Hunt sabs acquitted after earning praise from judge

It’s uncommon for hunt saboteurs to receive justice in a court of law. They often find themselves in the dock on trumped up charges, with police and hunt witnesses prepared to lie to get convictions. And they seldom get an impartial hearing from the magistrate or judge who belongs to the same social class as the hunt.

Nice then to see four sabs found not-guilty of committing aggravated trespass after a two day trial at Redhill magistrates court earlier this week. A deer was chased and injured by the Surrey Union Hunt in October 2014 and instead of allowing the sabs – who had years of animal sanctuary experience – to help the animal, Surrey Police arrested them for failing to leave private land. They then left the deer with the hunt terrier men who shot it.

A leading vet who testified for the defence criticised the way terrier men dragged the poor animal around by a broken leg and said its injuries had been caused by a pack of hounds. From video footage the police clearly lied about what happened and in his summing up the district judge said the hunt and police had caused unnecessary suffering to the deer and if the sabs had been allowed to help, they would have reduced its suffering. He also praised the saboteurs saying: 

“All of you contribute immensely to society not only in your working lives but in your free time. [on the day] You deserve high praise for managing yourselves and your behaviour.

Lee Moon, spokesperson for the Hunt Saboteurs Association, stated:

“Surrey police have a history of acting as private security for the Surrey Union Hunt…their bias led to the unnecessary suffering of an animal. Despite saboteurs informing the police that a crime had occurred, they allowed the hunt to take the deer’s body and dispose of it and arrested the saboteurs who were trying to minimise the animals suffering. We hope that the Surrey Union hunt will now be investigated for illegal hunting and that there will be an independent investigation into the actions of Surrey Police. Whilst we are pleased at the not-guilty verdict it is disgusting that this case ever came to trial.”

Disgusting but not surprising as the police invariably take the side of the hunt. In this case their lies were exposed and with the help of a good expert witness and an even-handed judge, the sabs won. But it’s a pyrrhic victory because a deer went through a great deal of suffering and possibly died unnecessarily at the hands of sadists who love tormenting and killing wild animals.

Neither the Surrey Union or Surrey Police will be investigated. The best that can be hoped for is the sabs take legal action but even that is unlikely given the difficulty of accessing legal aid following Tory cuts. Even with the so-called “ban on hunting” crimes like this are being committed against wildlife, and the brave people who try to stop them find themselves persecuted by those ruling class lackeys, the police. At least this time, though, the hunt scum and the filth lost!

A more detailed examination of the case:

16 – 21 March: Week of action against corporate media

One of the biggest obstacles to the transformation of society is the power and influence of the corporate media. Therefore it’s great to see a whole week of action on this subject. It’s being organised by Real Media who promise “loads of actions directed against the Daily Mail, the Murdoch media empire and other corporate media for their biased news coverage.”

On Monday 16 March , 20,000 spoof copies of the Daily Wail containing stories the billionaire-owned paper would never report will be distributed in London and Manchester and both cities will also be plastered with posters highlighting themes ignored by corporate media. 

Inside the paper are stories people don’t tend to read in the mass media – articles on mass rent rises and displacement of social housing tenants, the privatisation of the NHS, how the sick and disabled are being bullied off benefits by huge private corporations, and everything you need to know about TTIP – the secret international trade agreement that’s going to de-regulate everything.

Also every day this week, campaigners will highlight crucial issues ignored by the corporate-dominated press:

• Monday 16th: corporate influence undermining democracy
• Tuesday 17th: climate change
• Wednesday 18th: austerity increasing inequality to record levels
• Thursday 19th: privatisation of healthcare and other public services
• Friday 20th: the arms industry’s interests driving the war on terror
• Saturday 21st: human rights

The Real Media campaign isn’t just about slagging off the corporate news. In early April the group will be launching a website that aggregates alternative independent news platforms

Meanwhile, to follow up the Real Media Anti-Daily Mail Week, the group Occupy Rupert Murdoch will be hosting a week of action by the new HQ of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire at London Bridge. For more details on this see  http://www.occupythe

For more details on Anti-Daily Mail Week see or the Real Media website You can also follow the actions on Twitter @RealMediaGB and @occupy_murdoch

How to find out if you’re on the “domestic extremism” database

If you’re campaigning for social justice, animal rights or to protect the environment or part of a leftwing group, then it’s likely you’re already on a police database and classified as a “domestic extremist”. As previously mentioned, this term is deliberately vague and can be applied to anyone who’s challenging the existing order and wants to build a fairer, more just and compassionate society.

