contorted question. The answer is yes. What about
yourself?"

_______________


Seems you have a terrible problem with negative questions.


________________________________________________________


Well it seems they believe in your so-called "non-existent"
organisations or they might have changed their web address.  

http://www.gct.org.uk/

But again, Malcolm you fail to comprehend the issue.

I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".  
What I have said it they are fake conservationists - a term which
isn't an organisation - because of the environmentally damaging
activities they indulge in and encourage in others.

Simple, Malcolm but obviously too complicated for simple Malcolm.

And that's not abuse :-))

That's fact.


    
Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident. 
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

In article , 
amacmil304@aol.com writes
>
>I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".

Nor have I, Angus, so why did you feel you had to mention it?

-- 
Malcolm

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 10:09:45 +0000, Malcolm
 wrote:

>
>In article , 
>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>
>>I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".
>
>Nor have I, Angus, so why did you feel you had to mention it?

Bit early in the morning to hit the bottle Ogilvie!

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 10:09:45 +0000, Malcolm
 wrote:

>
>In article , 
>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>
>>I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".
>
>Nor have I, Angus, so why did you feel you had to mention it?


See you snipped my previous response :-))


_________________________________________________________

You didn't understand the question - once more :-))

Remember this?

_______________

Malcolm Ogilvie aka Dr Thick is confused about his measure of
intelligence.

A Macmillan:  "Do you think you don't have limited intelligence?"

Dr Thick:  "What a contorted question. The answer is yes. What about
yourself?"

_______________


Seems you have a terrible problem with negative questions.


________________________________________________________


Well it seems they believe in your so-called "non-existent"
organisations or they might have changed their web address.  

http://www.gct.org.uk/

But again, Malcolm you fail to comprehend the issue.

I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".  
What I have said it they are fake conservationists - a term which
isn't an organisation - because of the environmentally damaging
activities they indulge in and encourage in others.

Simple, Malcolm but obviously too complicated for simple Malcolm.

And that's not abuse :-))

That's fact.

Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident. 
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

In article , 
amacmil304@aol.com writes
>
>I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".

So why say so?

-- 
Malcolm

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:01:34 +0000, Malcolm
 wrote:

>
>In article , 
>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>
>>I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".
>
>So why say so?

Where have I said it?

They're fake conservationists; but real organisations.

You're confused again, Malcolm.


Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident. 
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

In article , 
amacmil304@aol.com writes
>On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:01:34 +0000, Malcolm
> wrote:
>
>>
>>In article ,
>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>
>>>I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".
>>
>>So why say so?
>
>Where have I said it?
>
You're being obtuse, Angus.

Out of the blue, you wrote:

"I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".

If you've never used the term, why did you think you had to deny using 
it?

-- 
Malcolm

"Old Codger"  wrote in message 
news:30f3p3leoiub45g3fehp2gcfkpsrim9k55@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:24:32 +0000, amacmil304@aol.com wrote:
>
>>http://gameconservation.org.uk/
>>
>>Now, why would I not agree with this?
>>
>>
>
> The RSPB have recently admitted it's pro hunt stance by allowing
> shoots on their land following the recent exposure by National Press
> that the RSPB has 11 wildfowling shoots on various reserves. It's time
> we questioned where the money we give to protect wildlife is really
> going!
>
> THE GAME CONSERVANCY TRUST
>
> Perspectives On Animal Abuse ®
> Turned on by guns? Enjoy killing animals for fun?
> Join the Game Conservancy Trust today.
>
> The GTC: conservationsts or animal abusers?
> The Game Conservancy Trust has the legal status of a UK charity. The
> Trust seeks to promote the hunting, shooting and killing of living
> creatures for fun.
> The Game Conservancy Trust employs a payroll of 50 'scientists'. The
> Trust combines 'research of game ecology and farmland wildlife' with a
> truly grotesque taste for Orwellian doublespeak. Thus hunted animals
> are 'harvested' [i.e. killed] using 'practical management techniques
> which will benefit game and wildlife' [i.e. kill them]. The benefits
> of being shot at and terrorised for human amusement are obscure, not
> least to the victim.
>
> What unites serial killers from Albert ('The Boston Strangler')
> DeSalvo and David ('Son of Sam') Berkowitz to Charles Manson and
> Jeffrey Dahmer is their early love of tormenting and killing non-human
> animals. Fortunately, most animal abusers don't go on to become serial
> killers. Nor do they typically end up practising pseudoscience in the
> manner of the Game Conservancy Trust. But the coarsening and
> brutalising effects of killing for pleasure are all too apparent.
>
> Using their 'scientific' results, Game Conservancy Ltd advises
> farmers, landowners and other ill-named conservationists on different
> ways to kill animals for human amusement. Indeed bloodsports
> enthusiasts continue to massacre as many of our fellow creatures as
> they think they can get away with before finally hunting becomes a
> criminal offense.
>
> With a cynicism that almost beggars belief, the slaughter of other
> sentient beings for fun is described by the Game Conservancy Trust as
> 'conservation'. (sic)
>
> Do 'sportsmen' have no shame?
>
>
>
>
> a n i m a l - a b u s e :
> The Game Conservancy Trust
> British Field Sports Society
>
>
> H O T L I N K S
>
> Animal Rights FAQ
>
> The Animal Liberation FAQ
> http://www.animal-rights.com/index.html
> Hunt Saboteurs Association
> http://hsa.enviroweb.org/hsa.shtml
> League Against Cruel Sports
> http://www.league.uk.com/
> The Last Twisted Molecule On Earth
> http://www.hedweb.com/animutop.htm
> The Quarterly Review of Doublespeak
> http://www.netins.net/showcase/clevad/double.htm
> The Countryside Alliance for Animal Rights
> http://www.countryside-aliance.com/

