Three years ago when someone here suggested:

"I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey 
squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey 
squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."

Angus responded with:
"I could agree with that."


Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dangerous road
With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save 
reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences 
and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population 
control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could 
begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and 
wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance 
within a few generations.
Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how 
long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate 
to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by 
the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?

A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening 
prospect.

ANGUS MacMILLAN
Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
Dunbartonshire
---------------------------------------------------------------

So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three 
years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few 
years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey 
squirrels?

-- 
Malcolm

On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm
 wrote:

>
>Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>
>"I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey 
>squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey 
>squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>
>Angus responded with:
>"I could agree with that."
>
>
>Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>Dangerous road
>With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save 
>reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences 
>and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population 
>control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could 
>begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and 
>wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance 
>within a few generations.
>Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how 
>long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate 
>to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by 
>the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>
>A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening 
>prospect.
>
>ANGUS MacMILLAN
>Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>Dunbartonshire
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three 
>years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few 
>years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey 
>squirrels?


Very simple.  If you read what I write you would be able to work it
out.  

This is another example of the close thinking of the so-called UK
conservationist movement to the Nazi thinking of the 30s and 40s.  

On that basis I think that immunocontraception is no longer an option
that can be considered moral and the rest is in my letter.

I'm too busy to get into a long and pointless debate with you and as I
have said in the recent past you're of no use to me any more, Malcolm.
You've been milked dry of any useful information.

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 Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
bully   sought to start conflict and
trouble when he wrote:

>
>Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>
>"I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey 
>squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey 
>squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>
>Angus responded with:
>"I could agree with that."
>
>
>Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>Dangerous road
>With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save 
>reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences 
>and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population 
>control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could 
>begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and 
>wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance 
>within a few generations.
>Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how 
>long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate 
>to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by 
>the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>
>A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening 
>prospect.
>
>ANGUS MacMILLAN
>Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>Dunbartonshire
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three 
>years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few 
>years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey 
>squirrels?


You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
cause trouble and attack your victims once again.

We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.
Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.

http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn

and

http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm

In article , 
amacmil304@aol.com writes
>On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm
> wrote:
>
>>
>>Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>>
>>"I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey
>>squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey
>>squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>>
>>Angus responded with:
>>"I could agree with that."
>>
>>
>>Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>>---------------------------------------------------------------
>>Dangerous road
>>With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save
>>reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences
>>and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population
>>control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could
>>begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and
>>wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance
>>within a few generations.
>>Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how
>>long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate
>>to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by
>>the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>>
>>A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening
>>prospect.
>>
>>ANGUS MacMILLAN
>>Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>>Dunbartonshire
>>---------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three
>>years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few
>>years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey
>>squirrels?
>
>
>Very simple.  If you read what I write you would be able to work it
>out.
>
>This is another example of the close thinking of the so-called UK
>conservationist movement to the Nazi thinking of the 30s and 40s.
>
I've tried reading what you've written above and it doesn't make sense, 
unsurprisingly. Perhaps you would like to try English next time!

>On that basis I think that immunocontraception is no longer an option
>that can be considered moral and the rest is in my letter.
>
Three years ago you publicly supported immunocontraception and took no 
moral stance on the matter. Perhaps you should have been honest enough 
in your letter to The Scotsman to admit that you have changed your mind.

So, out goes a possible alternative to killing that you once supported.

>I'm too busy to get into a long and pointless debate with you and as I
>have said in the recent past you're of no use to me any more, Malcolm.

Thank you for your surrender, Angus.

>You've been milked dry of any useful information.

More surrender. The information I have isn't useful to you because it so 
often reveals that are wrong or misguided. Nice to have that 
confirmation.


-- 
Malcolm

Old Codger wrote:
> On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
> bully   sought to start conflict and
> trouble when he wrote:
> 
>> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>>
>> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey 
>> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey 
>> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>>
>> Angus responded with:
>> "I could agree with that."
>>
>>
>> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>> Dangerous road
>> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save 
>> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences 
>> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population 
>> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could 
>> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and 
>> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance 
>> within a few generations.
>> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how 
>> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate 
>> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by 
>> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>>
>> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening 
>> prospect.
>>
>> ANGUS MacMILLAN
>> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>> Dunbartonshire
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three 
>> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few 
>> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey 
>> squirrels?
> 
> 
> You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
> sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
> get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
> snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
> cause trouble and attack your victims once again.
> 
> We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
> first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
> book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.
> Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
> of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn
> 
> and
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm


Would you care to comment, Malcy? When you decline to respond to such 
charges, it is hardly surprising that others are 'given to understand' 
certain things.

