View Single Post
  #22 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default "vegans": willingly gullible fools, when it suits them

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 15:04:15 GMT, wrote:
>On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 10:02:58 +0000, ipse dixit > wrote:
>>On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 00:12:46 GMT,
wrote:
>>>On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 14:24:22 +0000, ipse dixit > wrote:
>>>>On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 14:04:22 GMT,
wrote:
>>>>>On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:38:33 +0000, ipse dixit > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>That's no guarantee that the farmer won't finish
>>>>>>his beef in a feedlot on grains far from home
>>>>>>later on in the year.
>>>>>
>>>>> If someone happens to eat beef like that it wouldn't
>>>>>really matter anyway
>>>>
>>>>It does matter when farmers lie to their customers,
>>>
>>> The lying matters.

>>
>>You've only just wrote, "that it wouldn't really matter
>>anyway", so make up your stupid mind.
>>

Well? Which is it, then? Does lying matter or
doesn't it?

>>>>> Farmers have always
>>>>>been honest even when it hurts.
>>>>
>>>>Then why do they intentionally infect their own
>>>>cattle with painful, deadly diseases?
>>>
>>> To make them sick. Why did you think they do it?
>>>

>>They do it for exactly the reason you gave and
>>to fraudulently claim compensation for what
>>should be a safety net for other genuine people
>>in need of that money. In short, they lie and
>>cheat their own kind, and can't be trusted to look
>>after animals,

>_________________________________________________ ________
>Web posted Friday, April 27, 2001
>State Veterinarian, PETA Head Differ On Outbreak
>[...]
>On Thursday, Ingrid Newkirk, president of People for the Ethical Treatment
>of Animals, renewed her claim that an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease
>in the United States would benefit herds by sparing them from a tortured
>existence and the slaughterhouse.
>
>A PETA spokesman said it's inconceivable that anyone would fail to see
>the sense of Newkirk's statements, which have rankled politicians and
>livestock farmers from Texas to Canada.
>
>[...]
>In a telephone interview from Richmond, Va., Newkirk reiterated her
>hope that foot-and-mouth -- which has ravaged herds in Europe -- reaches
>U.S. shores.
>
>''It's a peculiar and disturbing thing to say, but it would be less than truthful
>if I pretended otherwise,'' she said.
>
>People would be better off without meat because it is tied to a host of
>ailments, Newkirk said. And animals would benefit because the current
>means of raising and slaughtering livestock are ''grotesquely cruel from
>start to finish.''
>[...]
>
http://www.pressanddakotan.com/stori...427010026.html
>ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ

How does Newkirk's statement take anything away
from the facts I've pointed out to you? Farmers
infect their cattle for exactly the reason you gave
and to fraudulently claim compensation from what
should be a safety net for other genuine people in
need of that money. In short, they lie and cheat their
own kind and can't be trusted to look after animals.
That's not being "honest even when it hurts", you idiot.
It's thoroughly dishonest and unethical.

>>>>That's not
>>>>being "honest even when it hurts",
>>>
>>> It is if they don't want to make their cattle sick, and
>>>only do it as a last resort that they hate to do.
>>>

>>What a load of rubbish. You start off by claiming
>>farmers are "honest even when it hurts" and then
>>go on to admit they're anything but honest or even
>>responsible enough to look after the animals in their
>>charge.
>>

Well, stupid? How is what they do being, "honest even
when it hurts"?