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
  #46 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 11:27 AM
Derek
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 21:14:00 GMT, usual suspect wrote:

Derek wrote:

First you're vegan,

I called myself that under the misconception that veganism was about
food rather than animal rights.

You declared yourself vegan because you claimed

1) to "dislike flesh"

That's correct, with the exception of fish.


You didn't mention that exception when making
your statement about your dislike for flesh.


Was I supposed to enumerate every single like or dislike in every single
post I ever made, tosser?


Yes, you were, especially when making categorical
statements concerning your dislike for flesh, which,
believe it or not, includes fish, liar suspect. You lied
when making that statement, so I've every reason
to believe you've lied since making it as well. You're
an habitual liar. Let's take your quotes concerning
hunting, for yet another example of many;

"*I* don't hunt."
usual suspect Jul 1 2003 http://tinyurl.com/e45k7

But then, just 4 days later you inadvertently confess
that you DO hunt after all;

"I know from my own hunting as well as from that
of family members and friends that nobody wants
to put a deer or rabbit or any other creature in pain."
usual suspect Jul 5 2003 http://tinyurl.com/c4h4d

You're an habitual liar.

2) that "the consumption of meat, dairy, and eggs is
bad for me, animals, my environment, and the
whole world"
3) that "no animal must die for my nourishment or
enjoyment"

I now distinguish between healthful and unhealthful diets


Then you


The past is irrelevant.


Only according to those with a past they would wish
to go away and forget about: you, for example. Your
past quotes reveal that you've lied about your dislike
for flesh. They also show that you have no grounds
to launch your pathetic tirades against vegans here
who abstain from meat, because like you, the majority
of them abstain from meat for the very same reasons
you gave, hypocrite.

My position now is consistent


Your position is


based on a learning process.


Confusion, more like.

unsnip

"I am vegan"
usual suspect 2002-05-09

"First, don't EVER call me "a vegan" or even just "vegan."
usual suspect 2003-06-10

"No thanks, I'm a vegan."
usual suspect 2003-08-14

"You'll find my views have been consistent."
usual suspect 2003-09-05

When you've finally made up your mind where your
own position is regarding veganism, you might have
some say here, but while you continue to attack
vegans that aren't as confused as you are regarding
their position, your feeble attacks can only be seen
as a swipe against those who've bettered you by
abiding by their stated principles. Your utter hatred
toward those you've tried but failed to aspire to is
ugly and so transparent.

Also, in answer to Bart who asked you whether
our dominion over animals includes eating and
slaughtering them for food, you answered no by
quoting Genesis 1:29-30 (New King James Version)

[start Bart to you]
So, according to the bible, God gave us dominion
over the animal kingdom.
[you]
Does dominion include slaughtering and eating them? The
answer is found immediately following one of the verses
you quoted:

Genesis 1:29-30 (New King James Version) -- And God
said, "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed
which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose
fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. Also, to every
beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything
that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given
every green herb for food"; and it was so.
[end]
usual suspect 11 Jun 2002 http://tinyurl.com/4jtz8

Upon further study, I ceded that the account of Noah following the flood
mitigated that isolated passage.


You were already aware


More aware than you'll ever be, blue-foot.


And yet, even when armed with all your so-called
awareness and understanding of the bible you
still chose Genesis 1:29-30 to indicate that our
said dominion over animals doesn't include
slaughtering them for food.

As for your later assertion, that you've NEVER held
a belief in the proposition of animal rights, read on and
see where you claim NOT to know that answer.

"Animals are not moral agents and generally operate
by instinct and conditioning (the same can be said of
far too many humans). Animals should be afforded
protection under the law. But are they endowed with
any rights by their creator? I do not know that answer.
usual suspect Date: 2002-06-12

It's a theological question, Derk, and in the above I refused to presume
the answer. I don't *know* if God endowed them with any rights


Then you have


The Bible is incongruent with AR, but consistent with AW.


