"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
>
> "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,
======================
Yes. It was succinct and truthful. Unlike any postsiong you have made
about your diet,
like your fallen apples BS.



then I'm only
> too glad to address it so I can show it wasn't and didn't.
=======================
No, you're too stupid to see what happening to you, fool.


> >
> > 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?"
========================
> ============================
No fool, I haven't said that at all. Like you, I only talk about 'my' diet.
Kinda like your fallen apples and stuff. Afterall, it's only *your*
specific diet that you think matters. Why is it everybody elses general
diets? Because
you're the hypocritical ignorant fool you are?


>
>