IAWTP.

Mr Pounder
>
>
>

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:15:10 GMT, "Mr Pounder"
 wrote:

>
>"Old Codger"  wrote in message 
>news:30f3p3leoiub45g3fehp2gcfkpsrim9k55@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:24:32 +0000, amacmil304@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>>http://gameconservation.org.uk/
>>>
>>>Now, why would I not agree with this?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The RSPB have recently admitted it's pro hunt stance by allowing
>> shoots on their land following the recent exposure by National Press
>> that the RSPB has 11 wildfowling shoots on various reserves. It's time
>> we questioned where the money we give to protect wildlife is really
>> going!
>>
>> THE GAME CONSERVANCY TRUST
>>
>> Perspectives On Animal Abuse ®
>> Turned on by guns? Enjoy killing animals for fun?
>> Join the Game Conservancy Trust today.
>>
>> The GTC: conservationsts or animal abusers?
>> The Game Conservancy Trust has the legal status of a UK charity. The
>> Trust seeks to promote the hunting, shooting and killing of living
>> creatures for fun.
>> The Game Conservancy Trust employs a payroll of 50 'scientists'. The
>> Trust combines 'research of game ecology and farmland wildlife' with a
>> truly grotesque taste for Orwellian doublespeak. Thus hunted animals
>> are 'harvested' [i.e. killed] using 'practical management techniques
>> which will benefit game and wildlife' [i.e. kill them]. The benefits
>> of being shot at and terrorised for human amusement are obscure, not
>> least to the victim.
>>
>> What unites serial killers from Albert ('The Boston Strangler')
>> DeSalvo and David ('Son of Sam') Berkowitz to Charles Manson and
>> Jeffrey Dahmer is their early love of tormenting and killing non-human
>> animals. Fortunately, most animal abusers don't go on to become serial
>> killers. Nor do they typically end up practising pseudoscience in the
>> manner of the Game Conservancy Trust. But the coarsening and
>> brutalising effects of killing for pleasure are all too apparent.
>>
>> Using their 'scientific' results, Game Conservancy Ltd advises
>> farmers, landowners and other ill-named conservationists on different
>> ways to kill animals for human amusement. Indeed bloodsports
>> enthusiasts continue to massacre as many of our fellow creatures as
>> they think they can get away with before finally hunting becomes a
>> criminal offense.
>>
>> With a cynicism that almost beggars belief, the slaughter of other
>> sentient beings for fun is described by the Game Conservancy Trust as
>> 'conservation'. (sic)
>>
>> Do 'sportsmen' have no shame?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> a n i m a l - a b u s e :
>> The Game Conservancy Trust
>> British Field Sports Society
>>
>>
>> H O T L I N K S
>>
>> Animal Rights FAQ
>>
>> The Animal Liberation FAQ
>> http://www.animal-rights.com/index.html
>> Hunt Saboteurs Association
>> http://hsa.enviroweb.org/hsa.shtml
>> League Against Cruel Sports
>> http://www.league.uk.com/
>> The Last Twisted Molecule On Earth
>> http://www.hedweb.com/animutop.htm
>> The Quarterly Review of Doublespeak
>> http://www.netins.net/showcase/clevad/double.htm
>> The Countryside Alliance for Animal Rights
>> http://www.countryside-aliance.com/
>
>IAWTP.
>
>Mr Pounder

Does that mean I agrebe with this poast?

