Do you wish to start your own blog about animal rights or about being
vegan?
Are you custom to the net than leave your favorites at the
WebDirectory!
....

Help send the vegan message out!

Start a blog - http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/summary.php
Leave animal rights and veggie friendly bookmarks -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/directory/
Join the community - http://www.animalsuffering.com/forum/
Leave an AR book review - http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/books.php

This is always quite amusing. Willfully contributing to the contiuned
demand for more and more dead animals for nothing more than selfish
entertainmnet.
Again, there are NO real vegans on usenet. try looking up the meaning of
the word as defined by the guy who coined it, Donald Watson.

Here's what i'm talking about fool. Here's a site that discusses the 3
BILLION animals that die every year from the production of power at just 3
generators.
That's just 3! out of ,more than 13000 in the US alone.
http://www.closeindianpoint.org/articles/tjn_071103.htm


Now, extrapolate those numbers to 1000s of other generators, and the
estimates that computers/internet usage consumes between 3% to 15%
of generated power, how many billions of animals is that? All killed for
nothing more than your entertainment here on internet.
Hypocrisy run amok. Usenet wannbe vegans are such an ignorant lot.



"ARF" wrote in message
ups.com...
Do you wish to start your own blog about animal rights or about being
vegan?
Are you custom to the net than leave your favorites at the
WebDirectory!
...

Help send the vegan message out!

Start a blog - http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/summary.php
Leave animal rights and veggie friendly bookmarks -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/directory/
Join the community - http://www.animalsuffering.com/forum/
Leave an AR book review - http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/books.php

On 25 Dec 2006 15:51:38 -0800, "ARF" wrote:

Do you wish to start your own blog about animal rights or about being
vegan?

I do like to share.

Are you custom to the net than leave your favorites at the
WebDirectory!

Huh?

...

Help send the vegan message out!

Oh, okay:

· Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use of
wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of
buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does.
What they try to avoid are products which provide life
(and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have
to avoid the following items containing animal by-products
in order to be successful:

Tires, Paper, Upholstery, Floor waxes, Glass, Water
Filters, Rubber, Fertilizer, Antifreeze, Ceramics, Insecticides,
Insulation, Linoleum, Plastic, Textiles, Blood factors, Collagen,
Heparin, Insulin, Solvents, Biodegradable Detergents, Herbicides,
Gelatin Capsules, Adhesive Tape, Laminated Wood Products,
Plywood, Paneling, Wallpaper and Wallpaper Paste, Cellophane
Wrap and Tape, Abrasives, Steel Ball Bearings

The meat industry provides life for the animals that it
slaughters, and the animals live and die as a result of it
as animals do in other habitats. They also depend on it for
their lives as animals do in other habitats. If people consume
animal products from animals they think are raised in decent
ways, they will be promoting life for more such animals in the
future. People who want to contribute to decent lives for
livestock with their lifestyle must do it by being conscientious
consumers of animal products, because they can not do it by
being vegan.
From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm
machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and
draining of fields, one serving of soy or rice based product is
likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of servings
derived from grass raised animals. Grass raised animal products
contribute to fewer wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and
better lives for livestock than soy or rice products. ·

dh@. wrote in message ...
On 25 Dec 2006 15:51:38 -0800, "ARF" wrote:

Do you wish to start your own blog about animal rights or about being
vegan?

I do like to share.

Are you custom to the net than leave your favorites at the
WebDirectory!

Huh?

...

Help send the vegan message out!

Oh, okay:

The answer to the following dumb rant is:

Just because, due to circumstances beyond our control, we cannot be 100%
Vegan, that does not mean that we are in any way wrong in doing the best
that we can.

So there, pratt!


· Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use of
wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of
buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does.
What they try to avoid are products which provide life
(and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have
to avoid the following items containing animal by-products
in order to be successful:

Tires,

That's 'tyres' BTW! The capital letters following commas are incorrect too.


Paper, Upholstery, Floor waxes, Glass, Water
Filters, Rubber, Fertilizer, Antifreeze, Ceramics, Insecticides,
Insulation, Linoleum, Plastic, Textiles, Blood factors, Collagen,
Heparin, Insulin, Solvents, Biodegradable Detergents, Herbicides,
Gelatin Capsules, Adhesive Tape, Laminated Wood Products,
Plywood, Paneling, Wallpaper and Wallpaper Paste, Cellophane
Wrap and Tape, Abrasives, Steel Ball Bearings

The meat industry provides life for the animals that it
slaughters, and the animals live and die as a result of it
as animals do in other habitats.

But the meat industry brings them into the world for one purpose: to be
slaughtered, idiot! You make it sound as if the industry is doing the
animals a favour!

They also depend on it for
their lives as animals do in other habitats. If people consume
animal products from animals they think are raised in decent
ways, they will be promoting life for more such animals in the
future. People who want to contribute to decent lives for
livestock with their lifestyle must do it by being conscientious
consumers of animal products, because they can not do it by
being vegan.

Vegan is a proper name, so use a damned capital letter you igaroo!

From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
over 500 servings of meat.

