"rick etter" > wrote in message ...
> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > "rick etter" > wrote in message ...
> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:48:11 -0500, "rick etter" > wrote:
> > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:24:29 -0500, "rick etter" >wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> >> >> >Under pressure from ranchers, the U.S.
> > > > >> >> >> >government exterminates tens of thousands
> > > > >> >> >> >of predator and "nuisance" animals each year.
> > > > >> >> >> >In 1989, a partial list of animals killed by the
> > > > >> >> >> >U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal
> > > > >> >> >> >Damage Control Program included 86,502
> > > > >> >> >> >coyotes, 7,158 foxes, 236 black bears,
> > > > >> >> >> >1,220 bobcats and 80 wolves. In 1988, 4.6
> > > > >> >> >> >million birds, 9,000 beavers, 76,000 coyotes,
> > > > >> >> >> >5,000 raccoons, 300 black bears, and 200
> > > > >> >> >> >mountain lions, among others, were killed.
> > > > >> >> >> >Some 400 pet dogs and 100 cats were also
> > > > >> >> >> >inadvertently killed. Extermination methods
> > > > >> >> >> >used include poisoning, shooting, gassing, and
> > > > >> >> >> >burning animals in their dens.
> > > > >> >> >> >======================
> > > > >> >> >>ROTFLMAO And the majority of those are
> > > > >> >> >>killed to protect crops
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> > Ah, but it does give numbers proving grass fed
> > > > >> >> > beef accrues collateral deaths, so why do you
> > > > >> >> >ignore them, hypocrite?
> > > > >> >> >======================
> > > > >> >> >Nope.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> You do ignore them, and that's a fact, liar.
> > > > >> >======================
> > > > >> >Nope.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Yep. They do exist.
> > > > >=================
> > > > >Nope.
> > > >
> > > > So, though you insist collateral deaths exist in crop production,
> > > > you also deny they exist in grass fed beef production. Thanks
> > > > for such an excellent example of a meatarian's state of denial.
> > > ======================
> > > Nope.
> >
> > Then it is you rather than the vegan who's living
> > in sanctimonious denial, Rick. You deny the CD
> > associated with your diet while whining on, day
> > after day to vegans on newsgroups about the CD
> > associated with their's. What kind of deluded
> > hypocrite are you, fool?
> ==============================
> You're continued unethical snipping of posts still won't cut it, stupid.
> here, I'll put it back for you, maybe someday you'll reply...
>
If you think this single sentence, " Nope. The meat
I eat gets none of those 'benefits' vfrom the gov."
was pertinent to and helped your case, then I'm only
too glad to address it so I can show it wasn't and didn't.
>
> Nope. The meat I eat gets none of those 'benefits'
> vfrom the gov.

Then, if the grass fed beef YOU eat isn't protected by
the ADC, who else protects them, and what about the
collateral deaths accrued during their processing, storage
packaging and distribution?

"Do you accept that the *general* production, storage, and
distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
deaths?"