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:46:21 +0000, Malcolm
 wrote:

>
>In article , 
>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:01:34 +0000, Malcolm
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>In article ,
>>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>>
>>>>I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".
>>>
>>>So why say so?
>>
>>Where have I said it?
>>
>You're being obtuse, Angus.

No I'm not.

>
>Out of the blue, you wrote:
>
>"I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".
>
>If you've never used the term, why did you think you had to deny using 
>it?



Because the  RSPB is a reality.  They're conservation is fake.

I've told you that once already in the previous.

Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident. 
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

In message , 
amacmil304@aol.com writes
>On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:45:18 +0000, Malcolm
> wrote:
>
>Malcolm Ogilvie aka

WOW this must be a record for how soon Angus can get desperate enough to 
have to resort to personal abuse.

Casual readers take note.

-- 
Malcolm Kane

In article ,
    wrote:
> http://gameconservation.org.uk/

> Now, why would I not agree with this?

Having not looked yet, I will have to guess.

You are bigoted?

-- 
Regards from Bob Seago:  http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/rjseago/

Old Codger wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 10:09:45 +0000, Malcolm
>  wrote:
> 
>> In article , 
>> amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>> I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".
>> Nor have I, Angus, so why did you feel you had to mention it?
> 
> Bit early in the morning to hit the bottle Ogilvie!

Why don't you piss off Pete, you are not intelligent enough to be me and 
no one believes your lies about Ogilvie.

I know you are desperate for attention but your nym shifting, forgeries 
and cross posting is becoming just a little tedious.

-- 
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make 
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:20:29 +0000, Old Codger
 wrote:

>Old Codger wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 10:09:45 +0000, Malcolm
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> In article , 
>>> amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>> I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".
>>> Nor have I, Angus, so why did you feel you had to mention it?
>> 
>> Bit early in the morning to hit the bottle Ogilvie!
>
>Why don't you piss off 

Now now. No need to be offensive, obnoxious, nasty, vindictive, upset,
unhappy, suicidal and fatuous. Even though you are!

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:46:03 +0000, Malcolm Kane
 wrote:

>In message , 
>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:45:18 +0000, Malcolm
>> wrote:
>>
>>Malcolm Ogilvie aka
>
>WOW this must be a record for how soon Angus can get desperate enough to 
>have to resort to personal abuse.
>
>Casual readers take note.

Oh yes that reminds me we were supposed to be telling the world about
your dodgy businesses. Now where was I?

In article , Malcolm Kane 
 writes
>In message , 
>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:45:18 +0000, Malcolm
>> wrote:
>>
>>Malcolm Ogilvie aka
>
>WOW this must be a record for how soon Angus can get desperate enough 
>to have to resort to personal abuse.
>
>Casual readers take note.
>
Yes, poor old Angus is finding it harder and harder to argue his case. 
Still, he is now on record as saying that the RSPB is not fake, so 
that's one organisation he believes in :-))

-- 
Malcolm

In article , 
amacmil304@aol.com writes
>On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:46:21 +0000, Malcolm
> wrote:
>
>>
>>In article ,
>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:01:34 +0000, Malcolm
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>In article ,
>>>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>>>
>>>>>I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".
>>>>
>>>>So why say so?
>>>
>>>Where have I said it?
>>>
>>You're being obtuse, Angus.
>
>No I'm not.
>
>>
>>Out of the blue, you wrote:
>>
>>"I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".
>>
>>If you've never used the term, why did you think you had to deny using
>>it?
>
>
>
>Because the  RSPB is a reality.  They're conservation is fake.
>
"They're" ????

Have you been on the bottle, Angus?