Sorry. They feed steers cattle-cake, and it was teh feedstuffs manufacturers
putting ground-up sheeps' carcases in it from sheep that had died from
Scrapey that lead to Mad Cow Disease and to NVCJD in humans! - from which
you seem to be suffering!

From a grass raised dairy cow people
get thousands of dairy servings.

And thousands of Migraines and digestive troubles . .

Due to the influence of farm
machinery, and *icides, (nice gimmick) and in
the case of rice the flooding and
draining of fields, one serving of soy or rice based product is
likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of servings
derived from grass raised animals.

Complete and utter ********!

Grass raised animal products
contribute to fewer wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and
better lives for livestock than soy or rice products.

More complete and utter ********!

If the grasslands were planted with Honey Locust Trees, the same land would
produce the protein equivalent of around hundred to five hundred times the
meat yield and consume far less energy as well.

ontheroad wrote:
This is always quite amusing. Willfully contributing to the contiuned
demand for more and more dead animals for nothing more than selfish
entertainmnet.
Again, there are NO real vegans on usenet. try looking up the meaning of
the word as defined by the guy who coined it, Donald Watson.

"..abstention from the use of all animal products.."


Here's what i'm talking about fool. Here's a site that discusses the 3
BILLION animals that die every year from the production of power at just 3
generators.
That's just 3! out of ,more than 13000 in the US alone.
http://www.closeindianpoint.org/articles/tjn_071103.htm


Electricity is not the use of an animal product per se.



Now, extrapolate those numbers to 1000s of other generators,

It is foolish to extrapolate one particular method of cooling / power
generation with all others.

and the
estimates that computers/internet usage consumes between 3% to 15%
of generated power, how many billions of animals is that? All killed for
nothing more than your entertainment here on internet.
Hypocrisy run amok. Usenet wannbe vegans are such an ignorant lot.

"The tendency of the casual mind is to pick out or stumble upon a sample
which supports or defines its prejudices, and then to make it
representative of a whole class."

Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) US editor and writer.






"ARF" wrote in message
ups.com...
Do you wish to start your own blog about animal rights or about being
vegan?
Are you custom to the net than leave your favorites at the
WebDirectory!
...

Help send the vegan message out!

Start a blog - http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/summary.php
Leave animal rights and veggie friendly bookmarks -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/directory/
Join the community - http://www.animalsuffering.com/forum/
Leave an AR book review - http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/books.php

I thought that in the vegan google group I would only find vegans and
not a bunch of trolls.
Why join a vegan group when you are clearly against veganism?
Very strange indeed.

Anyway if you are not a Vegan or against it than please ignore my
original post. It wasn't addressed to you. And I also think you joined
the wrong google group but that is up to the people who run this group.
Thanks!

ARF wrote:
Do you wish to start your own blog about animal rights or about being
vegan?
Are you custom to the net than leave your favorites at the
WebDirectory!
...

Help send the vegan message out!

Start a blog - http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/summary.php
Leave animal rights and veggie friendly bookmarks -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/directory/
Join the community - http://www.animalsuffering.com/forum/
Leave an AR book review - http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/books.php

"Jean Clingfilm" wrote in message
...
ontheroad wrote:
This is always quite amusing. Willfully contributing to the
contiuned demand for more and more dead animals for nothing
more than selfish entertainmnet.
Again, there are NO real vegans on usenet. try looking up the
meaning of the word as defined by the guy who coined it,
Donald Watson.

"..abstention from the use of all animal products.."
=======================
Not quite. Why leave out the part "excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom" That part
doesn't quite fit the vegan brainwashing spew?

Here it is...

"...Veganism is a way of living which excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom, and includes
a reverence for life. It applies to the practice of living on the
products of the plant kingdom to the exclusion of flesh, fish,
fowl, eggs, honey, animal milk and its derivatives, and
encourages the use of alternatives for all commodities derived
wholly or in part from animals..."

You'll note that diet is not anymore or less important than any
other aspect of a real vegan lifestyle.



Here's what i'm talking about fool. Here's a site that
discusses the 3 BILLION animals that die every year from the
production of power at just 3 generators.
That's just 3! out of ,more than 13000 in the US alone.
http://www.closeindianpoint.org/articles/tjn_071103.htm


Electricity is not the use of an animal product per se.
========================
ROTFLMAO But killing billions of them for unnecessary reasons is
quite alright by you, huh? Like I said, there are no real vegans
on usenet...
I submit that a person that lives on game and grass-fed beef and
ins't online causes far far fewer animal deaths than you even
wet-dream about saving...





Now, extrapolate those numbers to 1000s of other generators,

It is foolish to extrapolate one particular method of cooling /
power generation with all others.
======================
No, it is not. There are over 13000 generators in the US alone.
I only said to compare 1000s. The fact is that most power
generators are steam generation plants. All steam generators
use the same method to produce electricity, it's only the source
of the heat that changes. The rest of the steam generation and
dischage is the same.
The tap-dacing around the facts by vegans is what is amusing.
They get caught red-handed with their hands in the dead-animal
cookie jar and they send up strawman after strawman to try to
devert the attention away from their bloody footprints.



and the estimates that computers/internet usage consumes
between 3% to 15%
of generated power, how many billions of animals is that?
All killed for nothing more than your entertainment here on
internet.
Hypocrisy run amok. Usenet wannbe vegans are such an ignorant
lot.

