Are You Serious Jo

I'm about to make a big one, I'll be living in a caravan so I have accommodation with the dogs till I'm ready to rent again when I move. I'd live in the car rather than lose them, they are like family and you stick together through good and bad.

He doesn't encourage hysteria and outrage on shaky facts at all does he

Nope.

Get a remote and lock your mirror up and they'll be even sharper. I think it's amazing we can see some much detail on the moon :D

Kate got a little emotional there didn't she :laugh: FT, this is the reason rescue is now going to be regulated. Some can't be trusted to do the right thing so all will be strictly monitored. It baffles a lot of us how they got away with it for so long, not like there wasn't enough complaints.

Neither did I, they would be really hampered wouldn't they with what they could say. Don't forget Mark has supposedly given them a scoop, some scandalous inside info, which really means some crazy story he cooked up with Paul and Dave while drunk on bourbon one night :laugh:

I can't watch it so will have to see if it goes to air and what happens. Probably have some dodgy Mark facts :laugh:

She 120 there too before the raid remember. She won't do that, she said she'd rather close than change what she does. So if the rspca don't close her she'll be on such a tight leash she'll shut up shop. I know you guys can't believe how bad things were because you wouldn't think an animal person could do that but all the stories are unfortunately true.

Well, they can't really get decent numbers there, lots of please get there urgent but lots of sorry, can't do it. I know what you mean, but Lola turned everyone away when they have offered to help in the past, it must kill her to have working bees now.

It doesn't matter one bit whether they were bikers or bikies, which most of us do know the difference BTW. He was attempting to hinder an investigation and intimidate employees going about their job. Plenty of screenshots of him calling for truckies to block them on the highway. Do you really want to be known as a person who supports this man?

Mark used this as a publicity stunt. He knows the truth, that the rscpa have inspected previously and issued directives but he chooses to tell a lie and say they found nothing wrong and stayed for tea and cake. He is telling an outright lie, along with a host of others because it suits his political agenda. If he had been handling it properly things might have been resolved but that wouldn't suit what he wants. So you want to blame someone blame Mark. Laura only provided a place to tell the truth where people could see it. If you think blaming her for all the things Mark has been pinged on recently you are underestimating how many people see right through him and have for years.

If he had just answered some basic questions in the first place he could have avoided a lot of problems. The real reason is that once you have a bit of a look you can see he has made it up. Public figure, public scrutiny.

I have to keep some mystery in our relationship you know, can't let all the wonder and awe out at once :laugh: #toolateheadwaybig First one I'll try markhasabigpenis profile pic change immanent!

I've been telling you lot for years that I am awesome but did you all believe me, noooooo :laugh: #IhopeIdon'tgetabighead

Paul keeps also trying to convince people I'm a scared fake because I don't want to set up a public debate to ask a few simple questions such as what was the name of those rescues who got shut down, or what was the deal with Woolies He was a member there for days, he made one post and ran, Paul was there for 24 hours but actively avoided certain questions.

Poor dear, he is very sick and worried that if he unblocks me I'll go nuts and he can't block me again :rofl:

There are a lot, they get deleted or they pm their info about their experiences. He just has to post a few more false they are coming posts and some more conspiracy posts and even more will be asking questions. They do want to know why he won't answer questions.

I'm sorry MM, but apparently he can't understand you, you speak a way he can't interpret :laugh: If the prosecution do their job and the judge is fair I think it will go the way it should. They can rant all they like but at the end of the day evidence is evidence and it is out of their hands.

That is a good point, they may claim they need more time, hopefully the rscpa can make a case that it needs to be heard in a timely manner due to the nature of the case.

At least poor Wombles can't suffer any more. One month to go and the real possibility that she can't neglect any more animals.

The Hansard transcript also shows that despite Mark claiming that the rscpa found nothing wrong previously and sat down for tea and cakes this was a lie. Moorook were given directives to follow and I daresay that they weren't and the raid was a result. The fact that Moorook claim they can detect and diagnose illness from looking at a dog shows their excuses. Who knows how many hadn't been vet checked because they didn't "look" sick.

Called it!

The transcript of the minister's response to Mark's complaints via Anne Bressington at question time. QUESTION TIME MOOROOK ANIMAL SHELTER Page No: 3882 – 3883 The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON (15:02): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking a question of the Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation about the Moorook Animal Shelter. Leave granted. The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON: Last sitting week in this place the Hon. Michelle Lensink asked the minister a question in relation to the Moorook Animal Shelter. The minister's answer was that he was of the understanding that complaints had been made about Moorook, and that the RSPCA had acquired a warrant to go on to the property. My information has been that no warrant has been sighted or presented to the owner of Moorook at any time. Will the minister provide the house with information on the date the warrant was issued, and when was the first visit that the RSPCA made to Moorook Animal Shelter? The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation) (15:02): I thank the honourable member for her most important question. I said recently, as she noted, that inspectors employed by the RSPCA executed the primary enforcement functions prescribed under the Animal Welfare Act 1985 and its subordinate legislation in relation to an animal shelter at Moorook. I have been advised that since 2009 the RSPCA has received a number of complaints regarding the welfare of animals at that shelter. I refer to my comments made in this place on 30 April that RSPCA inspectors have attended the Moorook Animal Shelter on several occasions in the past and given directions in accordance with powers under the act. I understand that after receiving a recent complaint, the RSPCA inspectors sought and obtained an unrestricted warrant to access the Moorook premises. As a result of the inspection conducted by the RSPCA inspectors under warrant, I am advised that a number of animals were surrendered and the owner of the Moorook premises was provided with five animal welfare directions in relation to all the animals on the property, which had to be complied with by 24 April this year. As I also said in this place, I have been advised by my department that follow-up inspections were carried out by the RSPCA inspectors to ensure that the directions they issued were being met. No animals were removed on these subsequent occasions, and further directions were issued, which must be complied with by 25 April. On Thursday 2 May, I am advised, three RSPCA inspectors attended the Moorook Animal Shelter, including one who is an animal behaviourist, along with an independent veterinarian. The inspectors had a warrant and were accompanied by two police officers. It was confirmed that the conditions of the animal welfare notices issued the previous month had not been fully met. On 8 May I am advised the RSPCA laid seven charges of ill treatment against the proprietor of the shelter. Both the charges and the particulars may be varied or added to over time as the case progresses, I understand. The matter will be heard for the first time, is my advice, in the Berri Magistrates Court on 24 June 2013. I am also advised that the RSPCA has properly recommended to the defendant, apparently in writing but also orally to the defendant's daughter, that she seeks the assistance of the Legal Services Commission, and it has provided her with the relevant contact details.

I'm finding it hard to keep up with the tin foil hat theories, it just goes on and on then changes and then changes again.

What matter, what incident last week, it's all so vague. Yes he was going to have a "meeting in parliament" he really needs to keep better track of his fantasy world, so many continuity problems.