Vegan (alt.food.vegan) This newsgroup exists to share ideas and issues of concern among vegans. We are always happy to share our recipes- perhaps especially with omnivores who are simply curious- or even better, accomodating a vegan guest for a meal!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect

Here are "usual suspect's" quotes that Jonathan desperately
wants the reader to forget about (below).

[start Mmhsb]
> natural predators & a natural life is cruel?

[usual suspect]
Yes. Watch the Discovery Channel sometime.
usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2c9ac

and

"Ever seen what happens to various ruminants as they're
stalked and hunted by large cats? Slaughterhouses may
be messy, but they're not cruel."
Usual Suspect http://tinyurl.com/yu6eq

and

"Suffering results for all animals whether they're
eaten by humans or other animals. Indeed, many
other predators are less humane than humans."
usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2ba7f

It's clear from those quotes that "usual suspect" believes
natural predation is cruel while human predation isn't, but
both he and Jonathan Ball are doing their level best between
themselves to stop the readers on these animal related
groups getting to read them.

They have lied, edited my posts, changed the newsgroup
titles to make replying to them awkward, and just about
anything they can think of. What a pair of liars, eh?
  #2 (permalink)   Report Post  
Rubystars
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect


"ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> Here are "usual suspect's" quotes that Jonathan desperately
> wants the reader to forget about (below).
>
> [start Mmhsb]
> > natural predators & a natural life is cruel?

> [usual suspect]
> Yes. Watch the Discovery Channel sometime.
> usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2c9ac
>
> and
>
> "Ever seen what happens to various ruminants as they're
> stalked and hunted by large cats? Slaughterhouses may
> be messy, but they're not cruel."
> Usual Suspect http://tinyurl.com/yu6eq
>
> and
>
> "Suffering results for all animals whether they're
> eaten by humans or other animals. Indeed, many
> other predators are less humane than humans."
> usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2ba7f
>
> It's clear from those quotes that "usual suspect" believes
> natural predation is cruel while human predation isn't, but
> both he and Jonathan Ball are doing their level best between
> themselves to stop the readers on these animal related
> groups getting to read them.
>
> They have lied, edited my posts, changed the newsgroup
> titles to make replying to them awkward, and just about
> anything they can think of. What a pair of liars, eh?



I agree that when natural predation happens, the animal isn't being
consciously cruel, but the animal who is killed does suffer, and that fact
can't be diminished. There's no moral significance to this because the
predator isnt making any kind of "decision" to do this, just following
instincts.

Human actions have moral significance because we can choose what to do. With
that said, the fact that we provide slaughter that is often more humane than
a death by predation in the wild would be, is a significant point to be
made. After all, humans could attack a cow with spears or we could use
humane slaughter methods including stunning.

-Rubystars


  #3 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect

Are you still ranting on about this? I thought you'd have had the sense to
drop it by now..


  #4 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect

"Rubystars" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "ipse dixit" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Here are "usual suspect's" quotes that Jonathan desperately
> > wants the reader to forget about (below).
> >
> > [start Mmhsb]
> > > natural predators & a natural life is cruel?

> > [usual suspect]
> > Yes. Watch the Discovery Channel sometime.
> > usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2c9ac
> >
> > and
> >
> > "Ever seen what happens to various ruminants as they're
> > stalked and hunted by large cats? Slaughterhouses may
> > be messy, but they're not cruel."
> > Usual Suspect http://tinyurl.com/yu6eq
> >
> > and
> >
> > "Suffering results for all animals whether they're
> > eaten by humans or other animals. Indeed, many
> > other predators are less humane than humans."
> > usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2ba7f
> >
> > It's clear from those quotes that "usual suspect" believes
> > natural predation is cruel while human predation isn't, but
> > both he and Jonathan Ball are doing their level best between
> > themselves to stop the readers on these animal related
> > groups getting to read them.
> >
> > They have lied, edited my posts, changed the newsgroup
> > titles to make replying to them awkward, and just about
> > anything they can think of. What a pair of liars, eh?

>
>
> I agree that when natural predation happens, the animal isn't being
> consciously cruel, but the animal who is killed does suffer, and that fact
> can't be diminished. There's no moral significance to this because the
> predator isnt making any kind of "decision" to do this, just following
> instincts.
>
> Human actions have moral significance because we can choose what to do.

With
> that said, the fact that we provide slaughter that is often more humane

than
> a death by predation in the wild would be, is a significant point to be
> made. After all, humans could attack a cow with spears or we could use
> humane slaughter methods including stunning.


You've got it exactly right. Cruel also means simply causing pain and
suffering, based on that definition, nature is arguably more cruel than
captivity. Nash is equivocating again.


  #5 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect

On Tue, 11 May 2004 16:11:07 GMT, "Rubystars" > wrote:

>"ipse dixit" > wrote in message
.. .
>> Here are "usual suspect's" quotes that Jonathan desperately
>> wants the reader to forget about (below).
>>
>> [start Mmhsb]
>> > natural predators & a natural life is cruel?

>> [usual suspect]
>> Yes. Watch the Discovery Channel sometime.
>> usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2c9ac
>>
>> and
>>
>> "Ever seen what happens to various ruminants as they're
>> stalked and hunted by large cats? Slaughterhouses may
>> be messy, but they're not cruel."
>> Usual Suspect http://tinyurl.com/yu6eq
>>
>> and
>>
>> "Suffering results for all animals whether they're
>> eaten by humans or other animals. Indeed, many
>> other predators are less humane than humans."
>> usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2ba7f
>>
>> It's clear from those quotes that "usual suspect" believes
>> natural predation is cruel while human predation isn't, but
>> both he and Jonathan Ball are doing their level best between
>> themselves to stop the readers on these animal related
>> groups getting to read them.
>>
>> They have lied, edited my posts, changed the newsgroup
>> titles to make replying to them awkward, and just about
>> anything they can think of. What a pair of liars, eh?

>
>
>I agree that when natural predation happens, the animal isn't being
>consciously cruel, but the animal who is killed does suffer, and that fact
>can't be diminished. There's no moral significance to this because the
>predator isnt making any kind of "decision" to do this, just following
>instincts.


Yes, but my point here is that "usual suspect" has openly
lied by trying to wriggle away from his quotes which say
he finds natural predation cruel. Most normal-thinking
people already know that natural predation isn't cruel, but
"usual suspect" made the mistake in claiming it is to head
off any criticisms from those who object to human predation.

>Human actions have moral significance because we can choose what to do. With
>that said, the fact that we provide slaughter that is often more humane than
>a death by predation in the wild would be, is a significant point to be
>made. After all, humans could attack a cow with spears or we could use
>humane slaughter methods including stunning.
>
>-Rubystars
>




  #6 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

On Tue, 11 May 2004 09:23:35 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>"Rubystars" > wrote in message m...
>> "ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
>> >
>> > Here are "usual suspect's" quotes that Jonathan desperately
>> > wants the reader to forget about (below).
>> >
>> > [start Mmhsb]
>> > > natural predators & a natural life is cruel?
>> > [usual suspect]
>> > Yes. Watch the Discovery Channel sometime.
>> > usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2c9ac
>> >
>> > and
>> >
>> > "Ever seen what happens to various ruminants as they're
>> > stalked and hunted by large cats? Slaughterhouses may
>> > be messy, but they're not cruel."
>> > Usual Suspect http://tinyurl.com/yu6eq
>> >
>> > and
>> >
>> > "Suffering results for all animals whether they're
>> > eaten by humans or other animals. Indeed, many
>> > other predators are less humane than humans."
>> > usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2ba7f
>> >
>> > It's clear from those quotes that "usual suspect" believes
>> > natural predation is cruel while human predation isn't, but
>> > both he and Jonathan Ball are doing their level best between
>> > themselves to stop the readers on these animal related
>> > groups getting to read them.
>> >
>> > They have lied, edited my posts, changed the newsgroup
>> > titles to make replying to them awkward, and just about
>> > anything they can think of. What a pair of liars, eh?