On Jun 1, 11:42 am, Old Codger  wrote:
> On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
> bully   sought to start conflict and
>
>
>
> trouble when he wrote:
>
> >Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>
> >"I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey
> >squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey
> >squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>
> >Angus responded with:
> >"I could agree with that."
>
> >Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> >Dangerous road
> >With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save
> >reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences
> >and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population
> >control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could
> >begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and
> >wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance
> >within a few generations.
> >Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how
> >long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate
> >to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by
> >the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>
> >A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening
> >prospect.
>
> >ANGUS MacMILLAN
> >Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
> >Dunbartonshire
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three
> >years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few
> >years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey
> >squirrels?
>
> You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
> sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
> get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
> snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
> cause trouble and attack your victims once again.
>
> We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
> first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
> book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.
> Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
> of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn
>
> and
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm

Pete the Troll's obviously got a thing going on with Angus Macmillan

On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 18:53:36 +0100, Farmer Giles 
wrote:

>Old Codger wrote:
>> On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
>> bully   sought to start conflict and
>> trouble when he wrote:
>> 
>>> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>>>
>>> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey 
>>> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey 
>>> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>>>
>>> Angus responded with:
>>> "I could agree with that."
>>>
>>>
>>> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Dangerous road
>>> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save 
>>> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences 
>>> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population 
>>> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could 
>>> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and 
>>> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance 
>>> within a few generations.
>>> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how 
>>> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate 
>>> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by 
>>> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>>>
>>> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening 
>>> prospect.
>>>
>>> ANGUS MacMILLAN
>>> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>>> Dunbartonshire
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three 
>>> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few 
>>> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey 
>>> squirrels?
>> 
>> 
>> You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
>> sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
>> get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
>> snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
>> cause trouble and attack your victims once again.
>> 
>> We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
>> first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
>> book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.
>> Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
>> of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.
>> 
>> http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn
>> 
>> and
>> 
>> http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm
>
>
>Would you care to comment, Malcy? When you decline to respond to such 
>charges, it is hardly surprising that others are 'given to understand' 
>certain things.

He huffed, puffed and bluffed for many years. He took *the boy who
cried wolf* to heights unseen. Now he's washed up on the beach of
tidal energy which he is so desperate to support due to a backhander.
Though it's noticed he's not so keen to let SNH know that, who are
still promoting wind energy.

On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:04:53 +0100, Old Codger
 wrote:

>On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 18:53:36 +0100, Farmer Giles 
>wrote:
>
>>Old Codger wrote:
>>> On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
>>> bully   sought to start conflict and
>>> trouble when he wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>>>>
>>>> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey 
>>>> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey 
>>>> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>>>>
>>>> Angus responded with:
>>>> "I could agree with that."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Dangerous road
>>>> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save 
>>>> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences 
>>>> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population 
>>>> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could 
>>>> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and 
>>>> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance 
>>>> within a few generations.
>>>> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how 
>>>> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate 
>>>> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by 
>>>> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>>>>
>>>> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening 
>>>> prospect.
>>>>
>>>> ANGUS MacMILLAN
>>>> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>>>> Dunbartonshire
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three 
>>>> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few 
>>>> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey 
>>>> squirrels?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
>>> sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
>>> get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
>>> snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
>>> cause trouble and attack your victims once again.
>>> 
>>> We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
>>> first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
>>> book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.
>>> Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
>>> of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.
>>> 
>>> http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn
>>> 
>>> and
>>> 
>>> http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm
>>
>>
>>Would you care to comment, Malcy? When you decline to respond to such 
>>charges, it is hardly surprising that others are 'given to understand' 
>>certain things.
>
>He huffed, puffed and bluffed for many years. He took *the boy who
>cried wolf* to heights unseen. Now he's washed up on the beach of
>tidal energy which he is so desperate to support due to a backhander.
>Though it's noticed he's not so keen to let SNH know that, who are
>still promoting wind energy.