According to the Network for Police Monitoring – Netpol – “secret police databases may hold information on up to 9000 people, many with no criminal records, although the number could be far greater.” The group is suggesting people find out what information is held on them by making a subject access request under the Data Protection Act.

Because the process involves handing over personal information such as your name, address and date of birth, you should only consider it if you have good grounds to believe your details are already on file. Otherwise you would be “feeding the surveillance officers with information they don’t already possess.”

Why bother? Netpol say “if you discover inaccuracies or trivial information in any data that the police hold, we would like to work with you, in confidence, to expose this.” So basically it’s about shining a light up to the secret state, exposing and discrediting it. 

Some would argue this is irrelevant to the struggle for building a free, liberated world. I can see their point to some extent. It’s easy to become obsessively paranoid and then end up doing the state’s job for as we close ourselves off to the rest of society by being insular and conspiratorial.

Nevertheless with the revelations of recent years over state/corporate spying and surveillance, we have to recognise the extent to which we can be targeted. Or as someone once put it to me: “We had no idea we were as important as they thought we were”.

If you want to make a subject access request, Netpol have a guide on how to do it here:

See also:

Hunters still getting away with murder!

Last August and early into the new fox hunting season, a sab was ridden down and seriously injured by Mark Doggrell of the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale Hunt in Dorset. The attack happened during an evening cubbing and pony club meet, where children aged from 7 to 14 were present. The woman spent two weeks in hospital for injuries including seven broken ribs, a collapsed lung and trauma to her shoulder. 

Doggrell was arrested and investigated for causing grevious bodily harm but last week the CPS decided not to bring any charges, citing insufficient evidence. Whilst on bail for this attack he was also charged with assault for breaking a fellow hunter’s nose at their hunt ball.

Lee Moon, spokesperson for the Hunt saboteurs Association, stated: “We are disappointed, but not surprised, that no charges have been brought against Mark Doggrell. Historically the police and criminal justice system have allowed acts of violence on hunt saboteurs to go unpunished whilst the saboteurs themselves are prosecuted seemingly at the whim of the hunts.

The announcement coincided with the anniversary of the death of Mike Hill (pictured). He was killed whilst sabbing the Cheshire beagles on 9 February 1991, aged just 18, crushed between a truck and trailer driven by Alan Summersgill. Afterwards an angry group attacked Summersgill’s house and some people were gaoled but he was never charged with any offence, even driving without due care or attention.

Two years later another young man named Tom Worby died on his first sab, crushed under the wheels of a van belonging to the Cambridgeshire Fox Hunt. The driver was huntsman Alan Ball but he too faced no charges. Since then many sabs have been seriously injured, including one named Steve Christmas who nearly died in 2000.