>>
>> I agree that when natural predation happens, the animal isn't being
>> consciously cruel, but the animal who is killed does suffer, and that fact
>> can't be diminished. There's no moral significance to this because the
>> predator isnt making any kind of "decision" to do this, just following
>> instincts.
>>
>> Human actions have moral significance because we can choose
>> what to do. With that said, the fact that we provide slaughter
>> that is often more humane than
>> a death by predation in the wild would be, is a significant point to be
>> made. After all, humans could attack a cow with spears or we could use
>> humane slaughter methods including stunning.

>
>You've got it exactly right. Cruel also means simply causing pain and
>suffering, based on that definition, nature is arguably more cruel than
>captivity.


PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.
  #7 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect, and now Dutch as well

On Tue, 11 May 2004 09:17:33 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>Are you still ranting on about this? I thought you'd have had the sense to
>drop it by now..
>

Tell me why natural predation is cruel, Dutch.
  #8 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to Usual Suspect and Dutch etc.

On Tue, 11 May 2004 16:28:32 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:

>ipse dixit wrote:
>> Here are "usual suspect's" quotes that Jonathan desperately
>> wants the reader to forget about

>
>You're lying


Yet again you've shown your worthlessness by changing
the newsgroup titles and snipping away the evidence that
proves "usual suspect" believes natural predation is cruel.

<unsnip>
Here are "usual suspect's" quotes that Jonathan desperately
wants the reader to forget about (below).

[start Mmhsb]
> natural predators & a natural life is cruel?

[usual suspect]
Yes. Watch the Discovery Channel sometime.
usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2c9ac

and

"Ever seen what happens to various ruminants as they're
stalked and hunted by large cats? Slaughterhouses may
be messy, but they're not cruel."
Usual Suspect http://tinyurl.com/yu6eq

and

"Suffering results for all animals whether they're
eaten by humans or other animals. Indeed, many
other predators are less humane than humans."
usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2ba7f

It's clear from those quotes that "usual suspect" believes
natural predation is cruel while human predation isn't, but
both he and Jonathan Ball are doing their level best between
themselves to stop the readers on these animal related
groups from getting to read them.

They have lied, edited my posts, changed the newsgroup
titles to make replying to them awkward, and just about
anything they can think of. What a pair of liars, eh?
<endsnip>

  #9 (permalink)   Report Post  
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default illogic of the lard ass: dreck can't stop shit-stirring

ipse dixit wrote:
> Here are "usual suspect's" quotes that


....Dreck keeps taking out of context so he can stir shit.

<...>
> [start Mmhsb]
> > natural predators & a natural life is cruel?

> [usual suspect]
> Yes. Watch the Discovery Channel sometime.
> usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2c9ac


That's sarcasm, Dreck. Consider elsewhere in the same thread when I wrote:
I'm not taking Harrison's position in this. I'm only going as far as
saying that slaughterhouses aren't the only "travesty" animals face. I'm
all for lions stalking and hunting -- makes for good tv on Discovery and
National Geographic.

And:
Unlike misanthropes like you and your little hare-brained friend Lesley,
I accept the role we and other animals play in nature. Ruminants are
food -- whether for our species or others. That's their main purpose in
an ecosystem: to convert plant matter into protein and to be eaten.

And (to you, fatso):
You should careful lest you start agreeing again with your buddy Lotus,
whose anthropomorphisms range from the mildly amusing to the doubled
over in near-fatal laughter, and engaging in anthropomorphic projections
yourself:
I myself give these rights to any animal in
my presence. Why can I not feel aggressive
toward anyone who flouts these rights?
http://tinyurl.com/gkcj

> and
>
> "Ever seen what happens to various ruminants as they're
> stalked and hunted by large cats? Slaughterhouses may
> be messy, but they're not cruel."
> Usual Suspect http://tinyurl.com/yu6eq


Nothing in that even implies that I think either slaughterhouses or large cats
are cruel.

> and
>
> "Suffering results for all animals whether they're
> eaten by humans or other animals. Indeed, many
> other predators are less humane than humans."
> usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2ba7f
>
> It's clear from those quotes that


....Dreck likes to stir up shit.

<snip of patent lies>

  #10 (permalink)   Report Post  
Jonathan Ball
 
Posts: n/a
Default illogic of the lard ass: dreck can't stop shit-stirring

The title alone is worth a case of Sierra Nevada Pale
Ale; just tell me where to send it.



  #11 (permalink)   Report Post  
Rubystars
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect


"ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 11 May 2004 16:11:07 GMT, "Rubystars" >

wrote:
>
> >"ipse dixit" > wrote in message
> .. .
> >> Here are "usual suspect's" quotes that Jonathan desperately
> >> wants the reader to forget about (below).
> >>
> >> [start Mmhsb]
> >> > natural predators & a natural life is cruel?
> >> [usual suspect]
> >> Yes. Watch the Discovery Channel sometime.
> >> usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2c9ac
> >>
> >> and
> >>
> >> "Ever seen what happens to various ruminants as they're
> >> stalked and hunted by large cats? Slaughterhouses may
> >> be messy, but they're not cruel."
> >> Usual Suspect http://tinyurl.com/yu6eq
> >>
> >> and
> >>
> >> "Suffering results for all animals whether they're
> >> eaten by humans or other animals. Indeed, many
> >> other predators are less humane than humans."
> >> usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2ba7f
> >>
> >> It's clear from those quotes that "usual suspect" believes
> >> natural predation is cruel while human predation isn't, but
> >> both he and Jonathan Ball are doing their level best between
> >> themselves to stop the readers on these animal related
> >> groups getting to read them.
> >>
> >> They have lied, edited my posts, changed the newsgroup
> >> titles to make replying to them awkward, and just about
> >> anything they can think of. What a pair of liars, eh?

> >
> >
> >I agree that when natural predation happens, the animal isn't being
> >consciously cruel, but the animal who is killed does suffer, and that

fact
> >can't be diminished. There's no moral significance to this because the
> >predator isnt making any kind of "decision" to do this, just following
> >instincts.

>
> Yes, but my point here is that "usual suspect" has openly
> lied by trying to wriggle away from his quotes which say
> he finds natural predation cruel. Most normal-thinking
> people already know that natural predation isn't cruel, but
> "usual suspect" made the mistake in claiming it is to head
> off any criticisms from those who object to human predation.


I think the point is that the suffering experienced from natural predation
is often greater than the suffering experienced from humane slaughter
methods.

-Rubystars


  #12 (permalink)   Report Post  
Ray
 
Posts: n/a
Default illogic of the lard ass: dreck can't stop shit-stirring


"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> The title alone is worth a case of Sierra Nevada Pale
> Ale; just tell me where to send it.