He never did explain why he visited the young children's forums
pretending to be a young girl either?

Lust or just lust?

Is David G Bell on the register?

On Jun 1, 11:42 am, Old Codger  wrote:
> On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
> bully   sought to start conflict and
>
>
>
> trouble when he wrote:
>
> >Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>
> >"I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey
> >squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey
> >squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>
> >Angus responded with:
> >"I could agree with that."
>
> >Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> >Dangerous road
> >With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save
> >reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences
> >and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population
> >control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could
> >begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and
> >wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance
> >within a few generations.
> >Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how
> >long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate
> >to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by
> >the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>
> >A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening
> >prospect.
>
> >ANGUS MacMILLAN
> >Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
> >Dunbartonshire
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three
> >years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few
> >years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey
> >squirrels?
>
> You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
> sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
> get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
> snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
> cause trouble and attack your victims once again.
>
> We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
> first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
> book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.
> Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
> of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn
>
> and
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm

Silly old Pete again.

On May 31, 2:31 pm, Malcolm  wrote:
> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>
> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey
> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey
> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>
> Angus responded with:
> "I could agree with that."
>
> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Dangerous road
> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save
> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences
> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population
> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could
> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and
> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance
> within a few generations.
> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how
> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate
> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by
> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>
> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening
> prospect.
>
> ANGUS MacMILLAN
> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
> Dunbartonshire
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three
> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few
> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey
> squirrels?
>
> --
> Malcolm

This is clearly a letter that Angus doesn't agree with ;-))

On Jun 1, 11:42 am, Old Codger  wrote:
> On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
> bully   sought to start conflict and
>
>
>
> trouble when he wrote:
>
> >Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>
> >"I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey
> >squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey
> >squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>
> >Angus responded with:
> >"I could agree with that."
>
> >Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> >Dangerous road
> >With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save
> >reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences
> >and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population
> >control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could
> >begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and
> >wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance
> >within a few generations.
> >Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how
> >long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate
> >to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by
> >the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>
> >A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening
> >prospect.
>
> >ANGUS MacMILLAN
> >Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
> >Dunbartonshire
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three
> >years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few
> >years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey
> >squirrels?
>
> You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
> sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
> get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
> snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
> cause trouble and attack your victims once again.
>
> We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
> first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
> book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.
> Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
> of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn
>
> and
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm

Ooh, look. Angus must've telephoned Pete to try and get him off the
hook.

X-No-Archive: yes
In article 
, 
John M.  writes
>On May 31, 2:31 pm, Malcolm  wrote:
>> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>>
>> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey
>> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey
>> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>>
>> Angus responded with:
>> "I could agree with that."
>>
>> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>> Dangerous road
>> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save
>> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences
>> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population
>> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could
>> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and
>> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance
>> within a few generations.
>> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how
>> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate
>> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by
>> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>>
>> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening
>> prospect.
>>
>> ANGUS MacMILLAN
>> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>> Dunbartonshire
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three
>> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few
>> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey
>> squirrels?
>>
>> --
>> Malcolm
>
>This is clearly a letter that Angus doesn't agree with ;-))

LOL!

-- 
Malcolm

"John M."  wrote in message 
news:f1582abc-704e-438c-8409-ea2b5dfbd407@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> On May 31, 2:31 pm, Malcolm  wrote:
>> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>>
>> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey
>> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey
>> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>>
>> Angus responded with:
>> "I could agree with that."
>>
>> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>> Dangerous road
>> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save
>> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences
>> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population
>> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could
>> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and
>> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance
>> within a few generations.
>> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how
>> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate
>> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by
>> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>>
>> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening
>> prospect.
>>
>> ANGUS MacMILLAN
>> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>> Dunbartonshire
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three
>> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few
>> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey
>> squirrels?
>>
>> --
>> Malcolm
>
> This is clearly a letter that Angus doesn't agree with ;-))

It (the original letter) is clearly a letter he no longer agrees with. I 
assume your smiley indicates pleasure that Angus has demonstrated sufficient 
flexibility of mind to alter his opinion?

