View Single Post
  #100 (permalink)   Report Post  
frlpwr
 
Posts: n/a
Default Facts we should *not* consider.

usual suspect wrote:

> You forget that we had over forty nations
> supporting us in the build up to war.


You mean like these:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/ir...030327-10.html

Yep, Latvia has our back.

Please note the first sentence of the press release. Most of the
nations listed are poor, small and politically unimportant and even they
were bamboozled into declaring their support by the BIG, FAT LIE about
the presence of weapons of mass destruction.

> More are now coming on board. Even
> our harshest critics in the UN and Paris (who gives a **** what the
> French think anyway) later agreed that deposing Saddam was a good thing.


Are you sure that's a done deal?
>
> I was addressing the United States population.


The US population was bamboozled right along with Ethiopia. Right-wing
zealots, like you, believe anything the State Department tells them.
You're dangerous.
>
> If you disagree that a
> majority of Americans supported the war, I encourage you to find
> whichever polling organization(s) you trust. Most polling organizations
> have archives of their polling data, and some even have trend charts.
>

The highest approval rating I could find was 73%. This was before it
was revealed that the presence of weapons of mass destruction was a BIG,
FAT LIE. Interestingly, 29% of the 73% had a close relative or friend
serving in the military. This makes the 'majority approval rate' more a
matter of personal interest than political support.

(snip)
>
> > (It may be right for OTHER reasons, of course. Just like the War in
> > Iraq may be right for other reasons.)

>
> Plenty of reasons.


Like?
>

(snip)
>
> This is about animals, not Iraq. That said, hunting does not affect
> vegetarians or urban dwellers. It does affect countryfolk and hunters
> and people who eat meat. You are still trying to force them to live
> according to your weak, shattered conscience. Your intolerance is on
> full display.


If someone decided to shoot 'your' feral cats, would you tolerate it as
a matter of their personal choice?

I'm "affected" everytime a whitetail bleeds out in the short grass or a
duck is blasted out of the sky.

(snip)

> > In animal experimentation and factory farming, the billions of animals
> > tortured and murdered each year for no good reason form the REAL
> > majority.

>
> Animals are neither tortured


Yes, they are. Do a PubMed search on pain management experimentation or
burn research. Exemptions for pain relief requirements are readily
granted whenever analgesics would interfere with the purpose of the
study. There's a category for these laboratory animals, "Pain and
Distress without Relief". We don't know how many are suffering because
no one keeps track of the most frequently used species, mus and rattus.

> or murdered.


> specific legal definition.


Bullshit! People can use language in whatever way they want to
highlight import and lend emotive meaning to a word. Lucily, it's not
within your power to limit language to technical wording and legalese.

Kittens suffocated to study cot death are murdered, senselessly, cruelly
murdered.

> I know you don't care about specific
> definitions in your rush to condemn others,


Language is a living thing. You have to accept this.

> but you're not sincere


Here we go again. That's all you and Ball have, a lame accusation that
people who support animal rights are insincere and disingenous. All
this does is highlight the strictures of your own moral universe.

> you
> are merely an ideologue. Animals do not participate in democratic
> processes among their own species


Most humans alive today do not particicapte in democratic processes.
What's your point?

The rules in a feral cat colony are pretty inflexible, every cat knows
them, youngsters are taught them, and those that choose to breech them
are ruthlessly punished or exiled. Feral cats don't vote, but they're
more socialized than humans.

> much less in ours. Your point is
> laughably non sequitur and irrelevant.
>
> > I don't give a damn about the opinion of some arbitrary majority
> > who know nothing about an issue, never researched it, never did
> > anything to acquire the knowledge, etc.

>
> I know. As I just wrote, you are an ideologue. You don't care about the
> truth, especially since it is at odds with your agenda.


Master, isn't it the Truth that all creatures on this earth are our
relatives? That we are inextricably connected to all Life? Dosen't the
superiority of Man rest with our ability to choose kindness?
>
> > What matters is the opinion of the majority of those who fight, work,
> > suffer, and die for a cause --- which is the animal rights soldiers.

>
> ARAs are not a majority, they are a very vocal but still marginalized
> minority. ARAs are also not soldiers, they are terrorists.


Terrorists kill non-combatant people without prior warning. AR
activists are liberators and vandals.

> Review the
> list of articles in my previous replies to you.


If I do will I find evidence of AR terrorists?

(snip)