On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 21:48:26 -0500, "damon" > wrote:
>
>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>> damon wrote:
>>
>> > "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
>> > k.net...
>> >
>> >>Derek wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
>> >
>> > k.net...
>> >
>> >>>>Derek wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
>> >
>> > k.net...
>> >
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>Dreck lied about my logic.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>Here's the complete thread which proves you're the
>> >>>>>hypocrite as described in your opening post to this
>> >>>>>thread when you wrote;
>> >>>>>"People who advocate that everyone adopt a moral
>> >>>>>standard that the advocates themselves don't follow
>> >>>>>are hypocrites, and bad people."
>> >>>>
>> >>>>That's a true statement: people who advocate that
>> >>>>everyone adopt a moral standard that the advocates
>> >>>>themselves don't follow *are* hypocrites, and bad
>> >>>>people.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>That's you.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>>Because you earlier wrote;
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>"According to my logic, if you knowingly continue
>> >>>>>to buy chocolate - we know YOU do, you fat
>> >>>>>lard-ass - then YOU do not respect the rights of
>> >>>>>the children. It doesn't prove they don't have any;
>> >>>>>it proves YOU don't believe they do."
>> >>>>>Jonathan Ball Date: 2003-07-29
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Right, shitbag: my logic is that you do not respect
>> >>>>the rights you claim the children have.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>.... if you knowingly buy chocolate from them.
>> >>
>> >>Which you do.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>>But earlier,
>> >>>>you lied and said that my "logic" is that if you
>> >>>>knowingly buy the chocolate, it means the children
>> >>>>don't have rights.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>Which is exactly the same thing, stupid. You're a fool.
>> >>
>> >>No, it isn't the same thing at all, shitbag. Believing
>> >>that something is so, and something being so, are not
>> >>equivalent.
>> >>
>> >>You believe you can debate. You are wrong. You cannot
>> >>debate.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Okay I admit it. I'm missing part of this discussion. Just what does
>buying
>> > chocalte have to do with children's rights?
>> > And all this time I thought AMD was the most wacked NG.
>>
>> Some people with more time on their hands than sense
>> (and a guilty conscience) claim, without evidence, that
>> the cocoa crop in West Africa is harvested using child
>> slave labor. It isn't. Kids are "leased" into
>> indentured servitude by their parents. It's for a
>> fixed term, and the children are paid a wage, even if
>> it's their parents who collect it. It's the kind of
>> thing that goes in poor countries.
>>
>> It's brought up, here, by smarmy "animal rights
>> activists" who cannot address their complicity in the
>> violation of the "rights" they say animals ought to
>> have, except by trying to engage in a _tu quoque_ argument.
>>
>
>Thanks for the info. Man these animal rights dweebs are ****in insane.
>
Strange how the deviants who support child/animal abuse would say
that. Thankfully the rest of the civilized world agrees with us, even
if the wheels of justice do sometimes move somewhat slowly.
Face it pervert, your cards are marked.
'You can't win 'em all.'
Lord Haw Haw.
Since I stopped donating money to CONservation hooligan charities
Like the RSPB, Woodland Trust and all the other fat cat charities
I am in the top 0.801% richest people in the world.
There are 5,951,930,035 people poorer than me
If you're really interested I am the 48,069,965
richest person in the world.
And I'm keeping the bloody lot.
So sue me.
http://www.globalrichlist.com/