Old Codger wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:04:53 +0100, Old Codger
>  wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 18:53:36 +0100, Farmer Giles 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Old Codger wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
>>>> bully   sought to start conflict and
>>>> trouble when he wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>>>>>
>>>>> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey 
>>>>> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey 
>>>>> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>>>>>
>>>>> Angus responded with:
>>>>> "I could agree with that."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Dangerous road
>>>>> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save 
>>>>> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences 
>>>>> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population 
>>>>> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could 
>>>>> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and 
>>>>> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance 
>>>>> within a few generations.
>>>>> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how 
>>>>> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate 
>>>>> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by 
>>>>> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>>>>>
>>>>> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening 
>>>>> prospect.
>>>>>
>>>>> ANGUS MacMILLAN
>>>>> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>>>>> Dunbartonshire
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three 
>>>>> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few 
>>>>> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey 
>>>>> squirrels?
>>>>
>>>> You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
>>>> sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
>>>> get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
>>>> snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
>>>> cause trouble and attack your victims once again.
>>>>
>>>> We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
>>>> first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
>>>> book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.
>>>> Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
>>>> of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn
>>>>
>>>> and
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm
>>>
>>> Would you care to comment, Malcy? When you decline to respond to such 
>>> charges, it is hardly surprising that others are 'given to understand' 
>>> certain things.
>> He huffed, puffed and bluffed for many years. He took *the boy who
>> cried wolf* to heights unseen. Now he's washed up on the beach of
>> tidal energy which he is so desperate to support due to a backhander.
>> Though it's noticed he's not so keen to let SNH know that, who are
>> still promoting wind energy.
> 
> He never did explain why he visited the young children's forums
> pretending to be a young girl either?
> 
> Lust or just lust?
> 
> Is David G Bell on the register?
> 

I don't have the faintest idea about any of the things that you refer 
to, but the fact that he doesn't respond (he is usually very quick off 
the mark to do so) is interesting. I couldn't possibly comment, but one 
could be forgiven for drawing certain conclusions!

On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 21:42:58 +0100, Farmer Giles 
wrote:

>Old Codger wrote:
>> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:04:53 +0100, Old Codger
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 18:53:36 +0100, Farmer Giles 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Old Codger wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
>>>>> bully   sought to start conflict and
>>>>> trouble when he wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey 
>>>>>> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey 
>>>>>> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Angus responded with:
>>>>>> "I could agree with that."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Dangerous road
>>>>>> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save 
>>>>>> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences 
>>>>>> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population 
>>>>>> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could 
>>>>>> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and 
>>>>>> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance 
>>>>>> within a few generations.
>>>>>> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how 
>>>>>> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate 
>>>>>> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by 
>>>>>> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening 
>>>>>> prospect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ANGUS MacMILLAN
>>>>>> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>>>>>> Dunbartonshire
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three 
>>>>>> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few 
>>>>>> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey 
>>>>>> squirrels?
>>>>>
>>>>> You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
>>>>> sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
>>>>> get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
>>>>> snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
>>>>> cause trouble and attack your victims once again.
>>>>>
>>>>> We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
>>>>> first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
>>>>> book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.
>>>>> Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
>>>>> of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn
>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm
>>>>
>>>> Would you care to comment, Malcy? When you decline to respond to such 
>>>> charges, it is hardly surprising that others are 'given to understand' 
>>>> certain things.
>>> He huffed, puffed and bluffed for many years. He took *the boy who
>>> cried wolf* to heights unseen. Now he's washed up on the beach of
>>> tidal energy which he is so desperate to support due to a backhander.
>>> Though it's noticed he's not so keen to let SNH know that, who are
>>> still promoting wind energy.
>> 
>> He never did explain why he visited the young children's forums
>> pretending to be a young girl either?
>> 
>> Lust or just lust?
>> 
>> Is David G Bell on the register?
>> 
>
>I don't have the faintest idea about any of the things that you refer 
>to, but the fact that he doesn't respond (he is usually very quick off 
>the mark to do so) is interesting. I couldn't possibly comment, but one 
>could be forgiven for drawing certain conclusions!

That's the trouble when they bury their head in the sand hoping we'll
all go away. They forget the rest of us can still hear the wind.