These attacks receive scant coverage, unlike that afforded to the rare instances of saboteurs fighting back. Two weeks ago the joint master of the Tedworth Hunt in Wiltshire was beaten to the ground and required hospital treatment. His injuries weren’t serious – a few broken teeth – but according to the Daily Mail police said they were treating it as a serious incident of ABH and potential public disorder and described it as “a totally unacceptable assault involving a group of men and women wearing balaclavas.”
Some of you reading this might find it hard to believe that saboteurs are still being attacked and hunters getting away with it when hunting with dogs is supposed to have been banned since 2005. In fact it’s the 10th anniversary of the Hunting Act on 18 February. Shouldn’t it be hunt scum themselves who are facing the full force of the law?!
Yesterday the BBC website published an article called Did hunting disappear?  in which Hunt Saboteurs Association is quoted as saying: “Most hunts are carrying on as they did before. The police have never known much about hunting other than how to try to protect it, so we never had much faith in them changing sides”
The problem is the police don’t want to enforce the law and neither do the CPS. It’s left to hunt monitors to follow hunts and try to record their wrongdoing but they too can get attacked. Due to judicial inaction, the RSPCA have spent millions prosecuting hunts themselves. But even on the rare occasions when they are successful, those guilty are let off with a slap to the wrist. In 2013 Nicholas Bycroft of the Crawley & Horsham Hunt admitted illegally hunting a fox and received a 12 month conditional discharge, £150 costs and £15 victim surcharge.
There’s never been a better example of how class loyalty trumps the so-called rule of law than the Hunting Act. The hunts, the police, the judges and the politicians really are all in it together. While the public remain opposed to hunting with hounds, few realise how toothless the law has become. Labour Party supporters the League Against Cruel Sports continue to peddle the myth that it’s a “very successful and popular piece of legislation” despite having to admit “there are plenty of ways in which the pro-hunt groups… (are) contradicting the spirit and intent of the law.”
As usual it will be left to hunt sabs to go out into the field to confront the vicious and violent hunting fraternity. Just days after Doggrell was let off, his hunt was at it again, using quad bikes to block in a sab landrover before smashing the windows, throttling the driver and damaging equipment in the vehicle. They even placed a home made ‘stinger’ type device under the vehicles tyres in order to puncture them.
Some of you may recall that back in the eighties Class War used to publish a photo of an “Hospitalised copper of the month” in the pages of its newspaper, much to the annoyance of those who accused it of pandering to hooliganism. The group pointed out this was a response to the left’s usual portrayal of itself as a victim of oppression and injustice.
Perhaps its time we saw a similar mentality amongst the anti-bloodsports movement but that is highly unlikely. People who go out to stop animals being torn to pieces are compassionate and caring individuals who usually baulk at the prospect of violence. Unlike those they are up against.

Are we all “domestic extremists” now?

If you’re reading this then the chances are you could be a “domestic extremist”? Do you even know what that means? Don’t worry since not many of us do. It’s a word that’s crept into the lexicon over the last 10-15 years since the establishment of New Labour’s remodelled version of the secret state – institutions such as the National Public Order Investigation Unit, the National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit and the National Domestic Extremism team.

These units were set up in response to the success of anti-capitalist, animal rights and environmental movements of the late nineties. In 2006 all three were merged under the Association of Chief Police Officers and a national database of domestic extremists was built up which now numbers several thousand.

By then the term had broadened to include – in the police’s own words -groups or individuals who “commit or plan serious criminal activity motivated by a political or ideological viewpoint”. Something can be a “serious crime” when it is carried out by “a large number of persons in pursuit of a common purpose”. So that could include the groups who sabotaged the badger cull or anti-fracking protests for example.

In truth anyone who wants to radically change society and build a more just, equal or sane world is likely to be viewed as a “domestic extremist” and get on the database. In fact journalists and photographers who have made complaints against the police and even politicians such as London Assembly Member Jenny Jones have had the label applied to them.

It is in the nature of the state to always be fearful and suspicious of the people it rules over. Those who rise to the top – the rich and powerful – deeply distrust the rest of us and with good reason: they know exactly how iniquitous and venal the system is they help to perpetuate. Accordingly the rest of us – the working class – are viewed as dangerous and unpredictable. The 2011 riots proved that beneath the apparently stable order of society there are tumultuous forces to be contained.

It is easy to let this make you paranoid and suspicious and that would be playing into the hands of the oppressors. The so-called “secret police” went overground during the last decade. Whereas before spying and surveillance were done covertly by groups like Special Branch, in the New Labour era, they also become a tool of intimidation through employing “in yer face” tactics of filming by Forward Intelligence Teams (FIT).

For several years it appeared that on every demo there would be a group of cops with cameras and sometimes they’d also have sheets of paper with mug shots of activists to watch out for. The situation became so ridiculous that I was even followed on one occasion when I wasn’t doing anything political at all. I simply went into a building where a meeting I was unaware of was taking place and on leaving I noticed a FIT team behind me!

The effect of all this has understandably been to deter some from being politically active. The reasons why the numbers of people on demos or involved in grassroots campaigns has declined in the past decade is complex and can’t be whittled down to one cause, but there is little doubt that covert surveillance and with it feelings of intimidation and criminalisation has been a factor.

But in the last two or there years the mood has shifted. Thanks in part to revelations about undercover cops in protest groups and the Edward Snowden leaks, the secret state has had the glare of publicity shone on it. Importantly it has moved beyond mere activist circles to the point where even ordinary people – to use that term – have felt their privacy and integrity is being threatened and violated.