The bible can be interpreted to mean whatever the
liar using it wishes it to mean, as you've proved quite
effectively in this one thread alone. Take another pet
subject I have, for example: personal responsibility.
When considering the expression "children carry the
sins of their fathers" Deut. 5:9 says, "You shall not
bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD
your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for
the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation
of those who hate me...", but Deut. 24:16 completely
contradicts that message (God's word) with, "Fathers
shall not be put to death for their children, nor children
put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own
sin."

The bible is a lie and used by liars like yourself to get
them out of tight corners or into people's pockets.

You're a

You're a cuckold:
I am sure he will tell you that I have shagged his wife and its
true I will admit that.
David "Judas" Nash - http://tinyurl.com/n292


You throw that up at every opportunity


It's true.


Study my twin's statement again. Why was he so
certain that I would tell the truth over something
which would surely cause myself and my wife so
much public embarrassment when it would have
been so easy for me just to deny it? What was my
twin so sure about when making that statement if
NOT my commitment to honesty?

Also, you might want to take note of something
he wrote regarding you.

"Over the last couple of years I have been using
this news group to vent my anger at my twin
brother Derek. I have repeatedly posted stories
about how Derek has committed cruelty to animals
and his own family. It has been a bitter war and I
have enjoyed watching the results as people like Jon
Ball and Usual Suspects have become ensnared."
http://tinyurl.com/ccnt8

He ensnared you, and you're still just as ensnared
as ever you were. I get the last laugh.

So is your wanking which you've admitted.


That's another lie. I've not admitted to anything
like that, and I'll prove it by bringing the whole
quote here and the context in which I wrote it.
Read on.

I downloaded Debby Does Dallas 2000 from kazaa and
watch it every time the wife goes shopping.
Derek "Wanksalot" Nash - http://tinyurl.com/nu3s


Using that link you supplied, the context isn't about
wanking, let alone an announcement from me that I
jerk off in the same way you jerk off while watching
male wrestlers grapple.

[start me]
You're no Victor Mature, but American girls being
what they are and not very fussy... snip

[you]
wtf do you know about American girls?

[me]
I downloaded Debby Does Dallas 2000 from kazaa and
watch it every time the wife goes shopping. What else is
there to learn about them?
[end]

As we can see, when the whole quote is put before
us, there's no reference made there about wanking,
usual liar. My statement was in response to a question
concerning my knowledge of American women's
tastes in men; they aren't fussy.

Why did you lie about black olives, you fat orthorexic ex-greasemonkey?

I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but
stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or
something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to
maintain my ethical standard.
-- Derek "Squid Ink" Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3


There's no lie in there. Since learning how black olives
are sold in a medium containing squid ink I've stopped
eating them to maintain my ethical standard; something
you've proven incapable of doing, back-slider.

What is it about your ethical standards that allows you to share your
wife with your twin?


He took what he knew to be mine, as always, but
instead of wrecking something, like he planned to, he
didn't count on my wife's determination to make our
marriage succeed for another twenty years; again,
something you'll never accomplish.

  #47 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 12:32 PM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dutch wrote:
"usual suspect" wrote


1. I want to make sure people aren't deluded by the lies people like you
spread about diet, health, nutrition, the conditions in which animals are
raised, etc., so I'm here to add some balance.



Quite so, "veganism" is one of the most insidious ideas in modern culture.
Due to it's benign reputation, people find themselves ensconced in it's
dogma before they know what hit them. The same people who would never fall
victim to one of the more obvious cults are easy prey for extreme ARAs who
use veganism to promote their agenda.


I think it's apropos and fair to compare veganism to cults. While
veganism may not be as systematic as, say, Scientology, it similarly
defrauds its adherents, fosters an "us versus them" attitude, and gets
them to aggressively proselytize others.
  #48 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 12:57 PM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

pearl wrote:
Support your troops - http://www.americasupportsyou.mil/ .

Your unethical edit is noted.


It wasn't unethical.


You altered


The link I provided allows people to support the troops. The one you had
is to Internation Action Center and World Workers Party (same
organization, same office, same phone numbers, etc.), which is an
"orthodox Stalinist" organization -- a group hostile to the troops.