On Jun 1, 8:27 pm, "BAC"  wrote:
> "John M."  wrote in message
>
> news:f1582abc-704e-438c-8409-ea2b5dfbd407@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On May 31, 2:31 pm, Malcolm  wrote:
> >> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>
> >> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey
> >> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey
> >> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>
> >> Angus responded with:
> >> "I could agree with that."
>
> >> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Dangerous road
> >> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save
> >> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences
> >> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population
> >> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could
> >> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and
> >> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance
> >> within a few generations.
> >> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how
> >> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate
> >> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by
> >> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>
> >> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening
> >> prospect.
>
> >> ANGUS MacMILLAN
> >> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
> >> Dunbartonshire
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three
> >> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few
> >> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey
> >> squirrels?
>
> >> --
> >> Malcolm
>
> > This is clearly a letter that Angus doesn't agree with ;-))
>
> It (the original letter) is clearly a letter he no longer agrees with. I
> assume your smiley indicates pleasure that Angus has demonstrated sufficient
> flexibility of mind to alter his opinion?

It indicated pleasure that Angus demonstrated sufficient loss of mind
to have forgotten his opinion ;-)

On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 13:34:26 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
 wrote:

>On Jun 1, 8:27 pm, "BAC"  wrote:
>> "John M."  wrote in message
>>
>> news:f1582abc-704e-438c-8409-ea2b5dfbd407@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On May 31, 2:31 pm, Malcolm  wrote:
>> >> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>>
>> >> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey
>> >> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey
>> >> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>>
>> >> Angus responded with:
>> >> "I could agree with that."
>>
>> >> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> Dangerous road
>> >> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save
>> >> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences
>> >> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population
>> >> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could
>> >> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and
>> >> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance
>> >> within a few generations.
>> >> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how
>> >> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate
>> >> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by
>> >> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>>
>> >> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening
>> >> prospect.
>>
>> >> ANGUS MacMILLAN
>> >> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>> >> Dunbartonshire
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> >> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three
>> >> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few
>> >> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey
>> >> squirrels?
>>
>> >> --
>> >> Malcolm
>>
>> > This is clearly a letter that Angus doesn't agree with ;-))
>>
>> It (the original letter) is clearly a letter he no longer agrees with. I
>> assume your smiley indicates pleasure that Angus has demonstrated sufficient
>> flexibility of mind to alter his opinion?
>
>It indicated pleasure that Angus demonstrated sufficient loss of mind
>to have forgotten his opinion ;-)


Not at all.  The hate campaign against grey squirrels has reached such
a pitch that it is clear that the use of immunocontraception by
so-called conservationists would be in danger of widespread abuse.

I seem to remember saying some time ago that I was concerned that it
could be open to abuse.  However, I not going to trawl through loads
of messages to find it.  If you're keen you can.


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 Sun, 01 Jun 2008 10:42:52 +0100, Old Codger
 wrote:

>On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
>bully   sought to start conflict and
>trouble when he wrote:
>
>>
>>Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>>
>>"I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey 
>>squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey 
>>squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>>
>>Angus responded with:
>>"I could agree with that."
>>
>>
>>Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>>---------------------------------------------------------------
>>Dangerous road
>>With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save 
>>reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences 
>>and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population 
>>control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could 
>>begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and 
>>wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance 
>>within a few generations.
>>Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how 
>>long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate 
>>to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by 
>>the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>>
>>A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening 
>>prospect.
>>
>>ANGUS MacMILLAN
>>Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>>Dunbartonshire
>>---------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three 
>>years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few 
>>years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey 
>>squirrels?
>
>
>You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
>sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
>get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
>snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
>cause trouble and attack your victims once again.
>
>We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
>first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
>book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.
>Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
>of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.
>
>http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn
>
>and
>
>http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm

That would also explain why Ogilvie tries so hard to hide his posts
from the Google archives then by setting x-no archive? Very
suspicious.
--


Have you ever noticed that if something is advertised as 'amusing' or 
'hilarious', it usually isn't? 





















































































Cut Here............................................
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In article ,
   BAC  wrote:

> >
> > This is clearly a letter that Angus doesn't agree with ;-))

> It (the original letter) is clearly a letter he no longer agrees with. I
> assume your smiley indicates pleasure that Angus has demonstrated
> sufficient flexibility of mind to alter his opinion? 