Straight into the **** pot ~~jonnie~~, the best place for 'Chemical' beer.
>



  #13 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

On Tue, 11 May 2004 17:30:28 +0100, ipse dixit > wrote:

>On Tue, 11 May 2004 09:23:35 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
>>"Rubystars" > wrote in message m...
>>> "ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
>>> >
>>> > Here are "usual suspect's" quotes that Jonathan desperately
>>> > wants the reader to forget about (below).
>>> >
>>> > [start Mmhsb]
>>> > > natural predators & a natural life is cruel?
>>> > [usual suspect]
>>> > Yes. Watch the Discovery Channel sometime.
>>> > usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2c9ac
>>> >
>>> > and
>>> >
>>> > "Ever seen what happens to various ruminants as they're
>>> > stalked and hunted by large cats? Slaughterhouses may
>>> > be messy, but they're not cruel."
>>> > Usual Suspect http://tinyurl.com/yu6eq
>>> >
>>> > and
>>> >
>>> > "Suffering results for all animals whether they're
>>> > eaten by humans or other animals. Indeed, many
>>> > other predators are less humane than humans."
>>> > usual suspect http://tinyurl.com/2ba7f
>>> >
>>> > It's clear from those quotes that "usual suspect" believes
>>> > natural predation is cruel while human predation isn't, but
>>> > both he and Jonathan Ball are doing their level best between
>>> > themselves to stop the readers on these animal related
>>> > groups getting to read them.
>>> >
>>> > They have lied, edited my posts, changed the newsgroup
>>> > titles to make replying to them awkward, and just about
>>> > anything they can think of. What a pair of liars, eh?
>>>
>>> I agree that when natural predation happens, the animal isn't being
>>> consciously cruel, but the animal who is killed does suffer, and that fact
>>> can't be diminished. There's no moral significance to this because the
>>> predator isnt making any kind of "decision" to do this, just following
>>> instincts.
>>>
>>> Human actions have moral significance because we can choose
>>> what to do. With that said, the fact that we provide slaughter
>>> that is often more humane than
>>> a death by predation in the wild would be, is a significant point to be
>>> made. After all, humans could attack a cow with spears or we could use
>>> humane slaughter methods including stunning.

>>
>>You've got it exactly right. Cruel also means simply causing pain and
>>suffering, based on that definition, nature is arguably more cruel than
>>captivity.

>
>PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.


I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT THIS. Dutch - what
the heck did you do that for - and at a time like this, too! Jeeze!
Well done though ;-) I can always rely on you.
  #14 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

On Tue, 11 May 2004 18:05:36 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:

>>>>> After all, humans could attack a cow with spears or we could use
>>>>>humane slaughter methods including stunning.
>>>>
>>>>You've got it exactly right. Cruel also means simply causing pain and
>>>>suffering, based on that definition, nature is arguably more cruel than
>>>>captivity.
>>>
>>>PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.

>>
>>
>> I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT Dutch's COLOSSAL STUPIDITY!

>
>Well, suit yourself, prick-cheese.


That timing was a peach. Admit it; you laughed your
****ing head off. The perfect close to a long day.
See you tomorrow, Jon.
  #15 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect


"ipse dixit" > wrote

> Most normal-thinking
> people already know that natural predation isn't cruel


Ipse dixit, most people think that nature *is* cruel, not just predation,
but animals starving, drowning, or freezing to death.




  #16 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

"ipse dixit" > wrote

> >You've got it exactly right. Cruel also means simply causing pain and
> >suffering, based on that definition, nature is arguably more cruel than
> >captivity.

>
> PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.


Your brain-dead ignorance never ceases to amaze, Nash.


  #17 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect, and now Dutch as well

"ipse dixit" > wrote
> On Tue, 11 May 2004 09:17:33 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> >Are you still ranting on about this? I thought you'd have had the sense

to
> >drop it by now..
> >

> Tell me why natural predation is cruel, Dutch.


See 2. below

Cruel:
1.. Disposed to inflict pain or suffering.
2.. Causing suffering; painful.
man, you're thick.


  #18 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

"ipse dixit" > wrote

> >>You've got it exactly right. Cruel also means simply causing pain and
> >>suffering, based on that definition, nature is arguably more cruel than
> >>captivity.

> >
> >PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.

>
> I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT THIS. Dutch - what
> the heck did you do that for - and at a time like this, too! Jeeze!
> Well done though ;-) I can always rely on you.


I don't doubt that you actually are this clueless Nash. You really are a
one-of-a-kind dimwit. I guess that's something anyway..


  #19 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

"ipse dixit" > wrote
> On Tue, 11 May 2004 18:05:36 GMT, Jonathan Ball >

wrote:
>
> >>>>> After all, humans could attack a cow with spears or we could use
> >>>>>humane slaughter methods including stunning.
> >>>>
> >>>>You've got it exactly right. Cruel also means simply causing pain and
> >>>>suffering, based on that definition, nature is arguably more cruel

than
> >>>>captivity.
> >>>
> >>>PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.
> >>
> >>
> >> I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT Dutch's COLOSSAL STUPIDITY!

> >
> >Well, suit yourself, prick-cheese.

>
> That timing was a peach. Admit it; you laughed your
> ****ing head off. The perfect close to a long day.
> See you tomorrow, Jon.


Scurry away and gather yourself for another bout of ****ing up, the
inevitability of it is depressing. This latest campaign of brainless
equivocation has your signature all over it.

Here's some food for thought, I can only put it in front of you, I can't
make you eat.

Cruel:
1.. Disposed to inflict pain or suffering.
2.. Causing suffering; painful.
NOTE: Not only 1. but also 2.

It's perfectly correct for example to say "Nature can be cruel". Here are a
few links out of 456 where that phrase alone is correctly used.
http://home.tiscali.be/guild.discoverers/spirit.html
http://www.sensorium.org/sensingjapa.../mizu_pro.html
http://www.geocities.com/Baja/Dunes/.../wadispage.htm
http://www.legitgov.org/essay_macelv...md_051003.html
http://www.governor.state.ok.us/disp...article_type=0
http://www.pressrepublican.com/outdo...072004out1.htm
"For the second year in a row I am watching white-tailed deer struggle
through the winter. I know these deer. I have seen them almost daily for
several years... Nature can be cruel."

It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was being cruel when he
broke the broom over his dog's back." Lightbulb coming on yet brick-head?

It *is* nice that your narrow-minded ignorance provides you with such
entertainment though, it probably saves taxpayer a hefty bill for
anti-depressants..


  #20 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

On Tue, 11 May 2004 11:49:38 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Dutch wrote:
>> >>>>Cruel also means simply causing pain and
>> >>>>suffering, based on that definition, nature
>> >>>>is arguably more cruel than captivity.
>> >>>
>> >>>PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.
>> >>
>> >> I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT Dutch's COLOSSAL STUPIDITY!
>> >
>> >Well, suit yourself, prick-cheese.

>>
>> That timing was a peach. Admit it; you laughed your
>> ****ing head off. The perfect close to a long day.
>> See you tomorrow, Jon.

>
>Scurry away


"Get this, ****WIT:

If a predator kills a prey animal, there is no moral
meaning to it.

If you prevent a predator from killing prey, you have
not done a good deed.

Comparing our treatment of livestock to predators'
"treatment" of prey is misguided at best, and stupid
when you keep doing it after having had explained to
you why it's misguided.

One more to jam down your throat with my boot,
****WIT: non-human predators are never cruel.
They can't be."
Jonathan Ball to a ****wit 2004-05-11

It's clear that you believe natural predation is cruel
and that removing it is a benefit to wild animals. With
that in mind and your earlier quotes below, you've
conceded to both of Harrison's claims;

1) That animals benefit from getting the chance
to experience life;
[start ipse dixit]
> The quotes and admissions below prove you
> believe an animal benefits from getting to
> experience life and being able to reproduce after
> their predators have been removed

[Dutch]
Of course they do.
[end]

2) That "this is a "moral consideration" issue.""
"I have said this is a "moral consideration" issue."
Dutch 2003-11-28

Both these arguments are Harrison's, and like
him, when asked to explain how they benefit
and why it's a moral consideration issue, you
reply that it is "self-evident" or "obvious".

> [ipse dixit]
> Then explain how they benefit;
> 1) from living
> 2) from producing

[Dutch]
It's self-evident
[end]

As usual your past quotes have come back to bite you.
You believe our moral consideration to remove natural
predators is a good thing and that we should continue to
farm animals because "nature is arguably more cruel
than captivity." You follow the logic of the larder, Dutch.