-- 
Malcolm

In message , Malcolm 
 writes
>
>In article , Malcolm Kane 
> writes
>>In message , 
>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:45:18 +0000, Malcolm
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>Malcolm Ogilvie aka
>>
>>WOW this must be a record for how soon Angus can get desperate enough 
>>to have to resort to personal abuse.
>>
>>Casual readers take note.
>>
>Yes, poor old Angus is finding it harder and harder to argue his case. 
>Still, he is now on record as saying that the RSPB is not fake, so 
>that's one organisation he believes in :-))
>
Well that is a first.  I have frequently asked him to name a 
conservation organisation he approves of.  Until now he has failed to. 
Who would have believed he would endorse the good old RSPB as his first. 
;-)))))))))

Very pleasing!!
-- 
Malcolm Kane

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:31:11 +0000, Malcolm
 wrote:

>
>In article , Malcolm Kane 
> writes
>>In message , 
>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:45:18 +0000, Malcolm
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>Malcolm Ogilvie aka
>>
>>WOW this must be a record for how soon Angus can get desperate enough 
>>to have to resort to personal abuse.
>>
>>Casual readers take note.
>>
>Yes, poor old Angus is finding it harder and harder to argue his case.

Not in the slightest. 
 
>Still, he is now on record as saying that the RSPB is not fake, so 
>that's one organisation he believes in :-))

I'm on record as saying that the RSPB are fake conservationists. 

There is a clear difference between that and saying it's existence is
fake.  

You're obviously confused.


Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident. 
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

Old Codger wrote:

No he didn't, it was *another* Pete forgery.

-- 
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make 
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

Old Codger wrote:

No he didn't, it was *another* Pete forgery.

-- 
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make 
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

Old Codger wrote:
  Mainly piffle, so I hijacked his thread to say

I used to collect old games you know, so that`s conservancy isn't it?
I got several really old Monopoly`s, a game called Oscar that was 
manufactured in Morecambe I believe, and I have rather a liking for 
those old bagatelle boards. Any other old toy collectors in the group?

hijackingly
Chad Valley

Old Codger wrote:

No he didn't.  It was *another* forgery by Pete

-- 
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make 
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

"Ron(UK)"  wrote in message 
news:aN6dnTMJ4JPOxw_anZ2dnUVZ8vWdnZ2d@bt.com...
> Old Codger wrote:
>  Mainly piffle, so I hijacked his thread to say
>
> I used to collect old games you know, so that`s conservancy isn't it?
> I got several really old Monopoly`s, a game called Oscar that was 
> manufactured in Morecambe I believe, and I have rather a liking for those 
> old bagatelle boards. Any other old toy collectors in the group?
>
Oscar? That's my cat, that is. He's sprawling across my lap as I write!

Somewhere I've got my old Chinese Chequers, complete with glass marbles. I 
was a Chinese Chequers Master as a pre-adolescent, and could probably still 
knock spots off you all at it. My dad kept trying to interest me in chess, 
in the same way that misguided parents of talented recorder players expect 
them to 'progress' to the flute or the clarinet. I loved my little coloured 
glass balls, though, and had no interest in horses heads, forts and other 
strangely carved objects with their weirdly convoluted pathways across the 
board.

I also have a vast number of bears.

ally-arctophile

In article , 
amacmil304@aol.com writes
>On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:31:11 +0000, Malcolm
> wrote:
>
>>
>>In article , Malcolm Kane
>> writes
>>>In message ,
>>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>>On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:45:18 +0000, Malcolm
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Malcolm Ogilvie aka
>>>
>>>WOW this must be a record for how soon Angus can get desperate enough
>>>to have to resort to personal abuse.
>>>
>>>Casual readers take note.
>>>
>>Yes, poor old Angus is finding it harder and harder to argue his case.
>
>Not in the slightest.
>
>>Still, he is now on record as saying that the RSPB is not fake, so
>>that's one organisation he believes in :-))
>
>I'm on record as saying that the RSPB are fake conservationists.
>
You are on record as saying that the RSPB is not a fake organisation.

>There is a clear difference between that and saying it's existence is
>fake.
>
Nonsense. You have persistently refused to name a conservation 
organisation which you don't regard as fake. You have now stated that 
the RSPB is not a fake organisation. Thank you for making that clear.

Are you sure you're not on the bottle?  If not, why did you put an 
apostrophe in "it's"?

>You're obviously confused.
>
Beginning to think you're drunk :-))

-- 
Malcolm

"Ron(UK)"  wrote in message 
news:aN6dnTMJ4JPOxw_anZ2dnUVZ8vWdnZ2d@bt.com...
> Old Codger wrote:
>  Mainly piffle, so I hijacked his thread to say
>
> I used to collect old games you know, so that`s conservancy isn't it?
> I got several really old Monopoly`s, a game called Oscar that was 
> manufactured in Morecambe I believe, and I have rather a liking for those 
> old bagatelle boards. Any other old toy collectors in the group?
>
> hijackingly
> Chad Valley

Used to have a bagatelle board as a child  - thousands of pins in it. It 
would double up nicely as a useful bed for an eastern mystic. Also used to 
have a skittle board. The sort you pulled the string and everything stood 
upright again  - bit like old fashion Viagra. Otherwise, I made most of my 
toys being a wartime kid. I regret I did not hang on to any of them.