Even a week is a long time in politics.

On Jun 1, 11:08 am, Old Codger  wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:04:53 퍝, Old Codger
>
>
>
>
>
>  wrote:
> >On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 18:53:36 퍝, Farmer Giles 
> >wrote:
>
> >>Old Codger wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 퍝, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
> >>> bully   sought to start conflict and
> >>> trouble when he wrote:
>
> >>>> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>
> >>>> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey
> >>>> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey
> >>>> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>
> >>>> Angus responded with:
> >>>> "I could agree with that."
>
> >>>> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> Dangerous road
> >>>> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save
> >>>> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences
> >>>> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population
> >>>> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could
> >>>> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and
> >>>> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance> >>>> within a few generations.
> >>>> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how
> >>>> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate
> >>>> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by> >>>> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>
> >>>> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening
> >>>> prospect.
>
> >>>> ANGUS MacMILLAN
> >>>> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
> >>>> Dunbartonshire
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >>>> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three> >>>> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few
> >>>> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey
> >>>> squirrels?
>
> >>> You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
> >>> sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
> >>> get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
> >>> snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
> >>> cause trouble and attack your victims once again.
>
> >>> We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
> >>> first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
> >>> book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.> >>> Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
> >>> of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.
>
> >>>http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn
>
> >>> and
>
> >>>http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm
>
> >>Would you care to comment, Malcy? When you decline to respond to such
> >>charges, it is hardly surprising that others are 'given to understand'
> >>certain things.
>
> >He huffed, puffed and bluffed for many years. He took *the boy who
> >cried wolf* to heights unseen. Now he's washed up on the beach of
> >tidal energy which he is so desperate to support due to a backhander.
> >Though it's noticed he's not so keen to let SNH know that, who are
> >still promoting wind energy.
>
> He never did explain why he visited the young children's forums pretending to be a young girl either?

ROTFL .  A young girl?   I do hope you are not insinuating that
he's queer.
>
> Lust or just lust?
>
> Is David G Bell on the register?

"Bell"?  Oh ny God, another one. -
-
>
> - Show quoted text -

Boedicia@isp.com wrote:
> On Jun 1, 11:08 am, Old Codger  wrote:
>> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:04:53 +0100, Old Codger
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  wrote:
>>> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 18:53:36 +0100, Farmer Giles 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Old Codger wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
>>>>> bully   sought to start conflict and
>>>>> trouble when he wrote:
>>>>>> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>>>>>> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey
>>>>>> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey
>>>>>> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>>>>>> Angus responded with:
>>>>>> "I could agree with that."
>>>>>> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Dangerous road
>>>>>> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save
>>>>>> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences
>>>>>> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population
>>>>>> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could
>>>>>> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and
>>>>>> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance
>>>>>> within a few generations.
>>>>>> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how
>>>>>> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate
>>>>>> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by
>>>>>> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>>>>>> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening
>>>>>> prospect.
>>>>>> ANGUS MacMILLAN
>>>>>> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>>>>>> Dunbartonshire
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three
>>>>>> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few
>>>>>> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey
>>>>>> squirrels?
>>>>> You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
>>>>> sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
>>>>> get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
>>>>> snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
>>>>> cause trouble and attack your victims once again.
>>>>> We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
>>>>> first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
>>>>> book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.
>>>>> Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
>>>>> of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn
>>>>> and
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm
>>>> Would you care to comment, Malcy? When you decline to respond to such
>>>> charges, it is hardly surprising that others are 'given to understand'
>>>> certain things.
>>> He huffed, puffed and bluffed for many years. He took *the boy who
>>> cried wolf* to heights unseen. Now he's washed up on the beach of
>>> tidal energy which he is so desperate to support due to a backhander.
>>> Though it's noticed he's not so keen to let SNH know that, who are
>>> still promoting wind energy.
>> He never did explain why he visited the young children's forums pretending to be a young girl either?
> 
> ROTFL .  A young girl?   I do hope you are not insinuating that
> he's queer.

