Boycott the LSE - supporters of the Countryside Alliance

[Tamas Gyursanszky]

On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 22:51:57 +0100, User 1951 <user...@hotmai.com> wrote:

> Someone is putting a great deal of money into the Countryside
> Alliance. Political parties are under some requirement to reveal
> their sources of income. Does the same apply to the Countryside
> Alliance?

Privacy International revealed that the CA is acquiring
(at great expense) vast amounts of personal data on both
pro-hunting and anti-hunting peeps...

"The Countryside Alliance won a nomination
[for the Big Brother award] because,
although it has registered itself with the
Information Commissioner as all
organisations are required to do under the
Data Protection Act 1998 if they are
processing or holding any personal data, it
appears to have gone further than most. The
CA registration on the Information
Commissioner's site runs to 27 pages, and
reveals that the organisation holds (among
other categories) sexual, political, religious,
health, intelligence and lifestyle
information on a vast range of individuals.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2104936,00.html

I wonder how much of CA's 'intelligence' information
has been purloined from the security services?

i.e. intelligence from wiretaps, covert state surveillance etc..

[The Technical Manager]

User 1951 wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 15:23:33 +0100, "JA" <jah...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Typical leftie shite!!
>
> Lets raise the level of this debate shall we?
>
> The Countryside Alliance tell lies. They have publicly claimed their
> rallies are about "the neglect of the countryside and issues
> concerning those who live in the country" and most people in Sussex
> would be inclined to support that contention and many have supported
> the Countryside Alliance on that basis.
>
> After the event they have gone on to claim that the turnout at their
> rallies "shows the strength of feeling in support of fox hunting"
> whereas most people are not interested in the issue of fox hunting and
> many are actually opposed to it because of the damage to property and
> the lack of effectiveness as a means of controlling foxes.
>
> They tell lies.

Why is it that 99.999% of socialists don't seem to give a damn to rural
issues or the countryside as a whole ?

Perhaps they don't want to see any countryside after they have concreted
it over to provide houses for every single immigrant and bogus asylum
seeker they want to let into Britain.