Rex.

"a l l y"  wrote in message 
news:5vfajgF1lr2roU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "Ron(UK)"  wrote in message 
> news:aN6dnTMJ4JPOxw_anZ2dnUVZ8vWdnZ2d@bt.com...
>> Old Codger wrote:
>>  Mainly piffle, so I hijacked his thread to say
>>
>> I used to collect old games you know, so that`s conservancy isn't it?
>> I got several really old Monopoly`s, a game called Oscar that was 
>> manufactured in Morecambe I believe, and I have rather a liking for those 
>> old bagatelle boards. Any other old toy collectors in the group?
>>
> Oscar? That's my cat, that is. He's sprawling across my lap as I write!
>
> Somewhere I've got my old Chinese Chequers, complete with glass marbles. I 
> was a Chinese Chequers Master as a pre-adolescent, and could probably 
> still knock spots off you all at it. My dad kept trying to interest me in 
> chess, in the same way that misguided parents of talented recorder players 
> expect them to 'progress' to the flute or the clarinet. I loved my little 
> coloured glass balls, though, and had no interest in horses heads, forts 
> and other strangely carved objects with their weirdly convoluted pathways 
> across the board.
>
> I also have a vast number of bears.
>
> ally-arctophile

>
Just had a thought - I still have and use the chess set I bought as a ten 
year old. It has a four inch King and would be worth a bit now. I bought 
myself that from my paper round tips one Xmas. I suppose that ranks as an 
old toy.

Rex

Norcot wrote:
> "a l l y"  wrote in message 
> news:5vfajgF1lr2roU1@mid.individual.net...
>> "Ron(UK)"  wrote in message 
>> news:aN6dnTMJ4JPOxw_anZ2dnUVZ8vWdnZ2d@bt.com...
>>> Old Codger wrote:
>>>  Mainly piffle, so I hijacked his thread to say
>>>
>>> I used to collect old games you know, so that`s conservancy isn't it?
>>> I got several really old Monopoly`s, a game called Oscar that was 
>>> manufactured in Morecambe I believe, and I have rather a liking for those 
>>> old bagatelle boards. Any other old toy collectors in the group?
>>>
>> Oscar? That's my cat, that is. He's sprawling across my lap as I write!
>>
>> Somewhere I've got my old Chinese Chequers, complete with glass marbles. I 
>> was a Chinese Chequers Master as a pre-adolescent, and could probably 
>> still knock spots off you all at it. My dad kept trying to interest me in 
>> chess, in the same way that misguided parents of talented recorder players 
>> expect them to 'progress' to the flute or the clarinet. I loved my little 
>> coloured glass balls, though, and had no interest in horses heads, forts 
>> and other strangely carved objects with their weirdly convoluted pathways 
>> across the board.
>>
>> I also have a vast number of bears.
>>
>> ally-arctophile
> 
> Just had a thought - I still have and use the chess set I bought as a ten 
> year old. It has a four inch King and would be worth a bit now. I bought 
> myself that from my paper round tips one Xmas. I suppose that ranks as an 
> old toy.
> 
> Rex 
> 
> 

Sadly, since the rise of Ebay, the value of collectables has fallen 
dramatically. My Horby Dublo retirement fund is now worth 'sodall©' 
there`s so much of the stuff available online that it`s a buyers market.

Still, any nice old bit of memorabilia, be it Beatles wallpaper[1] or a 
cheap teddy with all the fur loved off, is a joy to own. I much prefer 
to chance across an old toy with some genuine playwear than a much more 
valuable item in mint condition that`s spent its days lost down the back 
of some dusty toyshop counter.