  #21 (permalink)   Report Post  
Jonathan Ball
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - accordingto usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

ipse dixit wrote:

> On Tue, 11 May 2004 11:49:38 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
>>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>>
>>>>>>>Dutch wrote:
>>>>>>>Cruel also means simply causing pain and
>>>>>>>suffering, based on that definition, nature
>>>>>>>is arguably more cruel than captivity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.
>>>>>
>>>>>I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT MY OWN COLOSSAL STUPIDITY!
>>>>
>>>>Well, suit yourself, prick-cheese.
>>>
>>>That timing was a peach. Admit it; you laughed your
>>>****ing head off. The perfect close to a long day.
>>>See you tomorrow, Jon.

>>
>>Scurry away

>
>
> "Get this, ****WIT:
>
> If a predator kills a prey animal, there is no moral
> meaning to it.
>
> If you prevent a predator from killing prey, you have
> not done a good deed.
>
> Comparing our treatment of livestock to predators'
> "treatment" of prey is misguided at best, and stupid
> when you keep doing it after having had explained to
> you why it's misguided.
>
> One more to jam down your throat with my boot,
> ****WIT: non-human predators are never cruel.
> They can't be."
> Jonathan Ball to a ****wit 2004-05-11
>
> It's clear that you believe natural predation is cruel
> and that removing it is a benefit to wild animals.


You're replying to a post by Dutch. How does offering
something I've said allow you to reach any conclusion
about what Dutch believes? You stupid fat ****.

You stupid, crippled, dying fat ****.

  #22 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

On Wed, 12 May 2004 15:06:59 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:

>ipse dixit wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 11 May 2004 11:49:38 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>
>>>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>>>
>>>>>>>>Dutch wrote:
>>>>>>>>Cruel also means simply causing pain and
>>>>>>>>suffering, based on that definition, nature
>>>>>>>>is arguably more cruel than captivity.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT MY OWN COLOSSAL STUPIDITY!
>>>>>
>>>>>Well, suit yourself, prick-cheese.
>>>>
>>>>That timing was a peach. Admit it; you laughed your
>>>>****ing head off. The perfect close to a long day.
>>>>See you tomorrow, Jon.
>>>
>>>Scurry away

>>
>>
>> "Get this, ****WIT:
>>
>> If a predator kills a prey animal, there is no moral
>> meaning to it.
>>
>> If you prevent a predator from killing prey, you have
>> not done a good deed.
>>
>> Comparing our treatment of livestock to predators'
>> "treatment" of prey is misguided at best, and stupid
>> when you keep doing it after having had explained to
>> you why it's misguided.
>>
>> One more to jam down your throat with my boot,
>> ****WIT: non-human predators are never cruel.
>> They can't be."
>> Jonathan Ball to a ****wit 2004-05-11
>>
>> It's clear that you believe natural predation is cruel
>> and that removing it is a benefit to wild animals.

>
>You're replying to a post by Dutch. How does offering
>something I've said allow you to reach any conclusion
>about what Dutch believes?


It's something you wrote to a ****wit, and Dutch
IS a ****wit. He's always been a ****wit.

"Pigs and cows are domesticated animals that
we create, breed and raise, giving them a life as
David says, in exchange for the use of their hides.
We give them life. They give us their lives, and
our lifestyles. It's a mutually beneficial contract,
which I believe includes treating them with respect."
Dutch 2001-01-19

He knows it, too. In context;

> > [start Dutch]
> > Pigs and cows are domesticated animals that
> > we create, breed and raise, giving them a life
> > as David says, in exchange for the use of their
> > hides. We give them life. They give us their
> > lives, and our lifestyles. It's a mutually beneficial
> > contract, which I believe includes treating them
> > with respect. The only contract I have with mice
> > is you get out of my grain and I won't kill you.
> > Isn't that the way YOU look at mice? Maybe
> > we're not so different after all.

> [Polly]
> Although we know there's no literal "contract", I
> do like your way of stating the fact that both humans
> and animals benefit from the animals' domestication.

[Dutch]
Thanks. I am beginning to find myself quoting David..
who'da thunk???
Dutch http://tinyurl.com/2jdml

"The cow is our benefactor in a mutually beneficial
partnership."
Dutch 2001-01-21

heh heh heh
  #23 (permalink)   Report Post  
Jonathan Ball
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - accordingto usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

ipse dixit wrote:
> On Wed, 12 May 2004 15:06:59 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>
>
>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Tue, 11 May 2004 11:49:38 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Dutch wrote:
>>>>>>>>>Cruel also means simply causing pain and
>>>>>>>>>suffering, based on that definition, nature
>>>>>>>>>is arguably more cruel than captivity.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT MY OWN COLOSSAL STUPIDITY!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Well, suit yourself, prick-cheese.



>>
>>You're replying to a post by Dutch. How does offering
>>something I've said allow you to reach any conclusion
>>about what Dutch believes?

>
>
> It's something you wrote to a ****wit


How does something I've said about David ****wit
Harrison allow you to reach any conclusion about what
Dutch believes? It doesn't. Dutch doesn't believe
what ****wit believes. You know this.

You just aren't worth the time of day, Dreck. You've
whored yourself beyond redemption.

  #24 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

On Wed, 12 May 2004 15:58:57 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:

> Dutch doesn't believe what ****wit believes.


I've provided his quotes proving he holds the
very same views as Harrison. You snipped
them all away, of course, because you always
snip evidence that defeats you.

"The cow is our benefactor in a mutually beneficial
partnership."
Dutch 2001-01-21

"Pigs and cows are domesticated animals that
we create, breed and raise, giving them a life as
David says, in exchange for the use of their hides.
We give them life. They give us their lives, and
our lifestyles. It's a mutually beneficial contract,
which I believe includes treating them with respect."
Dutch 2001-01-19


  #25 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH


"ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 11 May 2004 11:49:38 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >"ipse dixit" > wrote
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>Dutch wrote:
> >> >>>>Cruel also means simply causing pain and
> >> >>>>suffering, based on that definition, nature
> >> >>>>is arguably more cruel than captivity.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.
> >> >>
> >> >> I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT Dutch's COLOSSAL STUPIDITY!
> >> >
> >> >Well, suit yourself, prick-cheese.
> >>
> >> That timing was a peach. Admit it; you laughed your
> >> ****ing head off. The perfect close to a long day.
> >> See you tomorrow, Jon.


Snipping and changing the subject won't work Nash. Get this through your
thick head;

"Nature can be cruel."

Cruel:
1.. Disposed to inflict pain or suffering.
2.. Causing suffering; painful.
NOTE: Not only 1. but also 2.

It's perfectly correct for example to say "Nature can be cruel". Here are a
few links out of 456 where that phrase alone is correctly used.
http://home.tiscali.be/guild.discoverers/spirit.html
http://www.sensorium.org/sensingjapa.../mizu_pro.html
http://www.geocities.com/Baja/Dunes/.../wadispage.htm
http://www.legitgov.org/essay_macelv...md_051003.html
http://www.governor.state.ok.us/disp...article_type=0
http://www.pressrepublican.com/outdo...072004out1.htm
"For the second year in a row I am watching white-tailed deer struggle
through the winter. I know these deer. I have seen them almost daily for
several years... Nature can be cruel."

It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was being cruel when he
broke the broom over his dog's back." Lightbulb coming on yet brick-head?

It *is* nice that your narrow-minded ignorance provides you with such
entertainment though, it probably saves taxpayer a hefty bill for
anti-depressants..