New struggles have come along which have attracted a fresh influx of activists who are untainted by the past. The anti-fracking and badger cull campaigns spring to mind. Other activists, meanwhile, have been fighting back in the form of groups such FIT Watch, who have themselves filmed the surveillance teams, and NETPOL – the Network for Police Monitoring.

Last year on 5 February NETPOL launched the first “Domestic Extremist Awareness Day” by asking for campaigners to find out if secret records are held about them by making subject access requests to the Metropolitan Police’s National Domestic Extremism and Disorder Intelligence Unit.

This year they are following that up by asking you to tell them on Facebook – or on Twitter using #domesticextremist – “what might make you a so-called domestic extremist”. Er, how many days have you got…?

To find out more about Domestic Awareness Day 2015 see:

To find out if the police hold data on you see:

30 January: Islington Against Police Spies “Sack Bob Lambert” demo

Islington Against Police Spies (IAPS) was set up late last year following a meeting at London Metropolitan University. This is where disgraced ex-police spy Bob Lambert works as a lecturer in criminology. Before his career in academia, Lambert worked as an undercover cop for Special Branch and infiltrated political groups such as London Greenpeace. He then became operations manager of a top secret Scotland Yard unit called the Special Demonstrations Squad and managed other spies.

IAPS say: “In November we held a lively picket of London Metropolitan University in Holloway, launching our campaign to demand the sacking or resignation of Bob Lambert. Former police spy, Special Branch manipulator, abuser of women, agent provocateur, Lambert is now lecturing at London Met on policing and criminology.

As local residents we feel it is totally inappropriate for London Metropolitan to be employing a man with Lambert’s record in such a position; where he has not only influence and power over the lives of students, who may be young or vulnerable. Most particularly Lambert has shown he cannot be trusted not to abuse and lie to women.

Islington Against Police Spies have committed ourselves to holding regular events to keep putting pressure on the University and raising awareness of Lambert’s past, until he is forced to leave London Met. We call on anyone who thinks Bob Lambert should not be working in a supposedly progressive university to support our campaign.

The protest will be this Friday, 30 January, at 12.00 – 2.00pm, LMU Tower, 166-220 Holloway Road, London N7 8DB. The organisers say: “Bring placards, banners, anything to make noise. The bigger and noisier our protest, the more notice London Met will have to take of us.”

The website also has a list of senior management to email and call. There is even an email address and telephone no. for Lambert himself so you can “let him know what you think of his activities”.

For further information see:


Flashback: 20 January 2001 – HLS saved from the brink

The first in a new series of posts which look back at past events on a particular day.

14 years ago today the notorious Huntingdon Life Sciences, which tortures thousands of animals in cruel and unscientific experiments, was teetering on the brink of collapse. Outstanding loans were due to be paid back on Friday 19 January, leaving HLS facing insolvency.

As the hours counted down to bankruptcy, articles in the press and statements from scientists and politicians called on the government to step in. MP for Huntingdon and former Prime Minister, John Major, said: “The worst outcome would be for violent protesters to win. The real damage here is the domino effect.”

Only the last minute intervention of Lord Sainsbury, the New Labour science minister, allowed a deal to be brokered. Negotiations went on into the small hours of 20 January and eventually Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) wiped off the £11million owed to it for just £1. Meanwhile another financial institution, whose identity was kept secret, handed HLS a lifeline by extending the remaining loan.

In context: The campaign against HLS, Europe’s biggest contract-testing laboratory,  intensified following an undercover investigation shown on Channel 4 in 1997. Horrific footage of beagles being punched in the face led to the prosecution of four “animal technicians” for cruelty and a four month inquiry during which the company’s licence to vivisect was suspended.

Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) was formed in November 1999 and said HLS would close within three years. In 2000, SHAC obtained a list of HLS shareholders, including the pension funds of the Labour Party and Camden Council. The list was passed to The Sunday Telegraph and the Labour Party sold its 75,000 shares in January 2001. As a result the share price sank to just 1p. Also in December 2000 HLS was dropped from the New York Stock Exchange because its market capitalization had fallen below NYSE limits.

Throughout 2000 activists kept up the pressure by demonstrating at HLS’ three sites and at the homes of its workers, as well as against Nat West Bank and RBS who had given it the loan. Direct action increased as well with cashpoint machines a favourite target.