[1] got a roll in the loft, and a Beatles lampshade :)


hoardingly
Ron Lovejoy

"Ron(UK)"  wrote in message 
news:7aSdnVyQ-s5ssg7anZ2dnUVZ8u2dnZ2d@bt.com...
> Norcot wrote:
>> "a l l y"  wrote in message 
>> news:5vfajgF1lr2roU1@mid.individual.net...
>>> "Ron(UK)"  wrote in message 
>>> news:aN6dnTMJ4JPOxw_anZ2dnUVZ8vWdnZ2d@bt.com...
>>>> Old Codger wrote:
>>>>  Mainly piffle, so I hijacked his thread to say
>>>>
>>>> I used to collect old games you know, so that`s conservancy isn't it?
>>>> I got several really old Monopoly`s, a game called Oscar that was 
>>>> manufactured in Morecambe I believe, and I have rather a liking for 
>>>> those old bagatelle boards. Any other old toy collectors in the group?
>>>>
>>> Oscar? That's my cat, that is. He's sprawling across my lap as I write!
>>>
>>> Somewhere I've got my old Chinese Chequers, complete with glass marbles. 
>>> I was a Chinese Chequers Master as a pre-adolescent, and could probably 
>>> still knock spots off you all at it. My dad kept trying to interest me 
>>> in chess, in the same way that misguided parents of talented recorder 
>>> players expect them to 'progress' to the flute or the clarinet. I loved 
>>> my little coloured glass balls, though, and had no interest in horses 
>>> heads, forts and other strangely carved objects with their weirdly 
>>> convoluted pathways across the board.
>>>
>>> I also have a vast number of bears.
>>>
>>> ally-arctophile
>>
>> Just had a thought - I still have and use the chess set I bought as a ten 
>> year old. It has a four inch King and would be worth a bit now. I bought 
>> myself that from my paper round tips one Xmas. I suppose that ranks as an 
>> old toy.
>>
>> Rex
>
> Sadly, since the rise of Ebay, the value of collectables has fallen 
> dramatically. My Horby Dublo retirement fund is now worth 'sodall©' 
> there`s so much of the stuff available online that it`s a buyers market.
>
> Still, any nice old bit of memorabilia, be it Beatles wallpaper[1] or a 
> cheap teddy with all the fur loved off, is a joy to own. I much prefer to 
> chance across an old toy with some genuine playwear than a much more 
> valuable item in mint condition that`s spent its days lost down the back 
> of some dusty toyshop counter.
>
>
> [1] got a roll in the loft, and a Beatles lampshade :)
>
>
> hoardingly
> Ron Lovejoy

I got a roll in the hay once. Wasn't worth much. As for the old stuff I have 
stashed, I can't take it with me when I go so I would desireably swap it in 
for cash, at the right price, ofcourse. I'm no fool.

Second-hand-Rose.

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:03:45 +0000, Malcolm
 wrote:

>
>In article , 
>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:31:11 +0000, Malcolm
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>In article , Malcolm Kane
>>> writes
>>>>In message ,
>>>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>>>On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:45:18 +0000, Malcolm
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Malcolm Ogilvie aka
>>>>
>>>>WOW this must be a record for how soon Angus can get desperate enough
>>>>to have to resort to personal abuse.
>>>>
>>>>Casual readers take note.
>>>>
>>>Yes, poor old Angus is finding it harder and harder to argue his case.
>>
>>Not in the slightest.
>>
>>>Still, he is now on record as saying that the RSPB is not fake, so
>>>that's one organisation he believes in :-))
>>
>>I'm on record as saying that the RSPB are fake conservationists.
>>
>You are on record as saying that the RSPB is not a fake organisation.

It's a real organisation - it exists.  In a big house in Sandy with
executives being paid up to £100 per annum.  That's definitely not
fake.

But they're a fake conservation organisation - a completely different
thing.



>
>>There is a clear difference between that and saying it's existence is
>>fake.
>>
>Nonsense. You have persistently refused to name a conservation 
>organisation which you don't regard as fake. You have now stated that 
>the RSPB is not a fake organisation. Thank you for making that clear.

But it's not a "conservation" organsiation its a "fake conservation"
organisation.  

>
>Are you sure you're not on the bottle?  If not, why did you put an 
>apostrophe in "it's"?
>
>>You're obviously confused.
>>
>Beginning to think you're drunk :-))

Typos.

And I don't care too much about spelling and grammar on ngs.



Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident. 
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

Ron(UK) wrote:
> Old Codger wrote:
>  Mainly piffle, so I hijacked his thread to say
> 
> I used to collect old games you know, so that`s conservancy isn't it?
> I got several really old Monopoly`s, a game called Oscar that was 
> manufactured in Morecambe I believe, and I have rather a liking for 
> those old bagatelle boards. Any other old toy collectors in the group?
> 
> hijackingly
> Chad Valley
My husband still has his original Monopoly, probably from the early 
sixties, with proper wooden houses and hotels.

