AIBU to wonder what people don't like about Chris Packham?

[MRex]

Obviously people actually setting fire to his gates are plain lunatics: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-58861252. The article talks about all these other online threats, dead animals and other mischief however, which implies a fair number of individuals who expend time and energy going after him. He's just an environmentalist campaigner who wants a bit more wild space, a few beavers introduced, fewer birds shot... he isn't a man of great power. So what do these people fear so much?

Megan was graduating in zoology. The event would have become entirely about him. She's clearly quite happy and loves him very much so I don't suppose they really care that you disapprove

@ancientgran

Yes we encouraged people to do things to support their loved ones, bit of compassion is good but it can't all go one way. If you do a google search you will see loads of events he has appeared at, some of them at universities so I don't see why he couldn't have even tried to attend. Sometimes we'd have clients who would try to do something and all credit to them that they didn't just say no.

Another thing that is useful in life is accepting that other people are entitled to see things differently to you.

Again, why are you so bothered if Megan isn't?

Really odd.

I remember the programme too. It was about him being autistic. Megan asked him as though she hoped he'd go, but had no real expectation.

I like him. I just don't understand why people can't accept that others hold differing points of view. You have to be a special kind of fuckwit to attack or abuse someone just because they don't agree with you.

bit of compassion is good but it can't all go one way
Her opening Interview bit in that she talks about how he is always there to support her shee talks about all the things he's done for her and the experiences and things she'd done because of him before the fairly jokey 20 second Convo about the graduation. So I don't think she would describe it as just a one way relationship.

Most of the internet - including even Twitter, oddly enough, as it often takes the activists' side in these matters - was rightly, outraged when a similar terrorist campaign was levelled against Prof. Kathleen Stock at the University of Sussex earlier this week. And why?, because she disseminates views in moderate and intelligent language that some extremists find objectionable. What she endured is terrifying, hideous and wrong.

Like Chris Packham she's endured this shameful treatment for years rather than months. Like him, she required police intervention and had fears for her safety. Admittedly, we see this happening less often to men: women do seem to attract it more often. But what's been directed at this man is also terrorism, and I don't use that word unadvisedly; that is precisely what it is.

It's no less horrific because he happens to be male. It makes no odds whether this sickening, bullying behaviour is emanating from the left or the right. People have a right to express a view; to put it out there on a public platform. If other people disagree with it they're entitled to take issue with it on the same kind of platform, debate it in kind, or respond to it in print (that doesn't including hiding behind a cloak of anonymity and issuing threats from an internet platform). But look at what's currently happening to people who have the integrity to stick to their guns and continue fighting the causes which happen to be dear to them, when their opponents are determined to intimidate them rather than take on their arguments in good faith.

A stand needs to be taken, now. They need to feel the full force of the law; that also goes for the students and fellow-lecturers who have been complicit in bullying Stock and trying to get her fired from her job, the twisted activists threatening JKR with horrific violence, and the thugs now causing Chris Packham to fear for his life.

I saw some footage of him talking about this and he was clearly almost in tears, but very strong and resolute. What the hell has this seemingly decent man ever done to justify such a thing, whether you agree with what he has to say or not?

Breaks my heart. I don't want to live in a society in which opposition to someone's views leads to something like this.

Also not commenting on the thread of this conversation about his relationship with Megan. In his desire to be open about ASD he might have chosen to put this out there on a public platform; nonetheless I'd consider it their private business.

@Megan2018

He’s an absolute arsehole. But he shouldn’t have his gates set on fire for that. I disagree most of what he says, as do the majority of people that live in the countryside. He’s an extremist. He also loves the attention.

I don’t think it’s him that’s the arsehole .. and that’s coming from another countryside dweller. Blood sports are cruel and unnecessary.

@Pinkprawns

I think it might have something to do with being a sanctimonius prick

Or it might be people who don't like the truth.

For what it's worth, I am disgusted by the vile opinions of some of you on here about Chris Packham.

I won't be coming to set fire to your homes though.

Now, do you get it?

Watching defenceless animals getting ripped apart - thats farmers watching crows attacking their lambs and not being able to do shit about it

@HarrietsChariot

I dislike him because he is smug and dishonest. I'm not sure whether he believes the lies he spouts, and a lot of what he says has a degree of truth, but the outright lies put me off him.

Obviously, that doesn't mean it's necessarily acceptable to set fire to his gate.

What outright lies? Care to elaborate?

Nothing justifies violence against people or property

@Scrowy @HarrietsChariot

There are some seriously unpleasant people out there in the New Forest who have been threatening CP for some time and have also threatened anyone against their way of life even when it leads to the destruction of the Forest for the sake of their large incomes from overstocking the Forest. CP is not always right but burning a gate and leaving dead animals outside is not a great way of discussing things and is feral behaviour..

.

He is intensely irritating and so sanctimonius that I just turn him off. But he deserves the freedom to speak his mind and pursue his own objectives free from fear of personal threats.

@mustlovegin

Nothing justifies violence against people or property

This.

@Frymetothemoon

For what it's worth, I am disgusted by the vile opinions of some of you on here about Chris Packham.

I won't be coming to set fire to your homes though.

Now, do you get it?

No one has said it is OK to set fire to his gates. Now do you get it?