With [Ramsey] Clark's name-recognition and homespun, avuncular
image, WWP had the opportunity to form a new front group to win
over naive liberals. This was the International Action Center
(IAC), which remains the top vehicle for Clark's ego and WWP's
play for hegemony over the fragmented remnants of the left.
http://shadow.autono.net/sin001/clark.htm

See also:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...le.asp?ID=3181

You've no credibility.


That's a compliment coming from someone who believes in and/or peddles:
"veganism"
"inner earth beings"
"hollow earth"
that goofy patent for a MANUFACTURED globe
helium-inflated number(s) for feed:beef
rain forest destruction
Brazil's exports (based on *Argentina's* trade)
Stolen French flying saucer
Zapper
Foot massage (as cure-all)
Astrology
Numerology
Alien abduction
bestiality
Leprechauns
Channeling
Polar fountains
Sun gazing
Chemtrails
AIDS and ebola conspiracy theory
Crop circles
sexually aroused by violent ex-convicts
participation in skinhead subculture
the validity of online IQ tests
crackpot 9-11 conspiracy theories
Jeff Rense for "news"
  #49 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 01:14 PM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Claire's big, fat Uncle Dreck wrote:
First you're vegan,

I called myself that under the misconception that veganism was about
food rather than animal rights.

You declared yourself vegan because you claimed

1) to "dislike flesh"

That's correct, with the exception of fish.

You didn't mention that exception when making
your statement about your dislike for flesh.


Was I supposed to enumerate every single like or dislike in every single
post I ever made, tosser?


Yes, you were,


Talk about a high standard. Where's your comprehensive like-dislike
list, fat ****?

Let's take your quotes concerning
hunting, for yet another example of many;

"*I* don't hunt."
usual suspect Jul 1 2003 http://tinyurl.com/e45k7

But then, just 4 days later you inadvertently confess
that you DO hunt after all;

"I know from my own hunting as well as from that
of family members and friends that nobody wants
to put a deer or rabbit or any other creature in pain."
usual suspect Jul 5 2003 http://tinyurl.com/c4h4d

You're an habitual liar.


That's not a lie. I grew up in a family who hunted. When I posted that
in July of 2003, I hadn't hunted in some time. I resumed again later
that year (during hunting season) to help control the overpopulation of
deer and thereby provide meat to the needy through an assistance program.

2) that "the consumption of meat, dairy, and eggs is
bad for me, animals, my environment, and the
whole world"
3) that "no animal must die for my nourishment or
enjoyment"

I now distinguish between healthful and unhealthful diets

Then you


The past is irrelevant.


Only according to those


Resto
I judged the claims of vegan activists and found them to be
distortions or outright lies. Shame you still stupidly parrot
them.
End restore.

Why do you continue to believe vegan lies and distortions, Nash?

My position now is consistent

Your position is


based on a learning process.


Confusion, more like.


No, I naively bought into certain aspects of veganism -- e.g., some
health claims -- but I found them to be lacking in veracity each time I
challenged those beliefs/claims. You resent those who challenge,
question, or reject the holy vegan dogma. You see me as some kind of
heretic. That's fine. I see you for what you a a shit-stirring,
morbidly obese, self-crippled yob.

It's a theological question, Derk, and in the above I refused to presume
the answer. I don't *know* if God endowed them with any rights

Then you have


The Bible is incongruent with AR, but consistent with AW.


The bible can be interpreted to mean whatever


It's incongruent with AR. It's filled with commands to kill certain
animals at certain times, and with examples of the consumption of animals.

Why did you lie about black olives, you fat orthorexic ex-greasemonkey?

I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but
stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or
something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to
maintain my ethical standard.
-- Derek "Squid Ink" Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3


There's no lie in there. Since learning how black olives
are sold in a medium containing squid ink I've stopped
eating them to maintain my ethical standard; something
you've proven incapable of doing, back-slider.


They're not sold in anything containing squid ink, dumb ass. Not only do
you believe vegan lies, you also peddle them. Why do you vegans keep
lying about this?