Not our Malcy, surely. Very strange certainly, but not 'queer'! ;-)



>> Lust or just lust?
>>
>> Is David G Bell on the register?
> 
> "Bell"?  Oh ny God, another one. -
> -

Or perhaps another 'invention'!

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 13:50:16 +0100, Farmer Giles 
wrote:

>Boedicia@isp.com wrote:
>> On Jun 1, 11:08 am, Old Codger  wrote:
>>> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:04:53 +0100, Old Codger
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 18:53:36 +0100, Farmer Giles 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Old Codger wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 31 May 2008 13:31:39 +0100, Malcolm Ogilvie the troll and
>>>>>> bully   sought to start conflict and
>>>>>> trouble when he wrote:
>>>>>>> Three years ago when someone here suggested:
>>>>>>> "I read about the development of a contraceptive drug for grey
>>>>>>> squirrels, I think it was London University, that would reduce grey
>>>>>>> squirrel numbers and allow reds to persist without killing."
>>>>>>> Angus responded with:
>>>>>>> "I could agree with that."
>>>>>>> Yet a few days ago, the following letter was published in The Scotsman:
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Dangerous road
>>>>>>> With regard to your report "Chemically castrate grey squirrels to save
>>>>>>> reds, demands MSP" (27 May), the potential for unintended consequences
>>>>>>> and moral decline with immunocontraception as a form of population
>>>>>>> control is enormous . Before long, so-called conservationists could
>>>>>>> begin favouring designer wildlife populations that suit their agenda and
>>>>>>> wiping out those considered unacceptable by their origin or abundance
>>>>>>> within a few generations.
>>>>>>> Indeed, in a world beset with an unsustainable human population, how
>>>>>>> long would it be before someone, somewhere, decided it was appropriate
>>>>>>> to use the technology to control humans, similar to that advocated by
>>>>>>> the German medical experimentation programmes of the 1930s?
>>>>>>> A world even more controlled than it is at present is a frightening
>>>>>>> prospect.
>>>>>>> ANGUS MacMILLAN
>>>>>>> Meikle Boturich, near Balloch
>>>>>>> Dunbartonshire
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> So why is what Angus thought was good enough for grey squirrels three
>>>>>>> years ago, and also regarded it as preferable to shooting deer a few
>>>>>>> years before that, now much too dangerous to consider using on grey
>>>>>>> squirrels?
>>>>>> You are hardly one to criticize inconsistency.  You have already been
>>>>>> sacked from one employee for being a bully, and warned by others. We
>>>>>> get a few months of peace from you and then like the sneaky little
>>>>>> snake you are it all starts again. Your post is clearly designed to
>>>>>> cause trouble and attack your victims once again.
>>>>>> We also remember when you tried to claim your book on grebes was the
>>>>>> first book on grebes. It later transpired that you had copied Konters
>>>>>> book and then tried desperately to cover it up with threats and abuse.
>>>>>> Of course it never worked and the world now knows Dr Malcolm Ogilvie
>>>>>> of The SNH is a liar, cheat, fraud and bully as we can see here.
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/ytkqgn
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/3npxvm
>>>>> Would you care to comment, Malcy? When you decline to respond to such
>>>>> charges, it is hardly surprising that others are 'given to understand'
>>>>> certain things.
>>>> He huffed, puffed and bluffed for many years. He took *the boy who
>>>> cried wolf* to heights unseen. Now he's washed up on the beach of
>>>> tidal energy which he is so desperate to support due to a backhander.
>>>> Though it's noticed he's not so keen to let SNH know that, who are
>>>> still promoting wind energy.

>>> He never did explain why he visited the young children's forums pretending to be a young girl either?
>> 
>> ROTFL .  A young girl?   I do hope you are not insinuating that
>> he's queer.
>
>Not our Malcy, surely. Very strange certainly, but not 'queer'! ;-)

DingDong Bell was the dirty old man who liked to pretend he was a girl
on the kiddie forums. Malky though a great friend of DingDong has a
beard so it would be hard to pretend to be a girl, unless of course he
was laying down with his arms outstretched! lol

>
>>> Lust or just lust?
>>>
>>> Is David G Bell on the register?
>> 
>> "Bell"?  Oh ny God, another one. -
>> -
>
>Or perhaps another 'invention'!