  #26 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:50:50 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>"ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
>> On Tue, 11 May 2004 11:49:38 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>> >"ipse dixit" > wrote
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>Dutch wrote:
>> >> >>>>Cruel also means simply causing pain and
>> >> >>>>suffering, based on that definition, nature
>> >> >>>>is arguably more cruel than captivity.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT Dutch's COLOSSAL STUPIDITY!
>> >> >
>> >> >Well, suit yourself, prick-cheese.
>> >>
>> >> That timing was a peach. Admit it; you laughed your
>> >> ****ing head off. The perfect close to a long day.
>> >> See you tomorrow, Jon.

>
>Snipping and changing the subject won't work Nash. Get this through your
>thick head;
>
>"Nature can be cruel."


No, it cannot be cruel.

"Get this, ****WIT:

If a predator kills a prey animal, there is no moral
meaning to it.

If you prevent a predator from killing prey, you have
not done a good deed.

Comparing our treatment of livestock to predators'
"treatment" of prey is misguided at best, and stupid
when you keep doing it after having had explained to
you why it's misguided.

One more to jam down your throat with my boot,
****WIT: non-human predators are never cruel.
They can't be."
Jonathan Ball to a ****wit 2004-05-11

>It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was being cruel when he
>broke the broom over his dog's back."


Have you any evidence to support that claim?

  #27 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH


"ipse dixit" > wrote
> On Wed, 12 May 2004 15:58:57 GMT, Jonathan Ball >

wrote:
>
> > Dutch doesn't believe what ****wit believes.

>
> I've provided his quotes proving he holds the
> very same views as Harrison.


You showed that I made statements 3 1/2 years ago that appear superficially
similiar to ****wit's position. How does that equate to my holding the "very
same views" as him now?

You once claimed that ALL meat-eaters subscribe to The Logic of the Larder,
now you say it's 50%+1. Which one is bullshit? Answer - both.

I note that you have conveniently tried to change the subject of this
conversation. "Nature can be cruel" is a correct turn of phrase, and nobody
that says it is suggesting that nature is, or that wild animals are moral
agents. That was another in a long list of your silly campaigns, and you're
just dropping it like a hot potato to get into another one.



  #28 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

"ipse dixit" > wrote
> On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:50:50 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >"ipse dixit" > wrote
> >> On Tue, 11 May 2004 11:49:38 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >> >"ipse dixit" > wrote
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>>Dutch wrote:
> >> >> >>>>Cruel also means simply causing pain and
> >> >> >>>>suffering, based on that definition, nature
> >> >> >>>>is arguably more cruel than captivity.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT Dutch's COLOSSAL STUPIDITY!
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Well, suit yourself, prick-cheese.
> >> >>
> >> >> That timing was a peach. Admit it; you laughed your
> >> >> ****ing head off. The perfect close to a long day.
> >> >> See you tomorrow, Jon.

> >
> >Snipping and changing the subject won't work Nash. Get this through your
> >thick head;
> >
> >"Nature can be cruel."

>
> No, it cannot be cruel.


Then why do millions of people say it?

> "Get this, ****WIT:
>
> If a predator kills a prey animal, there is no moral
> meaning to it.


I didn't say there was a moral meaning to a predator killing a prey animal,
I said that nature can be cruel.

> If you prevent a predator from killing prey, you have
> not done a good deed.


I didn't say that if you prevent a predator from killing prey you have done
a good deed, I said that nature can be cruel.

> Comparing our treatment of livestock to predators'
> "treatment" of prey is misguided at best, and stupid
> when you keep doing it after having had explained to
> you why it's misguided.


Perhaps it's misguided if one uses the pain inflicted on prey by predators
as an excuse to inflict pain on livestock, but I'm not doing that, and I
don't believe anyone here was doing that. Perhaps the idea is in fact to
obtain perspective to treat animals *differently* than nature treats them.

> One more to jam down your throat with my boot,
> ****WIT: non-human predators are never cruel.
> They can't be."
> Jonathan Ball to a ****wit 2004-05-11


That means that non-human predators are not moral actors and cannot be
"cruel" in the human sense. The fact remains that the natural world is still
"cruel" when viewed *in human terms*, without judgement or expectation that
it should or could be any different (see 2. in the dictionary.com definition
of cruel)
>
> >It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was being cruel when

he
> >broke the broom over his dog's back."

>
> Have you any evidence to support that claim?


Are you denying it?


  #29 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

On Wed, 12 May 2004 11:29:06 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>> On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:50:50 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>> >"ipse dixit" > wrote
>> >> On Tue, 11 May 2004 11:49:38 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>> >> >"ipse dixit" > wrote
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>>Dutch wrote:
>> >> >> >>>>Cruel also means simply causing pain and
>> >> >> >>>>suffering, based on that definition, nature
>> >> >> >>>>is arguably more cruel than captivity.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT Dutch's COLOSSAL STUPIDITY!
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Well, suit yourself, prick-cheese.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> That timing was a peach. Admit it; you laughed your
>> >> >> ****ing head off. The perfect close to a long day.
>> >> >> See you tomorrow, Jon.
>> >
>> >Snipping and changing the subject won't work Nash. Get this through your
>> >thick head;
>> >
>> >"Nature can be cruel."

>>
>> No, it cannot be cruel.

>
>Then why do millions of people say it?


Ask them.

>> "Get this, ****WIT:
>>
>> If a predator kills a prey animal, there is no moral
>> meaning to it.

>
>I didn't say there was a moral meaning to a predator killing a prey animal,
>I said that nature can be cruel.


And you're wrong to state such a stupid thing.

>> >It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was
>> >being cruel when he broke the broom over his dog's back."

>>
>> Have you any evidence to support that claim?

>
>Are you denying it?


Yes, I am. Your source for that information admitted
that they had in fact lied about me and my family;

From: Allison McDowall
To: **********************
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 9:42 AM
Subject: Family man - Derek?

"I can lie about your family if i want, especially after the way you
have behaved towards David even his own mother put the phone
down on him without saying what she was upset about and now
Dave will probably never talk to her again. If she is upset with
him about the news group then that's her problem because Dave
has had nothing to so with that stupid ng for months now."
[end]
http://tinyurl.com/2qpss


  #30 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

On Wed, 12 May 2004 11:13:40 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>> On Wed, 12 May 2004 15:58:57 GMT, Jonathan Ball >wrote:
>>
>> > Dutch doesn't believe what ****wit believes.

>>
>> I've provided his quotes proving he holds the
>> very same views as Harrison.

>
>You showed that I made statements 3 1/2 years ago that appear superficially
>similiar to ****wit's position.


They are more superficially similar, and you
admitted this when you wrote that you were
in fact quoting him;

> > [start Dutch]
> > Pigs and cows are domesticated animals that
> > we create, breed and raise, giving them a life
> > as David says, in exchange for the use of their
> > hides. We give them life. They give us their
> > lives, and our lifestyles. It's a mutually beneficial
> > contract, which I believe includes treating them
> > with respect. The only contract I have with mice
> > is you get out of my grain and I won't kill you.
> > Isn't that the way YOU look at mice? Maybe
> > we're not so different after all.

> [Polly]
> Although we know there's no literal "contract", I
> do like your way of stating the fact that both humans
> and animals benefit from the animals' domestication.

[Dutch]
Thanks. I am beginning to find myself quoting David..
who'da thunk???
Dutch http://tinyurl.com/2jdml

When are you going to stop lying?