What happened next: The identity of HLS’ saviour was revealed as Stephens Inc., an Arkansas-based investment firm. Greg Avery, co-founder of SHAC, was defiant, saying: “Anyone who funds them, we will destroy. The government can do what they want, they will not save HLS.”

In February a massive mobile demo of 1000 people attacked the facilities of Glaxo, Bayer and Eli Lilly, who were customers of HLS. The same month managing director Brian Cass was assaulted outside his home. In March the company lost both of its market makers and its place on the London Stock Exchange. Shortly afterwards it moved its HQ to the United States, incorporating as Life Sciences Research

In July 2001 it was revealed that HLS was using the Bank of England as no commercial bank would go near it. The following year “global leader” Marsh Inc quit as insurer and the government had to step in to provide that service as well.

By 2003, however, the tide was turning. That year HLS won an injunction under the Protection from Harassment Act and eventually nearly 20 companies who used HLS did likewise, limiting the effectiveness of protests against them. Demonstrations outside peoples’ homes were banned and the offence of aggravated trespass was extended to buildings.

However, these measures did not stop over 100 companies severing links with HLS in 2004 and the laboratory was even forced into doing its own laundry. Finally in 2005 the government introduced new laws against SHAC activists. This meant much harsher penalties of up to five years for offences that previously might have resulted in just a few months imprisonment or even a fine.

This had a chilling effect on protest but worse was to come in 2007 with mass arrests in a police operation known as Operation Achilles. In 2009 and 2010, 13 members of SHAC, were jailed for between 15 months and eleven years on charges of conspiracy to blackmail HLS and its suppliers.

SHAC carried on for another four years until Debbie Vincent was convicted of conspiracy to blackmail in April 2014. In a final statement in August it said it had run the “biggest and most effective grassroots animal rights campaign the world has ever seen” but now was time “to reassess our methods, obstacles and opponent’s weaknesses, to build up our solidarity network for activists and to start healing the effects of repression.”

Activist Eric McDavid released from prison in the USA

Some rare good news today as activist Eric McDavid was released from prison after serving nine years of a near 20 year sentence. He went free due to the government’s failure to disclose documents to his defence at his trial in 2007.

He was convicted of conspiring to sabotage federal property which threatened the environment but always maintained he and his two co-defendants were entrapped by an “overzealous FBI” and its 19 year old informant, “Anna”, who literally “herded the group together from around the country, paying for their transportation, food and lodging,” according to one of his attorneys.

She admitted she was trained by the FBI to exploit Eric’s romantic desire for her by telling him: “We need to put the mission first. There’s time for romance later.” But at the trial she downplayed his feelings towards her and the government concealed this and other material from the defence. Records showed the FBI gave the missing correspondence to a special unit to “analyse…for behavioural insight into Eric McDavid.”

Documents which surfaced only after the trial show the FBI urgently ordered then inexplicably cancelled a lie detector test for Anna, and that extensive surveillance of Eric prior to him falling under Anna’s influence did not reveal any inclination to commit the offence for which he was charged.

His attorney stated: “There has never been a case in America that has involved this much entrapment, this much pushing by an informant, by the U.S. government and by the FBI behind it.” But at his trial, the judge said “It’s a new world since September 11, 2001” and sentenced him to nearly 235 months.

“Since 9-11, the United States government has mercilessly entrapped people, destroying their lives just to make political examples of them, especially in Muslim communities,” said Jenny Esquivel, Eric’s partner and one of the organizers of his support committee.

“The government has targeted leftists and anarchists with similar fervour. This, like so many other alleged conspiracies the public hears about, are FBI inventions from the start,” Esquivel said.

Enjoy your freedom Eric!

Here is a link to the page on Eric’s trial from the website Green is the New Red:

Out with the old, in with the new…

The turning of one year into another usually leads to the casting of one’s mind back over the previous 12 months and to looking forward as well. Eight months ago, on 1 May, this blog went online with the aim of spreading anarchist ideas within the animal rights movement and animal rights with the anarchist movement.

In my first post I said “animal rights needs libertarian ideas more than ever before” due to increasing state and corporate repression, the threat of far right infiltration and efforts to push the grassroots movement in a statist electoral direction.” This is as true now as it was then.