If you have a look at the top of the thread there is a title it says AIBU to wonder what people don't like about Chris Packham? So some people have answered the question. How very dare they.

@MarieIVanArkleStinks

Also not commenting on the thread of this conversation about his relationship with Megan. In his desire to be open about ASD he might have chosen to put this out there on a public platform; nonetheless I'd consider it their private business.

Strange to discuss it in front of a camera to be broadcast then.

@MRex

Obviously people actually setting fire to his gates are plain lunatics: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-58861252. The article talks about all these other online threats, dead animals and other mischief however, which implies a fair number of individuals who expend time and energy going after him. He's just an environmentalist campaigner who wants a bit more wild space, a few beavers introduced, fewer birds shot... he isn't a man of great power. So what do these people fear so much?

He’s a bit of a dick in person.

I guess it’s no surprise that the kind of people who would poison hen harriers and goshawks in order to keep vast areas of moorland sterile monocultures dedicated to preserving one particular species so that the extremely rich can get their jollies by slaughtering them would resort to violence and intimidation, really.

Strange to discuss it in front of a camera to be broadcast then.

Granted. I know that if you put something out there in the public domain, no matter how personal, you can expect people to comment on it. I'm not saying that's necessarily unreasonable, just that I personally wasn't comfortable doing so.

@FateHasRedesignedMost

He’s anti blood sports and is trying to tighten up the anti fox hunting ban so trail hunts can’t ride over National Trust land. Being anti hunting is going to rile up a lot of powerful people, especially those who’ve had bad encounters with aggressive hunt sabs.

Historically hunts have tracked down and tormented militant hunt sabs so I guess that’s why his gates were set on fire; arson is a silly thing to resort to but he’s made a lot of people very angry.

Hunting is still a way of life for many who’ve been born and bred in the countryside. Livelihoods depend on farmers being able to cull badgers and foxes.

Hunting foxes with dogs may be officially banned but there are enough loopholes to allow many hunts to kill foxes within the law, eg by using hounds to flush out the fox, using a bird a prey, ‘accidentally’ getting onto a fox during a trail hunt. And some trail hunts operate completely legally so he’s targeting those too.

Of course that will enrage a lot of people.

I’m very anti hunt. I very much agree with his viewpoints. I come from the New Forest. A large % of us agree with him.

He’s just rude. I mentioned on another thread the other day. We shared a local pub and he told punters he wasn’t signing autographs. They’d not asked!

@crackofdoom

I guess it’s no surprise that the kind of people who would poison hen harriers and goshawks in order to keep vast areas of moorland sterile monocultures dedicated to preserving one particular species so that the extremely rich can get their jollies by slaughtering them would resort to violence and intimidation, really.

Yes. They've done it before, and in full sunlight.

Historically hunts have tracked down and tormented militant hunt sabs so I guess that’s why his gates were set on fire; arson is a silly thing to resort to but he’s made a lot of people very angry.

And that's what I call minimizing. Arson isn't 'silly'. It's dangerous, life-threatening, and a serious criminal offence, and with good reason.

But the poor darlings had been 'made' angry?' God bless 'em, eh. That must make it alright, then!

Simple. He relentlessly shows up the pro hunting , pro badger digging and baiting , pro trapping and releasing foxes for guaranteed sport , inbred entitled thugs of all classes who go hunting . They have limited if not risible arguments for their activities so resort to violence , lies and corruption .Good man .

Posted on New Forest Information ..

We are saddened and shocked to see Chris Packham blame the fire damage to his gates on Hunt Supporters or the Countryside Alliance or the shooting community.
There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to suggest that. It was pure speculation from him and unfounded. We understand he is rightly angry but coming out all guns blazing before assessing the evidence is very unhelpful and unfair. Using it to further his campaigns is unwarranted.
It would appear there is evidence to suggest something totally different happened. The truth may be that it was a convenient, remote location for some criminals to dispose of a stolen vehicle. The stolen Land Rover was set alight, and the fire spread to the gates. On one view his gates were collateral damage only. At this point we would wish to state that we do completely condemn this criminal activity.
We are very surprised that Mr Packham did not mention that another vehicle was burnt out, on the very same night, just over a mile away across the open heath. As it is open heath you could have seen one fire from the other. We understand the police are investigating both vehicle fires as linked and appealing for information on their Facebook Page. The second vehicle was a stolen scaffolding lorry. It had been used to smash forestry gates before crashing into a Commoners Cow, killing it. It was stolen from the same builder’s yard.
This is not the first vehicle arson in this remote New Forest Area. Earlier this year [15.04.21], a stolen car was driven into the Beaulieu Road Pony Sales Yard and set on fire. The BBC reported it and we quote their headline, ‘Deliberate vehicle fire spread to wooden compound’. The Beaulieu Road pony sales yard is under a mile from Mr Packham’s gates. This is a very similar incident which clearly was not targeting Mr Packham.
The Police are investigating these incidents with crime numbers 44210403883 and 44210403698. So please make contact and quote these numbers if you have any information that will help. We hope that these criminals are brought to justice.
In the meantime, we ask Mr Packham not to accuse Country Sports people of being involved. There is no evidence of that and better still, evidence that tends to suggest something totally different. When Mr Packham considered who may have done this, he himself said, ‘I don’t know’.