Also, you've made recent statements owning up to
your belief in that animals benefit from getting to
experience life. Jon sipped them away while trying
to dig you out of this mess, but Google still has the
proof that you believe natural predation is cruel
and that removing it is a benefit to wild animals. With
that in mind and your earlier quotes below, you've
conceded to both of Harrison's claims;

1) That animals benefit from getting the chance
to experience life;
[start ipse dixit]
> The quotes and admissions below prove you
> believe an animal benefits from getting to
> experience life and being able to reproduce after
> their predators have been removed

[Dutch]
Of course they do.
[end]

2) That "this is a "moral consideration" issue.""
"I have said this is a "moral consideration" issue."
Dutch 2003-11-28

Both these arguments are Harrison's, and like
him, when asked to explain how they benefit
and why it's a moral consideration issue, you
reply that it is "self-evident" or "obvious".

> [ipse dixit]
> Then explain how they benefit;
> 1) from living
> 2) from producing

[Dutch]
It's self-evident
[end]

As usual your past quotes have come back to bite you.
You believe our moral consideration to remove natural
predators is a good thing and that we should continue to
farm animals because "nature is arguably more cruel
than captivity." You follow the logic of the larder, Dutch.


  #31 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

On Wed, 12 May 2004 20:27:04 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:

>ipse dixit wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 May 2004 11:29:06 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:50:50 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

[..]
>>>>>It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was
>>>>>being cruel when he broke the broom over his dog's back."
>>>>
>>>>Have you any evidence to support that claim?
>>>
>>>Are you denying it?

>>
>> Yes, I am. Your source for that information admitted
>> that they had in fact lied about me and my family;
>>
>> From: Allison McDowall
>> To: **********************
>> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 9:42 AM
>> Subject: Family man - Derek?
>>
>> "I can lie about your family if i want

>
>WRONG. That is NOT an admission of having lied about
>you and your family, cocksucker. It is a statement
>that she CAN do it.


She openly stated here on Usenet that she lied about me
and my family;

[start me]
> In ths email you sent my sister, (below) it's plain that you and
> David have lied about me, and that even his own mother, my
> mother too, can't bear to even speak to him over the phone
> because of it. Now, how many mothers would do a thing like
> that without a damn good reason?

[Allison McDowell using the nym "Belinda Laden"]
Oh yes that old one.. well your sister did hate you at that time
for trying to rail-road her into coming on google.
[end] http://tinyurl.com/3xoa8

So much for your sources of information, Jon, especially
since I've repeatedly shown they have lied. heh heh heh

>She did not lie about you breaking the broom over your
>dog's back. You did it.


She lied, and admitted she lied. Even my own sister
was about to come here and sort her out for it.

[Allison McDowell using the nym "Belinda Laden"]
> At least I'm not a NASH though. hahahhahahaha
>

I can understand David wanting to distance himself from me,
seeing as I've played such a large part in helping his ex girlfriend
keep him away from his kids all this time, but changing his
surname from Nash to Morrison only shows he's been rail-roaded
out of the family, that's all, and no wonder considering all the things
he's done and admitted to here.

In ths email you sent my sister, (below) it's plain that you and
David have lied about me, and that even his own mother, my
mother too, can't bear to even speak to him over the phone
because of it. Now, how many mothers would do a thing like
that without a damn good reason?

From: Allison McDowall
To: **********************
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 9:42 AM
Subject: Family man - Derek?

"I can lie about your family if i want, especially after the way you
have behaved towards David even his own mother put the phone
down on him without saying what she was upset about and now
Dave will probably never talk to her again. If she is upset with
him about the news group then that's her problem because Dave
has had nothing to so with that stupid ng for months now."
[end]

Why would David's own sister, my sister too, forward me all
the emails you both sent her if it weren't for the fact that you
lied about me and that she thought I might want some proof?
In these emails my sister sent you;

From: *my sister*
Reply-To: **********************
To: "Belinda Laden"
Subject: Family man - Derek?
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 23:16:24 +0100

Alison dear, if you ever tell lies about my mother and myself
again.. there will be trouble......i really do not want to get
involved, but you are forcing my arm.
[end]

From: *my sister*
To: Allison McDowall
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 10:16 AM
Subject: Family man - Derek?

I kept well out of it until u mentioned me and my mother..
You have instigated moves against me and mine.. You are
not family Alison.. I will bring you down. Want to take
me on too??
[end]

From :*my sister*
To: Allison McDowall
Sent: Date :Fri, 20 Sep 2002 21:21:05 +0100

no need for you to get soooooo upset and excited Alison, its
really not good for you my dear ))))

You will be so pleased to know its all sorted this end.. and
it wasn't that hard to come clean now was it sweetheart???.....
although maybe next time you might try a little harder to own
up a little sooner????

Now that we know that it was YOU who was the instigator,
the liar, the Shafter MY mother is more than happy ......and
that my dear is all I care about..

Im not sure quite how you are going to achieve leaving the
family when you never belonged in the first place, but like all
the other lies you connived and concocted .. Im sure you will
find a way
[end]

it looked likely she was about to come here and put you
both straight herself, but she agreed with me that it would
only result in a slanging match, and took my advice not to.

btw, why is it that David leaves all the ranting to you? Hasn't
he the guts or know-how to take me on and address the lies
he's told? Can't he cope against me?
[end] http://tinyurl.com/2qpss

Nice try, Jon, but I have evidence that your sources
have lied about me and my family, so you lose, and
your credibility suffers every time you repeat their
lies because I've shown you all this before. You
have zero credibility and ability.
  #32 (permalink)   Report Post  
Jonathan Ball
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? Dreck Nash breakinga broom over his dog is cruel

ipse dixit wrote:

> On Wed, 12 May 2004 20:27:04 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>
>
>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 11:29:06 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>
>>>>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:50:50 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
> [..]
>
>>>>>>It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was
>>>>>>being cruel when he broke the broom over his dog's back."
>>>>>
>>>>>Have you any evidence to support that claim?
>>>>
>>>>Are you denying it?
>>>
>>>Yes, I am. Your source for that information admitted
>>>that they had in fact lied about me and my family;
>>>
>>> From: Allison McDowall
>>> To: **********************
>>> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 9:42 AM
>>> Subject: Family man - Derek?
>>>
>>>"I can lie about your family if i want

>>
>>WRONG. That is NOT an admission of having lied about
>>you and your family, cocksucker. It is a statement
>>that she CAN do it.

>
>
> She openly stated here on Usenet that she lied about me
> and my family;


No, she didn't.

>
> [start me]
>
>>In ths email you sent my sister, (below) it's plain that you and
>>David have lied about me, and that even his own mother, my
>>mother too, can't bear to even speak to him over the phone
>>because of it. Now, how many mothers would do a thing like
>>that without a damn good reason?

>
> [Allison McDowell using the nym "Belinda Laden"]
> Oh yes that old one.. well your sister did hate you at that time
> for trying to rail-road her into coming on google.
> [end] http://tinyurl.com/3xoa8


No admission of lying in that. YOU lied in saying she
admitted to HAVING lied. You are a chronic liar.

>
> So much for your sources of information, Jon, especially
> since I've repeatedly shown they have lied. heh heh heh
>
>
>>She did not lie about you breaking the broom over your
>>dog's back. You did it.

>
>
> She lied, and admitted she lied.


No, she didn't. You're lying now.

>
> [Allison McDowell using the nym "Belinda Laden"]
>
>>At least I'm not a NASH though. hahahhahahaha
>>

> [...]
>
> From: Allison McDowall
> To: **********************
> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 9:42 AM
> Subject: Family man - Derek?
>
> "I can lie about your family if i want,


No admission to HAVING lied, you lying shitbag.

> Nice try


Nice WIN, you mean, you unethical lying cocksucker.
The accusation that you broke the broom handle over the
dog's back is true.