What is it about your ethical standards that allows you to share your
wife with your twin?


He took


No, he didn't take -- that would be rape. She *gave* it to him, and she
probably gave it to him *good*. That was her "determination," you
loathsome cuckold.
  #50 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 01:40 PM
pearl
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"usual suspect" wrote in message ...
pearl wrote:
Support your troops - http://www.americasupportsyou.mil/ .

Your unethical edit is noted.

It wasn't unethical.


You altered


And again. The game's up, suspect. You and your ilk are done.

The link I provided allows people to support the troops.


Hosted by the 'kind folks' who sent them there. Dumbkopf !!

The one you had
is to Internation Action Center and World Workers Party (same
organization, same office, same phone numbers, etc.), which is an
"orthodox Stalinist" organization -- a group hostile to the troops.


Hostile to your damned WAR, you depraved supporter of genocide.

usual malicious, desperate, perverse and twisted defamatory froth





  #51 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 01:41 PM
Derek
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 12:14:50 GMT, usual suspect wrote:

Derek wrote:

First you're vegan,

I called myself that under the misconception that veganism was about
food rather than animal rights.

You declared yourself vegan because you claimed

1) to "dislike flesh"

That's correct, with the exception of fish.

You didn't mention that exception when making
your statement about your dislike for flesh.

Was I supposed to enumerate every single like or dislike in every single
post I ever made, tosser?


Yes, you were,


Talk about a high standard.


You have no standard to begin with, so you
attack those who you've tried but failed to
aspire to instead.

Let's take your quotes concerning
hunting, for yet another example of many;

"*I* don't hunt."
usual suspect Jul 1 2003 http://tinyurl.com/e45k7

But then, just 4 days later you inadvertently confess
that you DO hunt after all;

"I know from my own hunting as well as from that
of family members and friends that nobody wants
to put a deer or rabbit or any other creature in pain."
usual suspect Jul 5 2003 http://tinyurl.com/c4h4d

You're an habitual liar.


That's not a lie.


It's one of many, usual liar. You just can't stop yourself
from lying and snipping away the evidence of your lies.
And you call yourself a Christian? Pah! You're a joke.

2) that "the consumption of meat, dairy, and eggs is
bad for me, animals, my environment, and the
whole world"
3) that "no animal must die for my nourishment or
enjoyment"

I now distinguish between healthful and unhealthful diets

Then you

The past is irrelevant.


Only according to those


Resto


unsnip
Only according to those with a past they would wish
to go away and forget about: you, for example. Your
past quotes reveal that you've lied about your dislike
for flesh. They also show that you have no grounds
to launch your pathetic tirades against vegans here
who abstain from meat, because like you, the majority
of them abstain from meat for the very same reasons
you gave, hypocrite.
end restore

Why do you continue to believe vegan lies and distortions, Nash?


I don't, queer.

My position now is consistent

Your position is

based on a learning process.


Confusion, more like.


No


Your quotes reveal your confusion, so there's
no use in trying to deny it, snippy.

unsnip

"I am vegan"
usual suspect 2002-05-09

"First, don't EVER call me "a vegan" or even just "vegan."
usual suspect 2003-06-10

"No thanks, I'm a vegan."
usual suspect 2003-08-14

"You'll find my views have been consistent."
usual suspect 2003-09-05

When you've finally made up your mind where your
own position is regarding veganism, you might have
some say here, but while you continue to attack
vegans that aren't as confused as you are regarding
their position, your feeble attacks can only be seen
as a swipe against those who've bettered you by
abiding by their stated principles. Your utter hatred
toward those you've tried but failed to aspire to is
ugly and so transparent.
end restore

It's a theological question, Derk, and in the above I refused to presume
the answer. I don't *know* if God endowed them with any rights

Then you have

The Bible is incongruent with AR, but consistent with AW.