He also has his own, original Teddy Bear, a late end Baby Boomer 
himself, worn to holes with affection, completely blind now, and with an 
embroidered replacement smile, who now sports a proper cowboy's bandanna 
to prop up his head. I adopted him as my own when my own mother gave 
away mine to a child of a former employee, around 1980, thinking that I 
wouldn't notice. Ha! When I gave away my son's die cast Thomas the Tank 
Engine collection when we left Britain when he was ten, I was told that 
he had been keeping them for his son! I'd love to get them back for him!

Between us we still have a collection of Ladybird 2/6d books, and I have 
several Beatrix Potter books given to me as a child young enough to 
write the "J" in my name the wrong way round.

I still have a jointed, life size baby doll from Woolworth's, circa 1962.
But everything was loved and played with, and so nobody would want it. 
But if anyone remembers being given a twenty-something year old teddy 
about twenty seven years ago, I'd be happy to be generous.

Jp

"Jpinny"  wrote in message 
news:47937c71$0$11572$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> Ron(UK) wrote:
>> Old Codger wrote:
>>  Mainly piffle, so I hijacked his thread to say
>>
>> I used to collect old games you know, so that`s conservancy isn't it?
>> I got several really old Monopoly`s, a game called Oscar that was 
>> manufactured in Morecambe I believe, and I have rather a liking for those 
>> old bagatelle boards. Any other old toy collectors in the group?
>>
>> hijackingly
>> Chad Valley
> My husband still has his original Monopoly, probably from the early 
> sixties, with proper wooden houses and hotels.
>
> He also has his own, original Teddy Bear, a late end Baby Boomer himself, 
> worn to holes with affection, completely blind now, and with an 
> embroidered replacement smile, who now sports a proper cowboy's bandanna 
> to prop up his head. I adopted him as my own when my own mother gave away 
> mine to a child of a former employee, around 1980, thinking that I 
> wouldn't notice. Ha! When I gave away my son's die cast Thomas the Tank 
> Engine collection when we left Britain when he was ten, I was told that he 
> had been keeping them for his son! I'd love to get them back for him!
>
> Between us we still have a collection of Ladybird 2/6d books, and I have 
> several Beatrix Potter books given to me as a child young enough to write 
> the "J" in my name the wrong way round.
>
> I still have a jointed, life size baby doll from Woolworth's, circa 1962.
> But everything was loved and played with, and so nobody would want it. But 
> if anyone remembers being given a twenty-something year old teddy about 
> twenty seven years ago, I'd be happy to be generous.
>
> Jp

Mphu! My teddybear is 40 years old and I'm nor sharing.

Edith Coodloop.

"Ron(UK)"  wrote in message 
news:7aSdnVyQ-s5ssg7anZ2dnUVZ8u2dnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> Sadly, since the rise of Ebay, the value of collectables has fallen 
> dramatically. My Horby Dublo retirement fund is now worth 'sodall©' 
> there`s so much of the stuff available online that it`s a buyers market.
>
Bugger. I've got a train set still in its box, unused, in the attic. I kept 
meaning to sell it and never got round to it. Maybe I should just get it out 
and play with it. (I have some friends who are retired and apparently 
completely sane in every other way, who have a huge model railway layout in 
their garage, and invite guests in to watch the trains go round. I love 
them.)

> Still, any nice old bit of memorabilia, be it Beatles wallpaper[1] or a 
> cheap teddy with all the fur loved off, is a joy to own. I much prefer to 
> chance across an old toy with some genuine playwear than a much more 
> valuable item in mint condition that`s spent its days lost down the back 
> of some dusty toyshop counter.
>
I've got loads of stuff like that. Bears going back nearly a century, all 
well-loved. (And, sadly, no buttons in the ear so not Steiffs. Maybe it's 
just as well.)

