Countryside Alliance and FACT in the dock.

[argyll]

Peter thats a load of bull. If all of those things that you've just pointed to had any REAL value at all, we wouldn't be be all debating the issue of major change to a organisation that is geared up to deal firmly with the goverment with a single voice and from a position of strength that the backing of millions of anglers should give, would we? or would you much prefer the multi-faceted 'mish mash' that we are blundering along with now? Right....you want something else, congratulations....we agree. FACT or CA..believe it or not I dont care... and if you go back through the threads you'll find I've alread said it several times...and I meant it.

 

Now I'll take you back to your statement..'Evidence enough for you? well it will do for me.

 

Sorry that not good enough. Evidence of what? How much work someone's done? How many meetings with officals and politicians? I mean no offence to Leon Roskilly or any of his colleagues, but if all of the work that had been done by himself and others like him over the years had resulted in a unified voice that ministers had no option but to listen to, then you'd have had a result. If the livebait and freshwater deadbait ban in the Lakes had been overturned by weight of angling opinion you'd have a result, if pair trawling for bass was more closely controlled, you'd have a result, if the Peter Collins affair in the Fens had produced a verdict that anglers could live with, you'd have a result. If the horrendous and quite ridiculous close season fiasco that the EA continue to operate was addressed, then you'd have a result. Get the picture Peter... it's all just so much chatter until something happens that we can all recognise as a 'result'. Having yet another version of an earlier organisation is not a 'result' its a promise of...well...yet another organisation. The CA may have lost foxhunting, but nobody could ever accuse them of not trying to oppose the result with everything they could muster. Who knows, with the return of a Tory Government the fox hunters might still win the day. But the CA are visible and active (real 'evidence' not opinion, I assume you read a newspaper)and who's to say with adequate support they won't fight angling's corner just as vociferously. The evidence of how they are prepared to defend their members interest is there, what evidence do you have that any other angling organisation would do likewise...oh right someone told you so.

 

But its a pointless argument where you've already made up your mind and theres no changing it. I seem to recall from the Tony Martin thread, that both you and Alan were the only ones that thought the BBC were in their right to pay Brendan Fearon £4,500 for the grubby side of his story. Seems you both got that one wrong too

 

[ 25. March 2005, 10:57 PM: Message edited by: argyll ]

[slodger]

Alan,

 

That's the kind of posting I was hoping to read. It makes sense and there's genuine food for thought there. More please everyone?

[Alan Stubbs]

Slodger...

My clear reasoning for NOT joining the CA has nothing to do with hunting with dogs, but everything to do with the fact that they have shown no good reason for joining them.

 

I am afraid that we should join them 'just because they're there' isn't a good reason in my view, and I have an innate mistrust of the motives of at least one of the CA proponents posting on here, based upon their previous track record in angling politics.

[slodger]

Blimey...and Gerry... now we're 'Cooking on gas'!

 

I need time to digest all of this.

[argyll]

..nad if they did, you'de ignore it. '

 

Quite ignoring your obvious illiteracy, you're totally unqualified to make an assumption like that. You don't know me from Adam - it makes your argument hard to sell to anyone other than a half-wit. Did you buy your own argument?

 

Oh dear, 'obvious illiteracy' That's not much of an argument Alan, be suitably embarrassed for saying it. Surely you can do better than that...or maybe not.

[argyll]

One other point that I dont think anyone has raised. How much do you think the emergence of FACT has to do with the emergence of the CA ?

 

Well none of course, its just a coincidence. Yea right.

[slodger]

Two or three great postings there chaps, but I fear any ground we've made is now going to be lost in a tit for tat insult swapping duel. What's the point of that??

[argyll]

Blimey...and Gerry... now we're 'Cooking on gas'!

 

Sorry Chris, I'm off to the hospital, it'll have to simmer on the back burner

 

[ 25. March 2005, 03:29 PM: Message edited by: argyll ]

[slodger]

'One other point that I dont think anyone has raised. How much do you think the emergence of FACT has to do with the emergence of the CA'

 

I'd wondered about that myself Gerry. I do hope all of this doesn't revolve around domestic political allegiance.

[slodger]

'Sorry Chris, I'm off to the hospital, it'll have to simmer on the back burner'

 

Broken heart??