"The tendency of the casual mind is to pick out or stumble upon
a sample which supports or defines its prejudices, and then to
make it representative of a whole class."
============================
The tendancy of the brainwashed vegan mind is to ignore reality
and disregard the bloody footprints they track about. That is
the way of ALL usenet wannbe vegans...
There is NO survival necessity for anyone that wants to claim an
ethical superiority to be on usnet, none. It's completely
unnecessary and an exploitation of animals for no more reason
than their entertainment.



Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) US editor and writer.






"ARF" wrote in message
ups.com...
Do you wish to start your own blog about animal rights or
about being
vegan?
Are you custom to the net than leave your favorites at the
WebDirectory!
...

Help send the vegan message out!

Start a blog -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/summary.php
Leave animal rights and veggie friendly bookmarks -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/directory/
Join the community - http://www.animalsuffering.com/forum/
Leave an AR book review -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/books.php

"ARF" wrote in message
ps.com...
I thought that in the vegan google group I would only find
vegans and
not a bunch of trolls.
Why join a vegan group when you are clearly against veganism?
Very strange indeed.
=========================
Get a clue loser, this is usenet. You posted your stupidity
around the world for all to see. Get used to it...


Anyway if you are not a Vegan or against it than please ignore
my
original post. It wasn't addressed to you. And I also think you
joined
the wrong google group but that is up to the people who run
this group.
Thanks!
===================
uhh, there is no group to 'join', fool. You just click and read
the stupidity of vegans... Actually, I originally got here
because vegans were spamming the outdoor newsgroups I was on.
Lucky for you we're here to tell the truth, and shine a light on
your delusions...

Again, I still can't get over laughing at wannbe vegans posting
and maintaining web sites. All of which contribute to far more
dead animals than I'll ever eat in my lifetime...
whatta a maroon...



ARF wrote:
Do you wish to start your own blog about animal rights or
about being
vegan?
Are you custom to the net than leave your favorites at the
WebDirectory!
...

Help send the vegan message out!

Start a blog -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/summary.php
Leave animal rights and veggie friendly bookmarks -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/directory/
Join the community - http://www.animalsuffering.com/forum/
Leave an AR book review -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/books.php

rick wrote:
"Jean Clingfilm" wrote in message
...
ontheroad wrote:
This is always quite amusing. Willfully contributing to the
contiuned demand for more and more dead animals for nothing
more than selfish entertainmnet.
Again, there are NO real vegans on usenet. try looking up the
meaning of the word as defined by the guy who coined it,
Donald Watson.
"..abstention from the use of all animal products.."
=======================
Not quite. Why leave out the part "excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom" That part
doesn't quite fit the vegan brainwashing spew?

'Ontheroad' (or was it you?), asked for Donald Watson's definition. You
for some reason have produced another.

Also electrical generation does not 'exploit', is not 'cruel' to
animals. It is not, on the whole, an animal commodity.



Here it is...

"...Veganism is a way of living which excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom, and includes
a reverence for life. It applies to the practice of living on the
products of the plant kingdom to the exclusion of flesh, fish,
fowl, eggs, honey, animal milk and its derivatives, and
encourages the use of alternatives for all commodities derived
wholly or in part from animals..."

You'll note that diet is not anymore or less important than any
other aspect of a real vegan lifestyle.

Here's what i'm talking about fool. Here's a site that
discusses the 3 BILLION animals that die every year from the
production of power at just 3 generators.
That's just 3! out of ,more than 13000 in the US alone.
http://www.closeindianpoint.org/articles/tjn_071103.htm

Electricity is not the use of an animal product per se.
========================
ROTFLMAO But killing billions of them for unnecessary reasons is
quite alright by you, huh? Like I said, there are no real vegans
on usenet...
I submit that a person that lives on game and grass-fed beef and
ins't online causes far far fewer animal deaths than you even
wet-dream about saving...


You'll need to supply evidence of that claim. For a start, I've made no
claim of saving animals. ask yourself questions like, how much energy
does the production of the meat need, including fertilisers, processing,
transport, water, supplemental nutrition, breeding and releasing 'game'
to the wild etc.

You also need to consider the issue holistically. Rather than apply an
exception, hypothesize the effect of a particular lifestyle may have if
applied generally. Do you really think it a good idea that everyone
start consuming wild game?






Now, extrapolate those numbers to 1000s of other generators,
It is foolish to extrapolate one particular method of cooling /
power generation with all others.
======================
No, it is not. There are over 13000 generators in the US alone.
I only said to compare 1000s. The fact is that most power
generators are steam generation plants. All steam generators
use the same method to produce electricity, it's only the source
of the heat that changes. The rest of the steam generation and
dischage is the same.

No it is not. For example; how many animals are killed by cooling
towers? - You quoted one method of cooling by river water, and foolishly
extrapolated it to the whole World's electrical generation systems

The tap-dacing around the facts by vegans is what is amusing.
They get caught red-handed with their hands in the dead-animal
cookie jar and they send up strawman after strawman to try to
devert the attention away from their bloody footprints.