There has been no let up in the state crackdown and as a result SHAC announced it was disbanding due to “an onslaught of government repression” in August. This was confirmed when the SOCPA 7 appeared in court in October, charged with conspiracy to commit sections 145 and 146 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. This law targets anti-vivisection campaigns such as SHAC.

Fortunately no-one was sent to prison due to a plea bargain, however the judge made it clear he thought the protests were unlawful due to  SHAC’s campaign of “intimidation and harassment”. In other words the protesters weren’t guilty because of their own actions – which were mild to say the least – but instead for what had happened over the last 15 years!

Repression has also led to low morale and a decrease in the number of activists and this in turn has caused a crisis in the movement’s very identity and the rise of a faction which believes so-called “human issues” do not matter. This means racists and fascists should not be excluded from groups as long as they say they care about animals.

In my first post I said “As elections loom nearer, politicians start crawling out of the woodwork to make promises on which they won’t deliver.” A couple of months ago Animal Aid’s magazine Outrage was already talking about the election and the nearer we get to 7th May, the more discussions on social media are dominated by which party has the best policies or has promised to do this and that for animals.

The radical wing of the animal rights movement has taken a battering from the state in the last 10 years. Many activists have been sent to prison, others have given up and left or just do their own thing helping animals as best they can. Others though are saying the answer lies in the political system itself, that it can be reformed, that politicians should be trusted.

I see no evidence to support this claim. The state, governments, political parties, politicians have not changed. In fact if anything the situation is now worse as under the guise of austerity they have unleashed an unprecedented onslaught on the living standards of ordinary people. In the current parliament government spending has been slashed by £35bn and the plan is to chop another £55bn by 2019.

There is little doubt the plight of animals will be very low down the list of concerns of the major parties – including the Greens – when they contest the election. The major issues will be the economy, immigration, the NHS, etc. And it shouldn’t be forgotten that a vast number of people will not vote at all as they rightly believe that the political system is inherently unfair, corrupt and does not represent them.

Real politics, that is grassroots resistance and alternatives to capitalism and the state, will continue of course. As the effects of austerity worsen, people will fight back. The fastest growing social movement in the UK is the anti-fracking campaign which currently has around 170 groups based in local communities and several more forming each week.

In terms of animal rights, the badger cull campaign will continue to dominate the agenda. This year hundreds of people will again sabotage the cull if it goes ahead.  All neutral observers are convinced they have failed and the government has lost the propaganda war. It only says it will carry on in order not to lose face.

This proves that when people organise themselves and take direct action they can still be effective. During 2015 this blog will continue to report and comment on the fightback against tyranny and exploitation and show how if we can take control of our lives, we can build a world based on equality, justice and compassion.

Corporate Watch needs our support

Corporate Watch has been one of the few organizations to acknowledge and publicise the repression suffered by animal rights campaigners. While other bastions of the liberal left such as the Guardian, the Independent, Liberty and Amnesty ignored the shocking persecution and imprisonment of activists – or worse still colluded with the state in condemning them as extremists and criminals – CW has always stood foursquare in support of the grassroots movment.

They have produced a number of articles on their website and also the excellent publication called State crackdown on anti-corporate dissent: the animal rights movement in 2009. Animal rights is only one of many issues CW has tacked in its near 20 year lifespan supporting people struggling against corporations and capitalism by providing information for action. Others include the arms trade, the environment, housing and migration.

In each case the group’s aim is to provide “research that is a vital resource for campaigns looking to target particular companies” and be “a reliable source of original and cutting-edge knowledge about the latest forms and manifestations of corporate power.”

Corporate Watch is a small workers’ co-operative, that works non-hierarchically with shared  responsibility for the collective running of the organisation. Legally, Corporate Watch is registered as a not-for-profit company limited by guarantee, which gives it the freedom to express political opinions. It’s work includes investigative journalism, analysis and publishing.

There is no doubt that the struggle to build a saner, more equal and compassionate world for humans and animals alike would be all the poorer if CW did not exist. Corporate Watch doesn’t accept corporate or state money, so depends on funding from its subscribers, the generosity of individual donors and a handful of independent trusts. In order to continue with its work it needs your support! You can help by making a one off donation or become a “Friend of Corporate Watch” by setting up a regular subscription

To find out how you can help: