The Sahara Desert used to be fertile land that fed the Roman Empire.
Grazing practices turned it into a desert. Now much of the US is being
turned into a desert. Here's an excellent article on the subject.

http://www.wildflowers-and-weeds.com/sahara.htm

yes, and Rick Etter is promoting this effect by promoting his grass fed beef
agenda

"Beach Runner" > wrote in message
...
> The Sahara Desert used to be fertile land that fed the Roman Empire.
> Grazing practices turned it into a desert. Now much of the US is being
> turned into a desert. Here's an excellent article on the subject.
>
> http://www.wildflowers-and-weeds.com/sahara.htm

yes, and Rick Etter is promoting this effect by promoting his grass fed beef
agenda

"Beach Runner" > wrote in message
...
> The Sahara Desert used to be fertile land that fed the Roman Empire.
> Grazing practices turned it into a desert. Now much of the US is being
> turned into a desert. Here's an excellent article on the subject.
>
> http://www.wildflowers-and-weeds.com/sahara.htm

"John Coleman" > wrote in message
...
> yes, and Rick Etter is promoting this effect by promoting his grass fed
> beef
> agenda
> ======================
Nope, especially since my diet, descenteds', and yours are not tied to the
sahara.

I suggest you and beachbum learn a few real facts about the desertification
that has been ongoing for 1000s of years...
Again, for the reading impaired, crop production is habitat destruction and
environemntal desturction. Using natuarl grass lands as they are and have
been is not.



> "Beach Runner" > wrote in message
> ...
>> The Sahara Desert used to be fertile land that fed the Roman Empire.
>> Grazing practices turned it into a desert. Now much of the US is being
>> turned into a desert. Here's an excellent article on the subject.
>>
>> http://www.wildflowers-and-weeds.com/sahara.htm
>
>

"John Coleman" > wrote in message
...
> yes, and Rick Etter is promoting this effect by promoting his grass fed
> beef
> agenda
======================
Besides, if you read the site, it's actually *promoting* grazing cattle, and
in greater numbers than now. Guess you missed that part, eh killer?


>
> "Beach Runner" > wrote in message
> ...
>> The Sahara Desert used to be fertile land that fed the Roman Empire.
>> Grazing practices turned it into a desert. Now much of the US is being
>> turned into a desert. Here's an excellent article on the subject.
>>
>> http://www.wildflowers-and-weeds.com/sahara.htm
>
>

"Beach Runner" > wrote in message
...
> The Sahara Desert used to be fertile land that fed the Roman Empire.
> Grazing practices turned it into a desert. Now much of the US is being
> turned into a desert. Here's an excellent article on the subject.
>
> http://www.wildflowers-and-weeds.com/sahara.htm



Well, I've given even you time to read your own site. Have you? I'd say
you haven't, since the site actually promotes the use of cattle in the west,
and argues that calling for their elimination by fools like you will cause
an even faster degradation of the habitat. But then, you haven't proven
much in the way of any smarts, have you killer?

rick etter wrote:
>>yes, and Rick Etter is promoting this effect by promoting his grass fed
>>beef
>>agenda
>>======================
>
> Nope, especially since my diet, descenteds', and yours are not tied to the
> sahara.
>
> I suggest you and beachbum learn a few real facts about the desertification
> that has been ongoing for 1000s of years...
> Again, for the reading impaired, crop production is habitat destruction and
> environemntal desturction. Using natuarl grass lands as they are and have
> been is not.

You can take that a step further, Rick. Where's the evidence for mass
desertification caused by human activity (much less grazing) anyway? Consider
the following.

...The wholesale deforestation of the Eastern United States...
seems only to have caused the extinction of one species of
bird. While in Puerto Rico, the island's loss of 99 percent of its
forest cover caused the loss of 7 out of 60 species, but after the
deforestation, the number of bird species on the island actually
increased to 97. The species-area relationship (plotted as a linear
function in 1859) seems to be a poor model on which to base extinction
rates.

So the model is suspect and the extrapolation invalid. What about the
link to global warming? The researchers assume that global warming will
reduce habitat. Yet this isn't the case. The earth is not shrinking.
The reduction of one area of habitat does not mean that it is replaced
by void. Other habitats expand. And so far, all the evidence we have
points not to desertification or other changes to less hospitable
climates because of global warming. Instead, the increase of carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere seems to have led to a 6 percent increase in
the amount of vegetation on the earth. The Amazon rain forests
accounted for 42 percent of the growth...
http://www.cei.org/gencon/019,03797.cfm

The link provided by Beachboob states that the Sahara "started drying up 6,000
to 8,000 years ago." Rome was founded in 753 BC. That means the Sahara started
drying up at least 3000 years before Romulus settled in the Seven Hills, not to
mention before man made the transition from hunter-gatherer to local farmer.

"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...
> rick etter wrote:
>>>yes, and Rick Etter is promoting this effect by promoting his grass fed
>>>beef
>>>agenda
>>>======================
>>
>> Nope, especially since my diet, descenteds', and yours are not tied to
>> the sahara.
>>
>> I suggest you and beachbum learn a few real facts about the
>> desertification that has been ongoing for 1000s of years...
>> Again, for the reading impaired, crop production is habitat destruction
>> and environemntal desturction. Using natuarl grass lands as they are
>> and have been is not.
>
> You can take that a step further, Rick. Where's the evidence for mass
> desertification caused by human activity (much less grazing) anyway?
> Consider the following.
==============
Whoa Usual, don't hit 'em with too much at once! they first have to learn
that cows aren't the problem, the vegans are... :-)



>
> ...The wholesale deforestation of the Eastern United States...
> seems only to have caused the extinction of one species of
> bird. While in Puerto Rico, the island's loss of 99 percent of its
> forest cover caused the loss of 7 out of 60 species, but after the
> deforestation, the number of bird species on the island actually
> increased to 97. The species-area relationship (plotted as a linear
> function in 1859) seems to be a poor model on which to base extinction
> rates.
>
> So the model is suspect and the extrapolation invalid. What about the
> link to global warming? The researchers assume that global warming will
> reduce habitat. Yet this isn't the case. The earth is not shrinking.
> The reduction of one area of habitat does not mean that it is replaced
> by void. Other habitats expand. And so far, all the evidence we have
> points not to desertification or other changes to less hospitable
> climates because of global warming. Instead, the increase of carbon
> dioxide in the atmosphere seems to have led to a 6 percent increase in
> the amount of vegetation on the earth. The Amazon rain forests
> accounted for 42 percent of the growth...
> http://www.cei.org/gencon/019,03797.cfm
>
> The link provided by Beachboob states that the Sahara "started drying up
> 6,000 to 8,000 years ago." Rome was founded in 753 BC. That means the
> Sahara started drying up at least 3000 years before Romulus settled in the
> Seven Hills, not to mention before man made the transition from
> hunter-gatherer to local farmer.
=====================
Yeah, I loved that part. Just think of all those massive cattle ranches in
Africa 8000 years ago.


>

rick etter wrote:
>>>>yes, and Rick Etter is promoting this effect by promoting his grass fed
>>>>beef
>>>>agenda
>>>>======================
>>>
>>>Nope, especially since my diet, descenteds', and yours are not tied to
>>>the sahara.
>>>
>>>I suggest you and beachbum learn a few real facts about the
>>>desertification that has been ongoing for 1000s of years...
>>>Again, for the reading impaired, crop production is habitat destruction
>>>and environemntal desturction. Using natuarl grass lands as they are
>>>and have been is not.
>>
>>You can take that a step further, Rick. Where's the evidence for mass
>>desertification caused by human activity (much less grazing) anyway?
>>Consider the following.
>
> ==============
> Whoa Usual, don't hit 'em with too much at once!

I realize they have learning disabilities, either organic or diet-related, but
they need to hear the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

> they first have to learn
> that cows aren't the problem, the vegans are... :-)

Got that right.

>>...The wholesale deforestation of the Eastern United States...
>>seems only to have caused the extinction of one species of
>>bird. While in Puerto Rico, the island's loss of 99 percent of its
>>forest cover caused the loss of 7 out of 60 species, but after the
>>deforestation, the number of bird species on the island actually
>>increased to 97. The species-area relationship (plotted as a linear
>>function in 1859) seems to be a poor model on which to base extinction
>>rates.
>>
>>So the model is suspect and the extrapolation invalid. What about the
>>link to global warming? The researchers assume that global warming will
>>reduce habitat. Yet this isn't the case. The earth is not shrinking.
>>The reduction of one area of habitat does not mean that it is replaced
>>by void. Other habitats expand. And so far, all the evidence we have
>>points not to desertification or other changes to less hospitable
>>climates because of global warming. Instead, the increase of carbon
>>dioxide in the atmosphere seems to have led to a 6 percent increase in
>>the amount of vegetation on the earth. The Amazon rain forests
>>accounted for 42 percent of the growth...
>>http://www.cei.org/gencon/019,03797.cfm
>>
>>The link provided by Beachboob states that the Sahara "started drying up
>>6,000 to 8,000 years ago." Rome was founded in 753 BC. That means the
>>Sahara started drying up at least 3000 years before Romulus settled in the
>>Seven Hills, not to mention before man made the transition from
>>hunter-gatherer to local farmer.
>
> =====================
> Yeah, I loved that part. Just think of all those massive cattle ranches in
> Africa 8000 years ago.

If you were to put the ridiculous claims of vegan activists to a math test
(especially issues like water, land, and feed related to livestock production),
you'd find that humans should've become extinct from lack of resources or global
warming sometime in the last millenium (if not sooner!). The information I
provided above debunks these idiots: increased CO2 levels have resulted in an
increase in our planet's vegetation, and much of that is in the Amazon (the very
point which Beachboob raised in his initial post in this thread -- see
http://snipurl.com/b03a)! So much for another false tenet of the vegan religion.

"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...
> rick etter wrote:

snippage...

>>>
>>>The link provided by Beachboob states that the Sahara "started drying up
>>>6,000 to 8,000 years ago." Rome was founded in 753 BC. That means the
>>>Sahara started drying up at least 3000 years before Romulus settled in
>>>the Seven Hills, not to mention before man made the transition from
>>>hunter-gatherer to local farmer.
>>
>> =====================
>> Yeah, I loved that part. Just think of all those massive cattle ranches
>> in Africa 8000 years ago.
>
> If you were to put the ridiculous claims of vegan activists to a math test
> (especially issues like water, land, and feed related to livestock
> production), you'd find that humans should've become extinct from lack of
> resources or global warming sometime in the last millenium (if not
> sooner!). The information I provided above debunks these idiots: increased
> CO2 levels have resulted in an increase in our planet's vegetation, and
> much of that is in the Amazon (the very point which Beachboob raised in
> his initial post in this thread -- see http://snipurl.com/b03a)! So much
> for another false tenet of the vegan religion.
================
I particularlly love the part about the site beachbum was promoting that
really is all about *increasing* the use of cattle to graze the west!
Quite a hoot. maybe this is lotus/lesley/lys latest incarnation, she always
like to post stuff she didn't read with comprehension to supposedly support
her idiocy...


>

rick etter wrote:
<...>
>>>Yeah, I loved that part. Just think of all those massive cattle ranches
>>>in Africa 8000 years ago.
>>
>>If you were to put the ridiculous claims of vegan activists to a math test
>>(especially issues like water, land, and feed related to livestock
>>production), you'd find that humans should've become extinct from lack of
>>resources or global warming sometime in the last millenium (if not
>>sooner!). The information I provided above debunks these idiots: increased
>>CO2 levels have resulted in an increase in our planet's vegetation, and
>>much of that is in the Amazon (the very point which Beachboob raised in
>>his initial post in this thread -- see http://snipurl.com/b03a)! So much
>>for another false tenet of the vegan religion.
>
> ================
> I particularlly love the part about the site beachbum was promoting that
> really is all about *increasing* the use of cattle to graze the west!

Chalk it up to B12 deficiency.

> Quite a hoot. maybe this is lotus/lesley/lys latest incarnation, she always
> like to post stuff she didn't read with comprehension to supposedly support
> her idiocy...

Different posters, but of the same mind(less)set.

rick etter wrote:
<...>
>>>Yeah, I loved that part. Just think of all those massive cattle ranches
>>>in Africa 8000 years ago.
>>
>>If you were to put the ridiculous claims of vegan activists to a math test
>>(especially issues like water, land, and feed related to livestock
>>production), you'd find that humans should've become extinct from lack of
>>resources or global warming sometime in the last millenium (if not
>>sooner!). The information I provided above debunks these idiots: increased
>>CO2 levels have resulted in an increase in our planet's vegetation, and
>>much of that is in the Amazon (the very point which Beachboob raised in
>>his initial post in this thread -- see http://snipurl.com/b03a)! So much
>>for another false tenet of the vegan religion.
>
> ================
> I particularlly love the part about the site beachbum was promoting that
> really is all about *increasing* the use of cattle to graze the west!

Chalk it up to B12 deficiency.

> Quite a hoot. maybe this is lotus/lesley/lys latest incarnation, she always
> like to post stuff she didn't read with comprehension to supposedly support
> her idiocy...

Different posters, but of the same mind(less)set.

rick etter wrote:
>
> "Beach Runner" > wrote in message
> ...
> > The Sahara Desert used to be fertile land that fed the Roman Empire.
> > Grazing practices turned it into a desert. Now much of the US is being
> > turned into a desert. Here's an excellent article on the subject.
> >
> > http://www.wildflowers-and-weeds.com/sahara.htm
>
> Well, I've given even you time to read your own site. Have you? I'd say
> you haven't, since the site actually promotes the use of cattle in the west,
> and argues that calling for their elimination by fools like you will cause
> an even faster degradation of the habitat. But then, you haven't proven
> much in the way of any smarts, have you killer?
I guess you need to read How to win friends and influence people. If you gave
people stuff to consider it would be well received. Instead you just are nasty.

Bob C wrote:
>>>The Sahara Desert used to be fertile land that fed the Roman Empire.
>>>Grazing practices turned it into a desert. Now much of the US is being
>>>turned into a desert. Here's an excellent article on the subject.
>>>
>>>http://www.wildflowers-and-weeds.com/sahara.htm
>>
>>Well, I've given even you time to read your own site. Have you? I'd say
>>you haven't, since the site actually promotes the use of cattle in the west,
>>and argues that calling for their elimination by fools like you will cause
>>an even faster degradation of the habitat. But then, you haven't proven
>>much in the way of any smarts, have you killer?
>
> I guess you need to read How to win friends and influence people. If you gave
> people stuff to consider it would be well received. Instead you just are nasty.

You can try offering "stuff to consider," too, Bob. Rick's offered plenty of
evidence over the years and it's never received well by vegans and animal rights
activists. You can find his posts easily in the Google groups archives. You can
also find the scorn heaped upon Rick by people like you -- including the quotes
from vegans which you didn't adequately address:

We should plaster Etter's, Dutch's and Ball's homes with PETA
and PCRM flyers so that THEY will have NO square inch to post
THEIR views and discuss topics of interest to THEM.
http://tinyurl.com/5m5ew

I hope you die slowly, and in excruciating pain from cancer or in a
house fire you worthless tramp for what you have just said. Just one
animals life is worth 10 of yours. Your wife is better off where she is,
at least she doesn't have to live with YOU. I bet she would have
committed suicide anyway rather than put up with you. Please do like her
and choke to death.
http://tinyurl.com/5lndg

I can hardly wait until you get your first heart attack.
I will jump for joy when you suffer and drop dead!
It will be hilarious for the medical staff to laugh at you
and tell you that they don't have to be told by YOU what to do.
http://tinyurl.com/3jalp

Keep on eating that red meat, Dick Etter!
http://tinyurl.com/3vkss

So you are saying I and fellow vegetarians have the legal
right to run an office the way WE want. Well, then, that is good --
because I encourage medical doctors not to help hunters and
non-vegetarians.
http://tinyurl.com/4j4tm

Vegans are the least compassionate people on the planet. Face the truth, Bob.

On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect > wrote:

> Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.

Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.

[start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
> Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
> with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
> accept that the *general* production, storage, and
> distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
> deaths.
============================
Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
[end]
Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m

"The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
"The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
Rick Etter 2003-11-15

He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.

On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect > wrote:

> Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.

Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.

[start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
> Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
> with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
> accept that the *general* production, storage, and
> distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
> deaths.
============================
Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
[end]
Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m

"The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
"The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
Rick Etter 2003-11-15

He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.

"Bob C" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> rick etter wrote:
>>
>> "Beach Runner" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > The Sahara Desert used to be fertile land that fed the Roman Empire.
>> > Grazing practices turned it into a desert. Now much of the US is being
>> > turned into a desert. Here's an excellent article on the subject.
>> >
>> > http://www.wildflowers-and-weeds.com/sahara.htm
>>
>> Well, I've given even you time to read your own site. Have you? I'd
>> say
>> you haven't, since the site actually promotes the use of cattle in the
>> west,
>> and argues that calling for their elimination by fools like you will
>> cause
>> an even faster degradation of the habitat. But then, you haven't proven
>> much in the way of any smarts, have you killer?
> I guess you need to read How to win friends and influence people. If you
> gave
> people stuff to consider it would be well received. Instead you just are
> nasty.
==================
LOL Where's the nasty, fool? I have never wished any of these idiots to
die. The same cannot be said by you vegan loons....
Now, as for the topic, I see you have nothing to add. Typical again for
vegan loons. Add nothing but spew, hate and lys.
Want to try again pea-brain? Maybe you can come up with something
original, eh killer?

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect >
> wrote:
>
>> Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>
> Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
> at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
> the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
> with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
> vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
=================
Nope. You're as ignorant and delusional as always, killer. Better get off
the drugs before you lose your last 2 remaining brain-cells, fool.

>
> [start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>> Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>> with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>> accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>> distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>> deaths.
> ============================
> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
> [end]
> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>
> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>
> He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
> insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
> just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
======================
Nope, you fit that far better, killer. YOU never add anything to a
discusiion. You can't. You have nothing but hate, lys, delusions and
ignorance.




>

On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:56:28 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect > wrote:
>>
>>> Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>>>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>
>> Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>> at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>> the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>> with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>> vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>=================
>Nope.

It's true, Rick, and your quotes regarding grass fed beef
confirm it. Look again at your reply to the comment below
made by "ipse dixit". You do deny the existence of collateral
deaths associated in the production of grass fed beef, and
yet you have the gall to insist that it's the vegans here who
deny the existence of collateral deaths associated with their
foods. You're a lying hypocrite.

>> [start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>>> Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>>> with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>>> accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>>> distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>>> deaths.
>> ============================
>> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>> [end]
>> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>
>> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>
>> He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>> insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>> just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>======================
>Nope

You can't escape those quotes you wrote, liar.

"Reynard" > wrote in message
news
> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:56:28 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>"Reynard" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>>>>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>>
>>> Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>>> at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>>> the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>>> with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>>> vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>>=================
>>Nope.
>
> It's true, Rick, and your quotes regarding grass fed beef
> confirm it.
======================
Nope, because unlike you, I've never claimed that the food eat is CD free,
and that I am not to blame. that's all yours, killer.



Look again at your reply to the comment below
> made by "ipse dixit". You do deny the existence of collateral
> deaths associated in the production of grass fed beef, and
> yet you have the gall to insist that it's the vegans here who
> deny the existence of collateral deaths associated with their
> foods. You're a lying hypocrite.
======================
Nope. Try checking the differences, fool. You'll see them, if you were
not so ignorant and delusional.


>
>>> [start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>>>> Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>>>> with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>>>> accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>>>> distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>>>> deaths.
>>> ============================
>>> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>>> [end]
>>> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>>
>>> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>>> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>>> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>>
>>> He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>>> insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>>> just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>>======================
>>Nope
>
> You can't escape those quotes you wrote, liar.
=====================
No need, because they don't say what you are always claiming they say,
fool....

"Reynard" > wrote in message
news
> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:56:28 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>"Reynard" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>>>>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>>
>>> Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>>> at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>>> the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>>> with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>>> vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>>=================
>>Nope.
>
> It's true, Rick, and your quotes regarding grass fed beef
> confirm it.
======================
Nope, because unlike you, I've never claimed that the food eat is CD free,
and that I am not to blame. that's all yours, killer.



Look again at your reply to the comment below
> made by "ipse dixit". You do deny the existence of collateral
> deaths associated in the production of grass fed beef, and
> yet you have the gall to insist that it's the vegans here who
> deny the existence of collateral deaths associated with their
> foods. You're a lying hypocrite.
======================
Nope. Try checking the differences, fool. You'll see them, if you were
not so ignorant and delusional.


>
>>> [start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>>>> Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>>>> with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>>>> accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>>>> distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>>>> deaths.
>>> ============================
>>> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>>> [end]
>>> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>>
>>> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>>> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>>> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>>
>>> He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>>> insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>>> just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>>======================
>>Nope
>
> You can't escape those quotes you wrote, liar.
=====================
No need, because they don't say what you are always claiming they say,
fool....

Basically, I question their going into a vegan group and trying to
disrupt it; It's called trolling. Reasonable questions are of course
welcome. Writing I should die doesn't encourage further reading.


Reynard wrote:

> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:56:28 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>
>>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>>
>>>On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>>>>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>>
>>>Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>>>at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>>>the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>>>with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>>>vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>>
>>=================
>>Nope.
>
>
> It's true, Rick, and your quotes regarding grass fed beef
> confirm it. Look again at your reply to the comment below
> made by "ipse dixit". You do deny the existence of collateral
> deaths associated in the production of grass fed beef, and
> yet you have the gall to insist that it's the vegans here who
> deny the existence of collateral deaths associated with their
> foods. You're a lying hypocrite.
>
>
>>>[start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>>>
>>>>Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>>>>with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>>>>accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>>>>distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>>>>deaths.
>>>
>>>============================
>>>Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>>>[end]
>>>Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>>
>>>"The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>>>"The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>>>Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>>
>>>He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>>>insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>>>just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>>
>>======================
>>Nope
>
>
> You can't escape those quotes you wrote, liar.

Beach Runner wrote:
> Basically, I question their going into a vegan group and trying to
> disrupt it;

Nobody here is disrupting anything. There have been some challenges to
the wildly exaggerated claims you and other vegans have made, and you've
been shown to be a liar. Regardless, what you call trolling has all been
on-topic and germane to the newsgroup.

> It's called trolling.

No, it's called debunking lies.

> Reasonable questions are of course welcome.

You make unreasonable points, and then you lie to support them.

> Writing I should die doesn't encourage further reading.

Nobody has suggested you should die. In fact, it's always the vegans who
wish harm upon others here. Consider the following examples I found at
Google's archives of vegans in this newsgroup wishing harm or
threatening non-vegans:

We should plaster Etter's, Dutch's and Ball's homes with PETA
and PCRM flyers so that THEY will have NO square inch to post
THEIR views and discuss topics of interest to THEM.
http://tinyurl.com/5m5ew

I hope you die slowly, and in excruciating pain from cancer or in a
house fire you worthless tramp for what you have just said. Just one
animals life is worth 10 of yours. Your wife is better off where she
is,
at least she doesn't have to live with YOU. I bet she would have
committed suicide anyway rather than put up with you. Please do
like her
and choke to death.
http://tinyurl.com/5lndg

I can hardly wait until you get your first heart attack.
I will jump for joy when you suffer and drop dead!
It will be hilarious for the medical staff to laugh at you
and tell you that they don't have to be told by YOU what to do.
http://tinyurl.com/3jalp

Keep on eating that red meat, Dick Etter!
http://tinyurl.com/3vkss

So you are saying I and fellow vegetarians have the legal
right to run an office the way WE want. Well, then, that is good --
because I encourage medical doctors not to help hunters and
non-vegetarians.
http://tinyurl.com/4j4tm

Want more examples? There are plenty more where those were found. That's
just from one quick search. Vegans are the least compassionate people on
the planet. They are misanthropes. They don't care about animals, they
just hate their fellow man and use their prattle about animals to
sugarcoat their base contempt for mankind. As you can see from the
above, their hate-filled expressions to those who oppose them is often
malevolent, if not psychotic. That's to be expected, though, given the
fact that vegans and ARAs are often very mentally disturbed.

<...>

On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 14:36:41 GMT, Beach Runner > wrote:

>Basically, I question their going into a vegan group and trying to
>disrupt it; It's called trolling.

I've made that same point several times over the years,
especially regarding Rick. He's just a heckler without
a clue concerning even the most basic issues raised
here. I don't know why he bothers really. It's not the
sort of thing normal people would do; intentionally
disrupt for the sake of disrupting. I'm of the opinion
he's here to try justifying his diet on sentient animals
by focusing on the deaths associated with vegan diets
from harvesting and the use of pesticides.

>Reasonable questions are of course
>welcome. Writing I should die doesn't encourage further reading.
>
>
>Reynard wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:56:28 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>
>>>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>>>>>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>>>
>>>>Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>>>>at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>>>>the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>>>>with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>>>>vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>>>
>>>=================
>>>Nope.
>>
>>
>> It's true, Rick, and your quotes regarding grass fed beef
>> confirm it. Look again at your reply to the comment below
>> made by "ipse dixit". You do deny the existence of collateral
>> deaths associated in the production of grass fed beef, and
>> yet you have the gall to insist that it's the vegans here who
>> deny the existence of collateral deaths associated with their
>> foods. You're a lying hypocrite.
>>
>>
>>>>[start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>>>>
>>>>>Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>>>>>with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>>>>>accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>>>>>distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>>>>>deaths.
>>>>
>>>>============================
>>>>Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>>>>[end]
>>>>Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>>>
>>>>"The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>>>>"The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>>>>Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>>>
>>>>He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>>>>insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>>>>just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>>>
>>>======================
>>>Nope
>>
>>
>> You can't escape those quotes you wrote, liar.

On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 14:36:41 GMT, Beach Runner > wrote:

>Basically, I question their going into a vegan group and trying to
>disrupt it; It's called trolling.

I've made that same point several times over the years,
especially regarding Rick. He's just a heckler without
a clue concerning even the most basic issues raised
here. I don't know why he bothers really. It's not the
sort of thing normal people would do; intentionally
disrupt for the sake of disrupting. I'm of the opinion
he's here to try justifying his diet on sentient animals
by focusing on the deaths associated with vegan diets
from harvesting and the use of pesticides.

>Reasonable questions are of course
>welcome. Writing I should die doesn't encourage further reading.
>
>
>Reynard wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:56:28 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>
>>>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>>>>>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>>>
>>>>Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>>>>at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>>>>the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>>>>with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>>>>vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>>>
>>>=================
>>>Nope.
>>
>>
>> It's true, Rick, and your quotes regarding grass fed beef
>> confirm it. Look again at your reply to the comment below
>> made by "ipse dixit". You do deny the existence of collateral
>> deaths associated in the production of grass fed beef, and
>> yet you have the gall to insist that it's the vegans here who
>> deny the existence of collateral deaths associated with their
>> foods. You're a lying hypocrite.
>>
>>
>>>>[start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>>>>
>>>>>Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>>>>>with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>>>>>accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>>>>>distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>>>>>deaths.
>>>>
>>>>============================
>>>>Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>>>>[end]
>>>>Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>>>
>>>>"The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>>>>"The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>>>>Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>>>
>>>>He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>>>>insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>>>>just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>>>
>>>======================
>>>Nope
>>
>>
>> You can't escape those quotes you wrote, liar.

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:31:36 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Reynard" > wrote in message news
>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:56:28 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>>>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>>>>>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>>>
>>>> Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>>>> at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>>>> the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>>>> with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>>>> vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>>>=================
>>>Nope.
>>
>> It's true, Rick, and your quotes regarding grass fed beef
>> confirm it.
>======================
>Nope

Here they are again;

Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m

"The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
"The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
Rick Etter 2003-11-15

From those quotes, it's easily seen that you do deny the
existence of collateral deaths associated with the production
of the beef you claim to eat. There no getting away from
them or from the fact that making them shows what a lying
hypocrite you are for trying to attack vegans for the collateral
deaths associated with their foods.

>> Look again at your reply to the comment below
>> made by "ipse dixit". You do deny the existence of collateral
>> deaths associated in the production of grass fed beef, and
>> yet you have the gall to insist that it's the vegans here who
>> deny the existence of collateral deaths associated with their
>> foods. You're a lying hypocrite.
>======================
>Nope.

You certainly are, dummy.

>>>> [start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>>>>> Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>>>>> with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>>>>> accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>>>>> distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>>>>> deaths.
>>>> ============================
>>>> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>>>> [end]
>>>> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>>>
>>>> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>>>> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>>>> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>>>
>>>> He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>>>> insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>>>> just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>>>======================
>>>Nope
>>
>> You can't escape those quotes you wrote, liar.
>=====================
>No need

Rather, you can't.

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:31:36 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>"Reynard" > wrote in message
>>news
>>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:56:28 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>>>"Reynard" > wrote in message
m...
>>>>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>>>>>>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>>>>> at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>>>>> the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>>>>> with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>>>>> vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>>>>=================
>>>>Nope.
>>>
>>> It's true, Rick, and your quotes regarding grass fed beef
>>> confirm it.
>>======================
>>Nope
>
> Here they are again;
>
> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>
> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>
> From those quotes, it's easily seen that you do deny the
> existence of collateral deaths associated with the production
> of the beef you claim to eat. There no getting away from
> them or from the fact that making them shows what a lying
> hypocrite you are for trying to attack vegans for the collateral
> deaths associated with their foods.
>
>>> Look again at your reply to the comment below
>>> made by "ipse dixit". You do deny the existence of collateral
>>> deaths associated in the production of grass fed beef, and
>>> yet you have the gall to insist that it's the vegans here who
>>> deny the existence of collateral deaths associated with their
>>> foods. You're a lying hypocrite.
>>======================
>>Nope.
>
> You certainly are, dummy.
=================
Nope. because unlike you, I don't claim that what I eat doesn't cause CDs or
that I am not responsible for them. You do, on both counts. Hypocrite to
the end, eh killer?


>
>>>>> [start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>>>>>> Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>>>>>> with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>>>>>> accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>>>>>> distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>>>>>> deaths.
>>>>> ============================
>>>>> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>>>>> [end]
>>>>> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>>>>
>>>>> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>>>>> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>>>>> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>>>>
>>>>> He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>>>>> insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>>>>> just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>>>>======================
>>>>Nope
>>>
>>> You can't escape those quotes you wrote, liar.
>>=====================
>>No need
>
> Rather, you can't.
========================
Nope. No need to. the part you have always tried to imply was that the
food I eat causes no CDs. I have always redily admitted such. You on the
other hand have denied it.

>

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:31:36 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>"Reynard" > wrote in message
>>news
>>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:56:28 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>>>"Reynard" > wrote in message
m...
>>>>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>>>>>>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>>>>> at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>>>>> the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>>>>> with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>>>>> vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>>>>=================
>>>>Nope.
>>>
>>> It's true, Rick, and your quotes regarding grass fed beef
>>> confirm it.
>>======================
>>Nope
>
> Here they are again;
>
> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>
> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>
> From those quotes, it's easily seen that you do deny the
> existence of collateral deaths associated with the production
> of the beef you claim to eat. There no getting away from
> them or from the fact that making them shows what a lying
> hypocrite you are for trying to attack vegans for the collateral
> deaths associated with their foods.
>
>>> Look again at your reply to the comment below
>>> made by "ipse dixit". You do deny the existence of collateral
>>> deaths associated in the production of grass fed beef, and
>>> yet you have the gall to insist that it's the vegans here who
>>> deny the existence of collateral deaths associated with their
>>> foods. You're a lying hypocrite.
>>======================
>>Nope.
>
> You certainly are, dummy.
=================
Nope. because unlike you, I don't claim that what I eat doesn't cause CDs or
that I am not responsible for them. You do, on both counts. Hypocrite to
the end, eh killer?


>
>>>>> [start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>>>>>> Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>>>>>> with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>>>>>> accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>>>>>> distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>>>>>> deaths.
>>>>> ============================
>>>>> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>>>>> [end]
>>>>> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>>>>
>>>>> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>>>>> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>>>>> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>>>>
>>>>> He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>>>>> insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>>>>> just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>>>>======================
>>>>Nope
>>>
>>> You can't escape those quotes you wrote, liar.
>>=====================
>>No need
>
> Rather, you can't.
========================
Nope. No need to. the part you have always tried to imply was that the
food I eat causes no CDs. I have always redily admitted such. You on the
other hand have denied it.

>

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 14:36:41 GMT, Beach Runner > wrote:
>
>>Basically, I question their going into a vegan group and trying to
>>disrupt it; It's called trolling.
>
> I've made that same point several times over the years,
> especially regarding Rick. He's just a heckler without
> a clue concerning even the most basic issues raised
> here.
====================
ROTFLMAO That's why you have never been able to refute what I say, and
have been reduced to a side-line heckler that has nothing but old quotes to
post. You have never even been able to defend your own stupidity. Your
pal, Aristotle has even told you you are culpable, and in english too!




snippage...

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 14:36:41 GMT, Beach Runner > wrote:
>
>>Basically, I question their going into a vegan group and trying to
>>disrupt it; It's called trolling.
>
> I've made that same point several times over the years,
> especially regarding Rick. He's just a heckler without
> a clue concerning even the most basic issues raised
> here.
====================
ROTFLMAO That's why you have never been able to refute what I say, and
have been reduced to a side-line heckler that has nothing but old quotes to
post. You have never even been able to defend your own stupidity. Your
pal, Aristotle has even told you you are culpable, and in english too!




snippage...

On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:35:14 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>> On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:31:36 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>>"Reynard" > wrote in message news >>>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:56:28 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>>>>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>>>>>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>>>>>>>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>>>>>> at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>>>>>> the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>>>>>> with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>>>>>> vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>>>>>=================
>>>>>Nope.
>>>>
>>>> It's true, Rick, and your quotes regarding grass fed beef
>>>> confirm it.
>>>======================
>>>Nope
>>
>> Here they are again;
>>
>> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>
>> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>
>> From those quotes, it's easily seen that you do deny the
>> existence of collateral deaths associated with the production
>> of the beef you claim to eat. There no getting away from
>> them or from the fact that making them shows what a lying
>> hypocrite you are for trying to attack vegans for the collateral
>> deaths associated with their foods.

Well, hypocrite?

>>>> Look again at your reply to the comment below
>>>> made by "ipse dixit". You do deny the existence of collateral
>>>> deaths associated in the production of grass fed beef, and
>>>> yet you have the gall to insist that it's the vegans here who
>>>> deny the existence of collateral deaths associated with their
>>>> foods. You're a lying hypocrite.
>>>======================
>>>Nope.
>>
>> You certainly are, dummy.
>=================
>Nope.

You are, as your quotes on grass fed beef clearly show.

>>>>>> [start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>>>>>>> Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>>>>>>> with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>>>>>>> accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>>>>>>> distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>>>>>>> deaths.
>>>>>> ============================
>>>>>> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>>>>>> [end]
>>>>>> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>>>>>> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>>>>>> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>>>>>> insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>>>>>> just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>>>>>======================
>>>>>Nope
>>>>
>>>> You can't escape those quotes you wrote, liar.
>>>=====================
>>>No need
>>
>> Rather, you can't.
>========================
>Nope.

Exactly.

On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:35:14 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>> On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:31:36 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>>"Reynard" > wrote in message news >>>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 20:56:28 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>>>>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>>>>>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>>>>>>>received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>>>>>> at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>>>>>> the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>>>>>> with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>>>>>> vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>>>>>=================
>>>>>Nope.
>>>>
>>>> It's true, Rick, and your quotes regarding grass fed beef
>>>> confirm it.
>>>======================
>>>Nope
>>
>> Here they are again;
>>
>> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>
>> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>
>> From those quotes, it's easily seen that you do deny the
>> existence of collateral deaths associated with the production
>> of the beef you claim to eat. There no getting away from
>> them or from the fact that making them shows what a lying
>> hypocrite you are for trying to attack vegans for the collateral
>> deaths associated with their foods.

Well, hypocrite?

>>>> Look again at your reply to the comment below
>>>> made by "ipse dixit". You do deny the existence of collateral
>>>> deaths associated in the production of grass fed beef, and
>>>> yet you have the gall to insist that it's the vegans here who
>>>> deny the existence of collateral deaths associated with their
>>>> foods. You're a lying hypocrite.
>>>======================
>>>Nope.
>>
>> You certainly are, dummy.
>=================
>Nope.

You are, as your quotes on grass fed beef clearly show.

>>>>>> [start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>>>>>>> Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>>>>>>> with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>>>>>>> accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>>>>>>> distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>>>>>>> deaths.
>>>>>> ============================
>>>>>> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>>>>>> [end]
>>>>>> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>>>>>> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>>>>>> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>>>>>> insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>>>>>> just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>>>>>======================
>>>>>Nope
>>>>
>>>> You can't escape those quotes you wrote, liar.
>>>=====================
>>>No need
>>
>> Rather, you can't.
>========================
>Nope.