(An overuse of metaphors BTW).

I'm not a vegan, I was pointing out (your?) fundamental error.



and the estimates that computers/internet usage consumes
between 3% to 15%
of generated power, how many billions of animals is that?
All killed for nothing more than your entertainment here on
internet.
Hypocrisy run amok. Usenet wannbe vegans are such an ignorant
lot.
"The tendency of the casual mind is to pick out or stumble upon
a sample which supports or defines its prejudices, and then to
make it representative of a whole class."
============================
The tendancy of the brainwashed vegan mind is to ignore reality
and disregard the bloody footprints they track about. That is
the way of ALL usenet wannbe vegans...
There is NO survival necessity for anyone that wants to claim an
ethical superiority to be on usnet, none. It's completely
unnecessary and an exploitation of animals for no more reason
than their entertainment.

Who's claimed moral superiority? It wasn't me. - You seem to be arguing
with yourself or some seemingly non existent 'bogie monster'.

Basically, you've drawn incorrect conclusions from an inaccurate
extrapolation of a non animal product, to support an incoherent and
logically flawed position.






Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) US editor and writer.





"ARF" wrote in message
ups.com...
Do you wish to start your own blog about animal rights or
about being
vegan?
Are you custom to the net than leave your favorites at the
WebDirectory!
...

Help send the vegan message out!

Start a blog -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/summary.php
Leave animal rights and veggie friendly bookmarks -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/directory/
Join the community - http://www.animalsuffering.com/forum/
Leave an AR book review -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/books.php

"Jean Clingfilm" wrote in message
...
rick wrote:
"Jean Clingfilm" wrote in message
...
ontheroad wrote:
This is always quite amusing. Willfully contributing to
the contiuned demand for more and more dead animals for
nothing more than selfish entertainmnet.
Again, there are NO real vegans on usenet. try looking up
the meaning of the word as defined by the guy who coined it,
Donald Watson.
"..abstention from the use of all animal products.."
=======================
Not quite. Why leave out the part "excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom" That
part doesn't quite fit the vegan brainwashing spew?

'Ontheroad' (or was it you?), asked for Donald Watson's
definition. You for some reason have produced another.
===================
That's the computer I use while 'on the road'...

http://www.vegetus.org/honey/honey.htm
"...Veganism is a way of living which excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom, and includes
a reverence for life. It applies to the practice of living on the
products of the plant kingdom to the exclusion of flesh, fish,
fowl, eggs, honey, animal milk and its derivatives, and
encourages the use of alternatives for all commodities derived
wholly or in part from animals ..."
Donald Watson, 1944
Looks to me like you tried to use something different, but it
still says the same thing.



Also electrical generation does not 'exploit', is not 'cruel'
to animals. It is not, on the whole, an animal commodity.
===========================
ROTFLMAO I bet that billions and billions of dead animals
disagree with you...
I guess you just have different difinitions for all words so that
they fit your propaganda, huh? causing the deaths of billions of
animals for nothing nore than our entertainment is exploitation,
regardless if you like it or not.




Here it is...

"...Veganism is a way of living which excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom, and
includes a reverence for life. It applies to the practice of
living on the products of the plant kingdom to the exclusion
of flesh, fish, fowl, eggs, honey, animal milk and its
derivatives, and encourages the use of alternatives for all
commodities derived wholly or in part from animals..."

You'll note that diet is not anymore or less important than
any other aspect of a real vegan lifestyle.

Here's what i'm talking about fool. Here's a site that
discusses the 3 BILLION animals that die every year from the
production of power at just 3 generators.
That's just 3! out of ,more than 13000 in the US alone.
http://www.closeindianpoint.org/articles/tjn_071103.htm

Electricity is not the use of an animal product per se.
========================
ROTFLMAO But killing billions of them for unnecessary reasons
is quite alright by you, huh? Like I said, there are no real
vegans on usenet...
I submit that a person that lives on game and grass-fed beef
and ins't online causes far far fewer animal deaths than you
even wet-dream about saving...


You'll need to supply evidence of that claim. For a start, I've
made no claim of saving animals. ask yourself questions like,
how much energy does the production of the meat need, including
fertilisers, processing, transport, water, supplemental
nutrition, breeding and releasing 'game' to the wild etc.
=================================
None, fool. Gama animals are abundent without ANY help from us.
There is no need for us to transport, suppliment their diets,
breed them or release them..
The fact vthat you are so closed minded that you can't see that
somebody living on game and grass-fed beef without the internet
causes fewer animal deaths than you is quite amazing... Actuall,
it just reenforces what I already know. You're a braindead
prop[agandized fool that wants to remain willfully ignorant of
their impact on animals and the environment.



You also need to consider the issue holistically. Rather than
apply an exception, hypothesize the effect of a particular
lifestyle may have if applied generally. Do you really think it
a good idea that everyone start consuming wild game?
=======================
You might want to reasd for comprehension sometime. No where did
I say that. All I said was that waanbe usenet veganms are just
ignorant hypocrites by claiming that just by not eating animals
tha=ey are somehow 'saving' them. It's just a delusional lie
they all te]ll themselves, right, hypocrite?








