This is good news. Animal rights activists who overstep the line between the legitmate expression of views, and the harassment of inocent people have restrictions placed on their activities.
"Indeed, we are satisfied that this order strikes a fair balance between the legitimate right to protest and the right of individuals to conduct their lawful business without fear of intimidation or violence."
We can only agree with that.
posted by Nutter Watch @ 11:01 pm
4 Comments:
It’s interesting that you don’t allow anonymous comments on what is an anonymous blog, set up to label those you don’t like ‘nutters’. The whole concept is rather cowardly, don’t you think? And it’s not surprising that you sign off this post with the royal ‘we’.
It’s a rather Orwellian concept you express here. Instead of Big Brother we have the anonymous ‘Nutter Watcher’, who decides whose views are nutty, defines ‘legitimate expression’ and identifies the innocent.
To be fair, in an earlier post, you do go someway to defining the innocent in the vivisection debate; ‘admin staff, people who play golf with investors… the wife of the man who sells fuel to the farm which provides the animals’. A silly list, inspired by hysterical news reporting rather than any statement of principle.
In the late 1980s, I was involved with the Anti-Apartheid Movement and am proud to have lobbied against businesses investing in or trading with South Africa at that time. Much of the international community and those fighting a extremely brutal regime, were on our side. This was a peaceful and effective tactic and remains so. While the issues are different, the legitimacy of such protest remains right in principle.
I think that if an opportunity arises to lobby an investor while playing golf, upsetting ‘innocent’ friends counts for very little. And if the ‘admin staff’ can be persuaded to walk away, that’s a good thing. So I guess I’m a nutter too.
Point taken on the anonymous comments.
The one cowardly act I will admit to is backing off in my criticism of Animal Rights campaigners at your suggestion that I was lumping a wide spectrum of people together. Since then I have restricted my criticism to those that harrass (to whatever degree) those involved with or associated with animal experimentation.
Those that merely protest sensibly or express their views publically I will agree to differ with.
Oh dear. Allowing anonymous comments is a small step, but failing to put your name to the blog, is still cowardice. I say that because this blog is established with the sole aim of labelling people ‘nutters’ and the only reason I can see for you to remain anonymous, is a fear of your victims returning fire. So let’s have a Blogger profile and ……’s Nutter Watch or Nutter Watch by …… (You’re not ashamed, are you?)
The Nutter Watcher remains a frustrated dictator, with this gem; ‘I have restricted my criticism to those that harass (to whatever degree)’. And then silly notions like ‘merely protest sensibly or express their views publicly’. No wonder you’re not prepared to put your name to the blog.
Are you trying to draw a line between protests aimed at individuals and those aimed at, say, corporations? And, if so, why?
Enough already about the guy's anonimity! Sounds like you want to attack him rather than what he says...
PS: nobody gives a toss what you did when you were young
Post a Comment
<< Home