>
> [1] got a roll in the loft, and a Beatles lampshade :)
>
Wow!

ally-impressed

"Norcot"  wrote in message 
news:F9Ekj.1252$UB4.280@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>
> "Ron(UK)"  wrote in message 
> news:aN6dnTMJ4JPOxw_anZ2dnUVZ8vWdnZ2d@bt.com...
>> Old Codger wrote:
>>  Mainly piffle, so I hijacked his thread to say
>>
>> I used to collect old games you know, so that`s conservancy isn't it?
>> I got several really old Monopoly`s, a game called Oscar that was 
>> manufactured in Morecambe I believe, and I have rather a liking for those 
>> old bagatelle boards. Any other old toy collectors in the group?
>>
>> hijackingly
>> Chad Valley
>
> Used to have a bagatelle board as a child  - thousands of pins in it. It 
> would double up nicely as a useful bed for an eastern mystic. Also used to 
> have a skittle board. The sort you pulled the string and everything stood 
> upright again  - bit like old fashion Viagra. Otherwise, I made most of my 
> toys being a wartime kid. I regret I did not hang on to any of them.
>
Steve's got a really interesting thing made by his Grandpa, but I'm not sure 
what it's called. You put these skittles up and there's a ball attached to a 
string hanging from a post, and you swing the ball round and try to knock 
down the skittles. Are you there, Steve? What's that thing called again?

Sadly nobody plays with things like this any more, but being a family 
heirloom it will be kept.

ally

"The Traveller"  wrote in message 
news:VamdnZHflJeKEQ7a4p2dnAA@telenor.com...
>
> Mphu! My teddybear is 40 years old and I'm nor sharing.
>
You had to wait until you were in your 20s to get a teddy bear? Poor you!

ally-knows-how-old-she-is

"Jpinny"  wrote in message 
news:47937c71$0$11572$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> My husband still has his original Monopoly, probably from the early 
> sixties, with proper wooden houses and hotels.
>
> He also has his own, original Teddy Bear, a late end Baby Boomer himself, 
> worn to holes with affection, completely blind now, and with an 
> embroidered replacement smile, who now sports a proper cowboy's bandanna 
> to prop up his head. I adopted him as my own when my own mother gave away 
> mine to a child of a former employee, around 1980, thinking that I 
> wouldn't notice. Ha! When I gave away my son's die cast Thomas the Tank 
> Engine collection when we left Britain when he was ten, I was told that he 
> had been keeping them for his son! I'd love to get them back for him!
>
Here's my mum's old teddy bear -
 http://www.flickr.com/photos/allybeag/1120448162/in/set-72157601442349416/  
- sitting on one of my customers' chairs, for which I'd made a new rush 
seat.

>
> I still have a jointed, life size baby doll from Woolworth's, circa 1962.
> But everything was loved and played with, and so nobody would want it. But 
> if anyone remembers being given a twenty-something year old teddy about 
> twenty seven years ago, I'd be happy to be generous.
>
Sounds like Mr Burns and Binky!

ally

a l l y wrote:
> "Jpinny"  wrote in message 
> news:47937c71$0$11572$607ed4bc@cv.net...
>> My husband still has his original Monopoly, probably from the early 
>> sixties, with proper wooden houses and hotels.
>>
>> He also has his own, original Teddy Bear, a late end Baby Boomer himself, 
>> worn to holes with affection, completely blind now, and with an 
>> embroidered replacement smile, who now sports a proper cowboy's bandanna 
>> to prop up his head. I adopted him as my own when my own mother gave away 
>> mine to a child of a former employee, around 1980, thinking that I 
>> wouldn't notice. Ha! When I gave away my son's die cast Thomas the Tank 
>> Engine collection when we left Britain when he was ten, I was told that he 
>> had been keeping them for his son! I'd love to get them back for him!
>>
> Here's my mum's old teddy bear -
>  http://www.flickr.com/photos/allybeag/1120448162/in/set-72157601442349416/  
> - sitting on one of my customers' chairs, for which I'd made a new rush 
> seat.
> 
>> I still have a jointed, life size baby doll from Woolworth's, circa 1962.
>> But everything was loved and played with, and so nobody would want it. But 
>> if anyone remembers being given a twenty-something year old teddy about 
>> twenty seven years ago, I'd be happy to be generous.
>>
> Sounds like Mr Burns and Binky!
> 
> ally 
> 
> 
I'd never associated myself with Mr Burns before. In fact, the name 
Burns immediately reminded me of Rabbie, whose day is coming up soon, 
and not Matt Groening's skinflint. But yes. Grrrr. My Edward Bear is 
much missed....and the only chillingly persistent shadow in my memories 
of my late mother*.


(*after 20 years I simply hope that she (who is *very* much loved and 
missed and had an adorably infectious and quirky sense of humour) 
wouldn't mind!  )

Apologising first!

Jp