Now, extrapolate those numbers to 1000s of other generators,
It is foolish to extrapolate one particular method of cooling
/ power generation with all others.
======================
No, it is not. There are over 13000 generators in the US
alone. I only said to compare 1000s. The fact is that most
power generators are steam generation plants. All steam
generators use the same method to produce electricity, it's
only the source of the heat that changes. The rest of the
steam generation and dischage is the same.

No it is not. For example; how many animals are killed by
cooling towers? - You quoted one method of cooling by river
water, and foolishly extrapolated it to the whole World's
electrical generation systems
===============================
No fool, I have not. Steam generating plants are steam
generating plants. But then, you propably don't know what steam
is, right? It is you theat is trying to read what you want to
see in what I write. If you'll notice, I specifically said US
plants.



The tap-dacing around the facts by vegans is what is amusing.
They get caught red-handed with their hands in the dead-animal
cookie jar and they send up strawman after strawman to try to
devert the attention away from their bloody footprints.

(An overuse of metaphors BTW).
===================
Better than your overuse of stupidity....



I'm not a vegan, I was pointing out (your?) fundamental error.
============================
There was no error. Power production kills billions and billions
of animals. I suggest vyou first refute that by providing
information that disputes the environmental agencys, like New
Yorks department of environmental conservation.

Next you could then start telling us how hydro generators don't
kill animals in their turbines either....





es that computers/internet usage consumes
between 3% to 15%
of generated power, how many billions of animals is that?
All killed for nothing more than your entertainment here on
internet.
Hypocrisy run amok. Usenet wannbe vegans are such an
ignorant lot.
"The tendency of the casual mind is to pick out or stumble
upon a sample which supports or defines its prejudices, and
then to make it representative of a whole class."
============================
The tendancy of the brainwashed vegan mind is to ignore
reality and disregard the bloody footprints they track about.
That is the way of ALL usenet wannbe vegans...
There is NO survival necessity for anyone that wants to claim
an ethical superiority to be on usnet, none. It's completely
unnecessary and an exploitation of animals for no more reason
than their entertainment.

Who's claimed moral superiority? It wasn't me. - You seem to be
arguing with yourself or some seemingly non existent 'bogie
monster'.
==========================
Same as you, huh fool?




Basically, you've drawn incorrect conclusions from an
inaccurate extrapolation of a non animal product, to support an
incoherent and logically flawed position.
===================================
Nope, not at all. Dead animals, by the billions, directly
connected to vegan activities is quite relevent, despite your
ignorant protestations...






Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) US editor and writer.





"ARF" wrote in message
ups.com...
Do you wish to start your own blog about animal rights or
about being
vegan?
Are you custom to the net than leave your favorites at the
WebDirectory!
...

Help send the vegan message out!

Start a blog -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/summary.php
Leave animal rights and veggie friendly bookmarks -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/directory/
Join the community - http://www.animalsuffering.com/forum/
Leave an AR book review -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/books.php

rick wrote:
"Jean Clingfilm" wrote in message
...
rick wrote:
"Jean Clingfilm" wrote in message
...
ontheroad wrote:
This is always quite amusing. Willfully contributing to
the contiuned demand for more and more dead animals for
nothing more than selfish entertainmnet.
Again, there are NO real vegans on usenet. try looking up
the meaning of the word as defined by the guy who coined it,
Donald Watson.
"..abstention from the use of all animal products.."
=======================
Not quite. Why leave out the part "excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom" That
part doesn't quite fit the vegan brainwashing spew?
'Ontheroad' (or was it you?), asked for Donald Watson's
definition. You for some reason have produced another.
===================
That's the computer I use while 'on the road'...

http://www.vegetus.org/honey/honey.htm
"...Veganism is a way of living which excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom, and includes
a reverence for life. It applies to the practice of living on the
products of the plant kingdom to the exclusion of flesh, fish,
fowl, eggs, honey, animal milk and its derivatives, and
encourages the use of alternatives for all commodities derived
wholly or in part from animals ..."
Donald Watson, 1944
Looks to me like you tried to use something different, but it
still says the same thing.

No, you stated "..the meaning of the word as defined by the guy who
coined it, Donald Watson" and then quoted another from someone else.
Donald Watson did not define vegan in that way. His main issues was with
vegetarians eating eggs and dairy products.

Donald Watson coined the WORD, in an effort to disassociate himself, and
anybody else that wanted to, from vegetarians who consumed milk and
eggs. The definition has followed in many different guises.




Also electrical generation does not 'exploit', is not 'cruel'
to animals. It is not, on the whole, an animal commodity.
===========================
ROTFLMAO I bet that billions and billions of dead animals
disagree with you...

Nothing dead will disagree with me or anyone else. - It still remains a
fact that electrical generation does not 'exploit', is not 'cruel' to
animals. It is not, on the whole, an animal commodity.

I guess you just have different difinitions for all words so that
they fit your propaganda, huh? causing the deaths of billions of
animals for nothing nore than our entertainment is exploitation,
regardless if you like it or not.