Exactly.

On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:37:56 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 14:36:41 GMT, Beach Runner > wrote:
>>
>>>Basically, I question their going into a vegan group and trying to
>>>disrupt it; It's called trolling.
>>
>> I've made that same point several times over the years,
>> especially regarding Rick. He's just a heckler without
>> a clue concerning even the most basic issues raised
>> here.
>====================
>ROTFLMAO

What a stupid thing to write.

On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:37:56 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 14:36:41 GMT, Beach Runner > wrote:
>>
>>>Basically, I question their going into a vegan group and trying to
>>>disrupt it; It's called trolling.
>>
>> I've made that same point several times over the years,
>> especially regarding Rick. He's just a heckler without
>> a clue concerning even the most basic issues raised
>> here.
>====================
>ROTFLMAO

What a stupid thing to write.

"Reynard" > wrote in message
news
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:37:56 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>"Reynard" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 14:36:41 GMT, Beach Runner > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Basically, I question their going into a vegan group and trying to
>>>>disrupt it; It's called trolling.
>>>
>>> I've made that same point several times over the years,
>>> especially regarding Rick. He's just a heckler without
>>> a clue concerning even the most basic issues raised
>>> here.
>>====================
>>ROTFLMAO
>
> What a stupid thing to write.
======================
What a dishonest, ignorant killer you are. thanks for proving that once
again...

"Reynard" > wrote in message
news
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:37:56 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>"Reynard" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 14:36:41 GMT, Beach Runner > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Basically, I question their going into a vegan group and trying to
>>>>disrupt it; It's called trolling.
>>>
>>> I've made that same point several times over the years,
>>> especially regarding Rick. He's just a heckler without
>>> a clue concerning even the most basic issues raised
>>> here.
>>====================
>>ROTFLMAO
>
> What a stupid thing to write.
======================
What a dishonest, ignorant killer you are. thanks for proving that once
again...

"Reynard" > wrote in message
news
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:37:56 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>"Reynard" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 14:36:41 GMT, Beach Runner > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Basically, I question their going into a vegan group and trying to
>>>>disrupt it; It's called trolling.
>>>
>>> I've made that same point several times over the years,
>>> especially regarding Rick. He's just a heckler without
>>> a clue concerning even the most basic issues raised
>>> here.
>>====================
>>ROTFLMAO
>
> What a stupid thing to write.
======================
What a dishonest, ignorant killer you are. thanks for proving that once
again...

Thanks Reynard, for pointing this out. Etter isn't just a liar, he is
actually mentally incompetant. Maybe his toxic dietary practices are
damaging his brain?

John

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect >
wrote:
>
> > Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
> >received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>
> Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
> at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
> the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
> with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
> vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>
> [start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
> > Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
> > with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
> > accept that the *general* production, storage, and
> > distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
> > deaths.
> ============================
> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
> [end]
> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>
> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>
> He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
> insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
> just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>

"John Coleman" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks Reynard, for pointing this out. Etter isn't just a liar, he is
> actually mentally incompetant. Maybe his toxic dietary practices are
> damaging his brain?
================
LOL Just like retard/twits, you have never bennable to defend your vegan
religion. So, you, like retard/twits has to take quotes and spew about
them. Despite what you and retard think, I have never claimed that the
food I eat causes no CDs, or that I am not responsible for them. You, and
retard, do that constantly, hypocrite.

>
> John
>
> "Reynard" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect >
> wrote:
>>
>> > Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>> >received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>
>> Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>> at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>> the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>> with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>> vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>>
>> [start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>> > Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>> > with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>> > accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>> > distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>> > deaths.
>> ============================
>> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>> [end]
>> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>
>> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>
>> He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>> insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>> just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>>
>
>

On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 23:03:16 GMT, "John Coleman" > wrote:

>Thanks Reynard, for pointing this out. Etter isn't just a liar, he is
>actually mentally incompetant. Maybe his toxic dietary practices are
>damaging his brain?
>
>John

That and the massive burden of guilt he's obviously labouring
under. I've never encountered anyone who carries so much
of it. It's driven him totally insane. He's lost it completely, but
instead of feeling sorry for him I keep in mind that life's a zero-
sum game where someone's loss is always someone else's
gain, and who better to suffer that loss than Rick Etter?

>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:58:57 GMT, usual suspect > wrote:
>>
>> > Rick's offered plenty of evidence over the years and it's never
>> >received well by vegans and animal rights activists.
>>
>> Of course it won't be, because while continually ranting on
>> at vegans for the supposed collateral deaths surrounding
>> the foods they eat, he denies the collateral deaths associated
>> with the production of his own, and this makes him the most
>> vile hypocrite on these animal related forums.
>>
>> [start ipse dixit to Rick Etter]
>> > Then tell me how many collateral deaths are associated
>> > with the grass fed beef you eat. After that tell me if you
>> > accept that the *general* production, storage, and
>> > distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
>> > deaths.
>> ============================
>> Why? The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period.
>> [end]
>> Rick Etter http://tinyurl.com/58l8m
>>
>> "The production of the beef I eat causes no CDs."
>> "The production of my beef promotes no CDs. Period."
>> Rick Etter 2003-11-15
>>
>> He lies about the production of his beef and then goes on to
>> insist that it's the vegans who lie about their food items. He's
>> just a lying meatarian on a vegan forum. That's all. A troll.
>>
>