  #33 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel, according to meatarians trying to justify livestock farming

On Wed, 12 May 2004 21:08:38 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:

>ipse dixit wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 May 2004 20:27:04 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 11:29:06 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>>>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:50:50 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:

>>
>> [..]
>>
>>>>>>>It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was
>>>>>>>being cruel when he broke the broom over his dog's back."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Have you any evidence to support that claim?
>>>>>
>>>>>Are you denying it?
>>>>
>>>>Yes, I am. Your source for that information admitted
>>>>that they had in fact lied about me and my family;
>>>>
>>>> From: Allison McDowall
>>>> To: **********************
>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 9:42 AM
>>>> Subject: Family man - Derek?
>>>>
>>>>"I can lie about your family if i want
>>>
>>>WRONG. That is NOT an admission of having lied about
>>>you and your family, cocksucker. It is a statement
>>>that she CAN do it.

>>
>> She openly stated here on Usenet that she lied about me
>> and my family;

>
>No, she didn't.


She certainly did, and this is shown by reading her
admission in the links I provided. "Oh yes that old
one"
>>
>> [start me]
>>
>>>In ths email you sent my sister, (below) it's plain that you and
>>>David have lied about me, and that even his own mother, my
>>>mother too, can't bear to even speak to him over the phone
>>>because of it. Now, how many mothers would do a thing like
>>>that without a damn good reason?

>>
>> [Allison McDowell using the nym "Belinda Laden"]
>> Oh yes that old one.. well your sister did hate you at that time
>> for trying to rail-road her into coming on google.
>> [end] http://tinyurl.com/3xoa8

>
>No admission of lying in that. YOU lied in saying she
>admitted to HAVING lied. You are a chronic liar.


You're intentionally ignoring her opening comment, "Oh
yes that old one." Also, you'll see she doesn't challenge
my statement;
"In ths email you sent my sister, (below) it's plain that you and
David have lied about me, and that even his own mother, my
mother too, can't bear to even speak to him over the phone
because of it."
but admits to lying instead.

>> So much for your sources of information, Jon, especially
>> since I've repeatedly shown they have lied. heh heh heh


Again, so much for your sources....

  #34 (permalink)   Report Post  
Jonathan Ball
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? Dreck Nash breakinga broom over his dog is cruel

ipse dixit wrote:

> On Wed, 12 May 2004 21:08:38 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>
>
>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 20:27:04 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>>>
>>>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 11:29:06 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:50:50 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>
>>>[..]
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was
>>>>>>>>being cruel when he broke the broom over his dog's back."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Have you any evidence to support that claim?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Are you denying it?
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, I am. Your source for that information admitted
>>>>>that they had in fact lied about me and my family;
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Allison McDowall
>>>>> To: **********************
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 9:42 AM
>>>>> Subject: Family man - Derek?
>>>>>
>>>>>"I can lie about your family if i want
>>>>
>>>>WRONG. That is NOT an admission of having lied about
>>>>you and your family, cocksucker. It is a statement
>>>>that she CAN do it.
>>>
>>>She openly stated here on Usenet that she lied about me
>>>and my family;

>>
>>No, she didn't.

>
>
> She certainly did


No, she didn't. She did not explicitly admit to HAVING
lied, and nothing she wrote could be reasonably taken
as an implied admission to it, either.

YOU are lying.

  #35 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? Dreck Nash breaking a broom over his dog is cruel

On Wed, 12 May 2004 21:32:28 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:

>ipse dixit wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 12 May 2004 21:08:38 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 20:27:04 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 11:29:06 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:50:50 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>[..]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was
>>>>>>>>>being cruel when he broke the broom over his dog's back."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Have you any evidence to support that claim?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Are you denying it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes, I am. Your source for that information admitted
>>>>>>that they had in fact lied about me and my family;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Allison McDowall
>>>>>> To: **********************
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 9:42 AM
>>>>>> Subject: Family man - Derek?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"I can lie about your family if i want
>>>>>
>>>>>WRONG. That is NOT an admission of having lied about
>>>>>you and your family, cocksucker. It is a statement
>>>>>that she CAN do it.
>>>>
>>>>She openly stated here on Usenet that she lied about me
>>>>and my family;
>>>
>>>No, she didn't.

>>
>> She certainly did

>
>No, she didn't. She did not explicitly admit to HAVING
>lied, and nothing she wrote could be reasonably taken
>as an implied admission to it, either.


Here's proof that they lied, and owned up to it..
> [start]
> Anyway this group is only made up of 5 sad old cyber mates who abuse each other so who cares. We
> don't care what anybody thinks on that stupid group so why do you?
> Although dave has disowned you all, I still wont let derek off...****you obviously have not grasped the
> gravity of what derek has done***** (evil man). Dave has given me a free hand to say what i like because he does not
> touch this computer anymore, he hates them and is not interested in any news group crap. This is my
> hand and my thoughts and if you dont like it go away as you said you would.
>
> *I can lie about your family if i want,* especially after the way you have behaved towards David so what you are an arsehole...


Yes i can tell one little lie if I want... they don't like you so what
is the big deal if i embelished it
http://tinyurl.com/2q485

So, not only did they claim they COULD tell lies about me
and my family if they want, they also ADMIT to it, so you
lose.

heh heh heh


  #36 (permalink)   Report Post  
Jonathan Ball
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? Dreck Nash breakinga broom over his dog is cruel

ipse dixit wrote:

> On Wed, 12 May 2004 21:32:28 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>
>
>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 21:08:38 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 20:27:04 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 11:29:06 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:50:50 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>[..]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was
>>>>>>>>>>being cruel when he broke the broom over his dog's back."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Have you any evidence to support that claim?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Are you denying it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yes, I am. Your source for that information admitted
>>>>>>>that they had in fact lied about me and my family;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>From: Allison McDowall
>>>>>>>To: **********************
>>>>>>>Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 9:42 AM
>>>>>>>Subject: Family man - Derek?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"I can lie about your family if i want
>>>>>>
>>>>>>WRONG. That is NOT an admission of having lied about
>>>>>>you and your family, cocksucker. It is a statement
>>>>>>that she CAN do it.
>>>>>
>>>>>She openly stated here on Usenet that she lied about me
>>>>>and my family;
>>>>
>>>>No, she didn't.
>>>
>>>She certainly did

>>
>>No, she didn't. She did not explicitly admit to HAVING
>>lied, and nothing she wrote could be reasonably taken
>>as an implied admission to it, either.

>
>
> Here's proof that they lied, and owned up to it..
>
>>[start]
>>Anyway this group is only made up of 5 sad old cyber mates who abuse each other so who cares. We
>>don't care what anybody thinks on that stupid group so why do you?
>>Although dave has disowned you all, I still wont let derek off...****you obviously have not grasped the
>>gravity of what derek has done***** (evil man). Dave has given me a free hand to say what i like because he does not
>>touch this computer anymore, he hates them and is not interested in any news group crap. This is my
>>hand and my thoughts and if you dont like it go away as you said you would.
>>
>>*I can lie about your family if i want,* especially after the way you have behaved towards David so what you are an arsehole...

>
>
> Yes i can tell one little lie if I want


The only lie she told was to say that your mother told
your brother she (mum) thinks you're an arsehole.

The story about you breaking the broom over your dog's
back is true.

  #37 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? "Yes" - according to usual suspect AND NOW DUTCH

"ipse dixit" > wrote
> On Wed, 12 May 2004 11:29:06 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >"ipse dixit" > wrote
> >> On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:50:50 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >> >"ipse dixit" > wrote
> >> >> On Tue, 11 May 2004 11:49:38 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >> >> >"ipse dixit" > wrote
> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >>>>Dutch wrote:
> >> >> >> >>>>Cruel also means simply causing pain and
> >> >> >> >>>>suffering, based on that definition, nature
> >> >> >> >>>>is arguably more cruel than captivity.
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>PERFECT! Thanks for offering your stupidity to this, Dutch.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I JUST CAN'T STOP LAUGHING AT Dutch's COLOSSAL STUPIDITY!
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Well, suit yourself, prick-cheese.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> That timing was a peach. Admit it; you laughed your
> >> >> >> ****ing head off. The perfect close to a long day.
> >> >> >> See you tomorrow, Jon.
> >> >
> >> >Snipping and changing the subject won't work Nash. Get this through

your
> >> >thick head;
> >> >
> >> >"Nature can be cruel."
> >>
> >> No, it cannot be cruel.