I suggest you take this argument you have with yourself elsewhere;
perhaps a psychologist.




Here it is...

"...Veganism is a way of living which excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom, and
includes a reverence for life. It applies to the practice of
living on the products of the plant kingdom to the exclusion
of flesh, fish, fowl, eggs, honey, animal milk and its
derivatives, and encourages the use of alternatives for all
commodities derived wholly or in part from animals..."

You'll note that diet is not anymore or less important than
any other aspect of a real vegan lifestyle.

Here's what i'm talking about fool. Here's a site that
discusses the 3 BILLION animals that die every year from the
production of power at just 3 generators.
That's just 3! out of ,more than 13000 in the US alone.
http://www.closeindianpoint.org/articles/tjn_071103.htm
Electricity is not the use of an animal product per se.
========================
ROTFLMAO But killing billions of them for unnecessary reasons
is quite alright by you, huh? Like I said, there are no real
vegans on usenet...
I submit that a person that lives on game and grass-fed beef
and ins't online causes far far fewer animal deaths than you
even wet-dream about saving...

You'll need to supply evidence of that claim. For a start, I've
made no claim of saving animals. ask yourself questions like,
how much energy does the production of the meat need, including
fertilisers, processing, transport, water, supplemental
nutrition, breeding and releasing 'game' to the wild etc.
=================================
None, fool. Gama animals are abundent without ANY help from us.
There is no need for us to transport, suppliment their diets,
breed them or release them..

So you were ONLY taking about wild game? ..............

The fact vthat you are so closed minded that you can't see that
somebody living on game and grass-fed beef

...........Oh you did include grass fed beef.

1) So all grass fed beef get to the plate without transport, without
supplementing its diet, without fertilizers on the fields, without
water, etc?


without the internet
causes fewer animal deaths than you is quite amazing... Actuall,
it just reenforces what I already know. You're a braindead
prop[agandized fool that wants to remain willfully ignorant of
their impact on animals and the environment.

I'm aware that my (non vegan) lifestyle causes damage to the
environment, and ultimately animals and humans, as does virtually
everyone else's lifestyles.

The only person demonstrating foolishness is you.



You also need to consider the issue holistically. Rather than
apply an exception, hypothesize the effect of a particular
lifestyle may have if applied generally. Do you really think it
a good idea that everyone start consuming wild game?
=======================
You might want to reasd for comprehension sometime. No where did
I say that. All I said was that waanbe usenet veganms are just
ignorant hypocrites by claiming that just by not eating animals
tha=ey are somehow 'saving' them. It's just a delusional lie
they all te]ll themselves, right, hypocrite?

You wrote (emphasis added) "I submit that a person that lives on
**game** and grass-fed beef and ins't online causes far far fewer animal
deaths than you even wet-dream about saving..."

If the game is not bred and released as you refute above, it must be
wild. - I'll break this down to make it easier for you:

2)Does your hypothesis include game, as you first postulated or not?

3)If it does, is it wild or bred and released?

4)Should anyone be allowed be allowed to consume this game, or is it
limited to a certain sunset? - How is this subset defined?







Now, extrapolate those numbers to 1000s of other generators,
It is foolish to extrapolate one particular method of cooling
/ power generation with all others.
======================
No, it is not. There are over 13000 generators in the US
alone. I only said to compare 1000s. The fact is that most
power generators are steam generation plants. All steam
generators use the same method to produce electricity, it's
only the source of the heat that changes. The rest of the
steam generation and dischage is the same.
No it is not. For example; how many animals are killed by
cooling towers? - You quoted one method of cooling by river
water, and foolishly extrapolated it to the whole World's
electrical generation systems
===============================
No fool, I have not. Steam generating plants are steam
generating plants. But then, you propably don't know what steam
is, right? It is you theat is trying to read what you want to
see in what I write. If you'll notice, I specifically said US
plants.


The tap-dacing around the facts by vegans is what is amusing.
They get caught red-handed with their hands in the dead-animal
cookie jar and they send up strawman after strawman to try to
devert the attention away from their bloody footprints.
(An overuse of metaphors BTW).
===================
Better than your overuse of stupidity....


I'm not a vegan, I was pointing out (your?) fundamental error.
============================
There was no error. Power production kills billions and billions
of animals. I suggest vyou first refute that by providing
information that disputes the environmental agencys, like New
Yorks department of environmental conservation.

Power production, a non animal product, kills animals yes. How many I do
not know. Your estimation was based a flawed premise.


Next you could then start telling us how hydro generators don't
kill animals in their turbines either....

No, I know wind turbines kill birds for example.






es that computers/internet usage consumes
between 3% to 15%
of generated power, how many billions of animals is that?
All killed for nothing more than your entertainment here on
internet.
Hypocrisy run amok. Usenet wannbe vegans are such an
ignorant lot.
"The tendency of the casual mind is to pick out or stumble
upon a sample which supports or defines its prejudices, and
then to make it representative of a whole class."
============================
The tendancy of the brainwashed vegan mind is to ignore
reality and disregard the bloody footprints they track about.
That is the way of ALL usenet wannbe vegans...
There is NO survival necessity for anyone that wants to claim
an ethical superiority to be on usnet, none. It's completely
unnecessary and an exploitation of animals for no more reason
than their entertainment.
Who's claimed moral superiority? It wasn't me. - You seem to be
arguing with yourself or some seemingly non existent 'bogie
monster'.
==========================
Same as you, huh fool?

Clearly not.




Basically, you've drawn incorrect conclusions from an
inaccurate extrapolation of a non animal product, to support an
incoherent and logically flawed position.
===================================
Nope, not at all. Dead animals, by the billions, directly
connected to vegan activities is quite relevent, despite your
ignorant protestations...

I think it safe to conclude that most vegans will cause some animal
deaths, by consuming non animal products like electricity. This does not
preclude them using the term vegan if they wish to.

If you answer the questions above, I may respond, otherwise I'm wasting
my time, a bit like kicking shit about until you lose it.






Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) US editor and writer.




"ARF" wrote in message
ups.com...
Do you wish to start your own blog about animal rights or
about being
vegan?
Are you custom to the net than leave your favorites at the
WebDirectory!
...

Help send the vegan message out!

Start a blog -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/summary.php
Leave animal rights and veggie friendly bookmarks -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/directory/
Join the community - http://www.animalsuffering.com/forum/
Leave an AR book review -
http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/books.php

"Jean Clingfilm" wrote in message
...
rick wrote:
"Jean Clingfilm" wrote in message
...
rick wrote:
"Jean Clingfilm" wrote in message
...
ontheroad wrote:
This is always quite amusing. Willfully contributing to
the contiuned demand for more and more dead animals for
nothing more than selfish entertainmnet.
Again, there are NO real vegans on usenet. try looking up
the meaning of the word as defined by the guy who coined
it, Donald Watson.
"..abstention from the use of all animal products.."
=======================
Not quite. Why leave out the part "excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom" That
part doesn't quite fit the vegan brainwashing spew?
'Ontheroad' (or was it you?), asked for Donald Watson's
definition. You for some reason have produced another.
===================
That's the computer I use while 'on the road'...

http://www.vegetus.org/honey/honey.htm
"...Veganism is a way of living which excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom, and
includes a reverence for life. It applies to the practice of
living on the products of the plant kingdom to the exclusion
of flesh, fish, fowl, eggs, honey, animal milk and its
derivatives, and encourages the use of alternatives for all
commodities derived wholly or in part from animals ..."
Donald Watson, 1944
Looks to me like you tried to use something different, but it
still says the same thing.

No, you stated "..the meaning of the word as defined by the guy
who coined it, Donald Watson" and then quoted another from
someone else.
==================
No, I did not. I quoted the definition given by watson in 1944.
You have quoted from someone else.

Donald Watson did not define vegan in that way. His main issues
was with vegetarians eating eggs and dairy products.
=========================
Then you'd better get a refund on the education you think you
recieved.


Donald Watson coined the WORD, in an effort to disassociate
himself, and anybody else that wanted to, from vegetarians who
consumed milk and eggs. The definition has followed in many
different guises.
============================
But there is only one definition from the man who made up the
term. I gave it. It is not about diet, it is a lifestyle, a
belief. Diet is no more or less important than any other aspect
of ones life.






Also electrical generation does not 'exploit', is not 'cruel'
to animals. It is not, on the whole, an animal commodity.
===========================
ROTFLMAO I bet that billions and billions of dead animals
disagree with you...

Nothing dead will disagree with me or anyone else. - It still
remains a fact that electrical generation does not 'exploit',
is not 'cruel' to animals. It is not, on the whole, an animal
commodity.
================================
ROTFLMAO Nice strawman, fool, I didn't say it was an animal
commodity, but to try to insist that being sliced, diced,
shredded and dis-memebered is not cruel is quite amusing. Thanks
for proving your ignorance yet again...



I guess you just have different difinitions for all words so
that they fit your propaganda, huh? causing the deaths of
billions of animals for nothing nore than our entertainment is
exploitation, regardless if you like it or not.

I suggest you take this argument you have with yourself
elsewhere; perhaps a psychologist.
==============================
LOL I don't have a problem. Maybe you do, with comprehension
and reality.





Here it is...

"...Veganism is a way of living which excludes all forms of
exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom, and
includes a reverence for life. It applies to the practice of
living on the products of the plant kingdom to the exclusion
of flesh, fish, fowl, eggs, honey, animal milk and its
derivatives, and encourages the use of alternatives for all
commodities derived wholly or in part from animals..."

You'll note that diet is not anymore or less important than
any other aspect of a real vegan lifestyle.

Here's what i'm talking about fool. Here's a site that
discusses the 3 BILLION animals that die every year from
the production of power at just 3 generators.
That's just 3! out of ,more than 13000 in the US alone.
http://www.closeindianpoint.org/articles/tjn_071103.htm
Electricity is not the use of an animal product per se.
========================
ROTFLMAO But killing billions of them for unnecessary
reasons is quite alright by you, huh? Like I said, there
are no real vegans on usenet...
I submit that a person that lives on game and grass-fed beef
and ins't online causes far far fewer animal deaths than you
even wet-dream about saving...