> >
> >Then why do millions of people say it?

>
> Ask them.


I did as much, I went to a dozen websites of people who said it and read
what they had to say. Didn't you? I gave you the opportunity.

> >> "Get this, ****WIT:
> >>
> >> If a predator kills a prey animal, there is no moral
> >> meaning to it.

> >
> >I didn't say there was a moral meaning to a predator killing a prey

animal,
> >I said that nature can be cruel.

>
> And you're wrong to state such a stupid thing.


It's merely an observation about nature.

> >> >It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was
> >> >being cruel when he broke the broom over his dog's back."
> >>
> >> Have you any evidence to support that claim?

> >
> >Are you denying it?

>
> Yes, I am. Your source for that information admitted
> that they had in fact lied about me and my family;
>
> From: Allison McDowall
> To: **********************
> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 9:42 AM
> Subject: Family man - Derek?
>
> "I can lie about your family if i want, especially after the way you
> have behaved towards David even his own mother put the phone
> down on him without saying what she was upset about and now
> Dave will probably never talk to her again. If she is upset with
> him about the news group then that's her problem because Dave
> has had nothing to so with that stupid ng for months now."
> [end]
> http://tinyurl.com/2qpss


That's not my source, I got it from the horse's mouth. Does your dog still
cringe when he sees a broom in your hand?


  #38 (permalink)   Report Post  
ipse dixit
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? Dreck Nash breaking a broom over his dog is cruel

On Wed, 12 May 2004 21:45:32 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:

>ipse dixit wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 May 2004 21:32:28 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 21:08:38 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>>>>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 20:27:04 GMT, Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>>>>>>>ipse dixit wrote:
>>>>>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 11:29:06 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>"ipse dixit" > wrote
>>>>>>>>>>On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:50:50 -0700, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was
>>>>>>>>>>>being cruel when he broke the broom over his dog's back."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Have you any evidence to support that claim?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Are you denying it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Yes, I am. Your source for that information admitted
>>>>>>>>that they had in fact lied about me and my family;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>From: Allison McDowall
>>>>>>>>To: **********************
>>>>>>>>Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 9:42 AM
>>>>>>>>Subject: Family man - Derek?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"I can lie about your family if i want
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>WRONG. That is NOT an admission of having lied about
>>>>>>>you and your family, cocksucker. It is a statement
>>>>>>>that she CAN do it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>She openly stated here on Usenet that she lied about me
>>>>>>and my family;
>>>>>
>>>>>No, she didn't.
>>>>
>>>>She certainly did
>>>
>>>No, she didn't. She did not explicitly admit to HAVING
>>>lied, and nothing she wrote could be reasonably taken
>>>as an implied admission to it, either.

>>
>> Here's proof that they lied, and owned up to it..
>>
>>>[start]
>>>Anyway this group is only made up of 5 sad old cyber mates who abuse each other so who cares. We
>>>don't care what anybody thinks on that stupid group so why do you?
>>>Although dave has disowned you all, I still wont let derek off...****you obviously have not grasped the
>>>gravity of what derek has done***** (evil man). Dave has given me a free hand to say what i like because he does not
>>>touch this computer anymore, he hates them and is not interested in any news group crap. This is my
>>>hand and my thoughts and if you dont like it go away as you said you would.
>>>
>>>*I can lie about your family if i want,* especially after the way you have behaved towards David so what you are an arsehole...

>>
>> Yes i can tell one little lie if I want

>
>The only lie she told


So, you finally admit that she did lie about me
and my family. Excellent! That's all I need to
discredited her as a reliable source. Couple
that together with my sister's emails, which
Allison acknowledged were authentic, and
I have everything in my favour to prove I
never did the things they accused me of. In
fact, there's not even any room for doubt.

All they proved is that I have a twin brother
who resents me for keeping him away from
his children FOR LIFE and is willing to lie to
try getting his own back. All he succeeded in
doing was to disgrace himself to such an extent
that he lost our father's name. He changed it
by deed poll from Nash to Morrison. Get this;

[start Allison]
> You and your wife
> are so sick and that is why we are called Morrison.


So, David gave up his father's name simply because he was annoyed
with me, yeah right. He and you have been rail-roaded out, and you
both know it.

> Dave's mum is always talking to Dave on the phone (nearly every day)


That's a lie, because if it were true she would've told me of your
laughable marriage, so it's clear you haven't been in contact with
her or any other member of my family at all, which is why you
had to tell me yourself using usenet. What a giggle.

> and she is happy about our name since it was Dave's
> granmothers maiden name.


Er, Allison, my grandmother's surname was Morris, not Morrison.
You are joking, aren't you - surely David didn't choose the wrong
surname. This is hysterical! Her name was Morris, Ivy Morris, and
I can prove it too. He should've studied that family tree I sent him,
but there again I doubt he would've been able to retain what was
written on it. He never was very sharp, but to get something as wrong
as this rates as probably THE most stupid thing he's ever done, apart
from marry you, of course, if he did. This is priceless.
[end] http://tinyurl.com/2mr5l

I still can't stop laughing when I think of that. Such justice - YES!
  #39 (permalink)   Report Post  
Dutch
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? Dreck Nash breaking a broom over his dog is cruel

"ipse dixit" > wrote

>>>>It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was
>>>>being cruel when he broke the broom over his dog's back."


>>>Have you any evidence to support that claim?


>>Are you denying it?


> Yes, I am.


Does this ring a bell?

"My dog quivers like a jelly when I pick up a broom to sweep the garden. I
must get a new handle for that old broom one of these days."

Why does your dog quiver like jelly when you pick up a broom Derek?



  #40 (permalink)   Report Post  
William J. Wolfe
 
Posts: n/a
Default natural predators & a natural life is cruel? Dreck Nash breaking a broom over his dog is cruel

"Dutch" > wrote in message >...
> "ipse dixit" > wrote
>
> >>>>It means something quite different than "Derek Nash was
> >>>>being cruel when he broke the broom over his dog's back."

>
> >>>Have you any evidence to support that claim?

>
> >>Are you denying it?

>
> > Yes, I am.

>
> Does this ring a bell?
>
> "My dog quivers like a jelly when I pick up a broom to sweep the garden. I
> must get a new handle for that old broom one of these days."
>
> Why does your dog quiver like jelly when you pick up a broom Derek?


Seems like a typical fear response from a dog that has been severely
beaten by some maggot who deserves to have the broom handle shoved up
his arse.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Natural Gas - Pictures and Diagrams of Natural Gas, Natural Gas Furnace, Natural Gas Grill, Natural Gas Heater, Natural Gas Water Heater and Natural Gas Vehicle [email protected] General Cooking 1 18-06-2007 05:32 AM
Natural Gas - Pictures and Diagrams of Natural Gas, Natural Gas Furnace, Natural Gas Grill, Natural Gas Heater, Natural Gas Water Heater and Natural Gas Vehicle [email protected] Cooking Equipment 1 18-06-2007 05:32 AM
at least keep up, usual suspect soapless Vegan 2 22-04-2004 02:13 AM
regarding fruitarians to usual suspect usual suspect Vegan 5 11-03-2004 04:44 PM
Attn: usual suspect Kate Pugh Vegan 2 15-11-2003 01:22 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2023 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"