You'll need to supply evidence of that claim. For a start,
I've made no claim of saving animals. ask yourself questions
like, how much energy does the production of the meat need,
including fertilisers, processing, transport, water,
supplemental nutrition, breeding and releasing 'game' to the
wild etc.
=================================
None, fool. Gama animals are abundent without ANY help from
us. There is no need for us to transport, suppliment their
diets, breed them or release them..

So you were ONLY taking about wild game? ..............
========================
No fool, YOU were. Read what you just wrote, dolt. Whatta
maroon...


The fact vthat you are so closed minded that you can't see
that somebody living on game and grass-fed beef

..........Oh you did include grass fed beef.

1) So all grass fed beef get to the plate without transport,
without supplementing its diet, without fertilizers on the
fields, without water, etc?
======================
Uh, i guess your stupidity knows no bounds, huh? The grass fed
beef I eat gets no suppliments. What suppliments do you have in
mind? The water is what fills the ponds from rain. No pumping
from water sources. What field do you suppose I'd want to spray
and have the cattle eat? Are you thinking about grains being fed
to cattle? Again, fool, the "grass-fed" beef I eat doesn't eat
any grain. Is "grass-fed" too big a word for you? The are born,
raised, slaughtered and eaten withing just a few miles.
care to tell me where your last banana came from?



without the internet causes fewer animal deaths than you is
quite amazing... Actuall, it just reenforces what I already
know. You're a braindead prop[agandized fool that wants to
remain willfully ignorant of their impact on animals and the
environment.

I'm aware that my (non vegan) lifestyle causes damage to the
environment, and ultimately animals and humans, as does
virtually everyone else's lifestyles.
==========================
Good, then why deny the fact that being killed for our
entertainment by being sliced, diced, shredded and dis-memebered
isn't 'cruel?'



The only person demonstrating foolishness is you.
===============
hardly, fool.
Keep tap dancing away...




You also need to consider the issue holistically. Rather than
apply an exception, hypothesize the effect of a particular
lifestyle may have if applied generally. Do you really think
it a good idea that everyone start consuming wild game?
=======================
You might want to reasd for comprehension sometime. No where
did I say that. All I said was that waanbe usenet veganms are
just ignorant hypocrites by claiming that just by not eating
animals tha=ey are somehow 'saving' them. It's just a
delusional lie they all te]ll themselves, right, hypocrite?

You wrote (emphasis added) "I submit that a person that lives
on **game** and grass-fed beef and ins't online causes far far
fewer animal deaths than you even wet-dream about saving..."

If the game is not bred and released as you refute above, it
must be wild. - I'll break this down to make it easier for you:
=====================
What other 'wild game' do you suppose there is, fool? Are you
really this impaired, or just willfully ignorant? Do you really
not know a difference between game and grass-fed beef? The
statement I wrote is quite clear.



2)Does your hypothesis include game, as you first postulated or
not?
======================
Sure it can. Why are you so dense? Willfully ignorant or just
naturally stupid?


3)If it does, is it wild or bred and released?
=====================
I don't know of any deer catch and release programs.


4)Should anyone be allowed be allowed to consume this game, or
is it limited to a certain sunset? - How is this subset
defined?
======================
Why all the strawmen, fool? Who do you want to restrict from
eating it?
Again, for the 2 braincells you're apparently woking with here,
The fact is that vegan loons make the claim that because they are
vegan no/less/fewer animals die. I show quite well how that is
not the case, and that there are meat-included diets that kill
fewer animals than some vegan ones. I know that that is hard for
the mentally challenged to comprehend, but do give it a go, fool.









Now, extrapolate those numbers to 1000s of other
generators,
It is foolish to extrapolate one particular method of
cooling / power generation with all others.
======================
No, it is not. There are over 13000 generators in the US
alone. I only said to compare 1000s. The fact is that most
power generators are steam generation plants. All steam
generators use the same method to produce electricity, it's
only the source of the heat that changes. The rest of the
steam generation and dischage is the same.
No it is not. For example; how many animals are killed by
cooling towers? - You quoted one method of cooling by river
water, and foolishly extrapolated it to the whole World's
electrical generation systems
===============================
No fool, I have not. Steam generating plants are steam
generating plants. But then, you propably don't know what
steam is, right? It is you theat is trying to read what you
want to see in what I write. If you'll notice, I specifically
said US plants.


The tap-dacing around the facts by vegans is what is
amusing. They get caught red-handed with their hands in the
dead-animal cookie jar and they send up strawman after
strawman to try to devert the attention away from their
bloody footprints.
(An overuse of metaphors BTW).
===================
Better than your overuse of stupidity....


I'm not a vegan, I was pointing out (your?) fundamental
error.
============================
There was no error. Power production kills billions and
billions of animals. I suggest vyou first refute that by
providing information that disputes the environmental agencys,
like New Yorks department of environmental conservation.

Power production, a non animal product, kills animals yes. How
many I do not know. Your estimation was based a flawed premise.
============================
No it was not. Billions and billions from just 3 power
generators are a known quantity. You may wnat to ignore fact and
reality if you want, but that doesn't make the numbers go away.