The bible can be interpreted to mean whatever


It's incongruent with AR.


unsnip

The bible can be interpreted to mean whatever the
liar using it wishes it to mean, as you've proved quite
effectively in this one thread alone. Take another pet
subject I have, for example: personal responsibility.
When considering the expression "children carry the
sins of their fathers" Deut. 5:9 says, "You shall not
bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD
your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for
the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation
of those who hate me...", but Deut. 24:16 completely
contradicts that message (God's word) with, "Fathers
shall not be put to death for their children, nor children
put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own
sin."

The bible is a lie and used by liars like yourself to get
them out of tight corners or into people's pockets.
end restore

Why did you lie about black olives, you fat orthorexic ex-greasemonkey?

I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but
stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or
something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to
maintain my ethical standard.
-- Derek "Squid Ink" Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3


There's no lie in there. Since learning how black olives
are sold in a medium containing squid ink I've stopped
eating them to maintain my ethical standard; something
you've proven incapable of doing, back-slider.


They're not sold in anything containing squid ink, dumb ass.


I'm reliably told that they are immersed in squid ink
to colour them black, and I've no reason to believe a
word you write that suggests otherwise, liar suspect.
  #52 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 01:47 PM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

pearl wrote:
Support your troops - http://www.americasupportsyou.mil/ .

Your unethical edit is noted.

It wasn't unethical.

You altered


And again.


Why do you push the following?
"veganism"
"inner earth beings"
"hollow earth"
that goofy patent for a MANUFACTURED globe
helium-inflated number(s) for feed:beef
rain forest destruction
Brazil's exports (based on *Argentina's* trade)
Stolen French flying saucer
Zapper
Foot massage (as cure-all)
Astrology
Numerology
Alien abduction
bestiality
Leprechauns
Channeling
Polar fountains
Sun gazing
Chemtrails
AIDS and ebola conspiracy theory
Crop circles
sexually aroused by violent ex-convicts
participation in skinhead subculture
the validity of online IQ tests
crackpot 9-11 conspiracy theories
Jeff Rense for "news"
  #53 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 01:53 PM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Claire's fat and orthorexic Uncle Dreck wrote:
Why did you lie about black olives, you fat orthorexic ex-greasemonkey?

I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but
stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or
something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to
maintain my ethical standard.
-- Derek "Squid Ink" Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3

There's no lie in there. Since learning how black olives
are sold in a medium containing squid ink I've stopped
eating them to maintain my ethical standard; something
you've proven incapable of doing, back-slider.


They're not sold in anything containing squid ink, dumb ass.


I'm reliably told that they are immersed in squid ink
to colour them black,


You're UNreliably told that.

I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but
stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or
something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to
maintain my ethical standard.
-- Derek Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3

You stopped eating them because of misinformation, not because of
superior ethics.

These olives are processed in a lye curing solution that leaches
the bitterness out. California Ripe Olives have a firm texture
and smooth, mellow taste. Once curing is complete, a series of
cold water rinses removes every trace of curing solution. During
the curing process, which takes several days, a flow of air
bubbling through the olives produces the natural, rich dark
color. A trace of organic iron salt (ferrous gluconate) is added
to act as a color fixer so the olives will have less tendency to
fade after the cans are stored.

Canning is the final step. Ripe olives are canned in a mild
salt
brine solution and, because they are a low-acid product, are
heat sterilized under strict California State health rules.
http://www.calolive.org/homecooks/facts.html

They're processed in LYE to change their color, fatso, yet you
delibverately LIE and say they "swim around in squid ink or something
close to it." Why do you continue to lie, you orthorexic sod?
  #54 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 01:58 PM
pearl
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"usual suspect" wrote in message . ..
pearl wrote:
Support your troops - http://www.americasupportsyou.mil/ .

Your unethical edit is noted.

It wasn't unethical.

You altered


And again.


Why do you push the following?


I don't. You wrote a hotch-potch of truth, distortion, lies and invention.
And that's your dirty, sleazy, cowardly, modus operandi, neoscum boy.



  #55 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 02:04 PM
Derek
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 12:53:23 GMT, queer suspect wrote:
Derek wrote:

Why did you lie about black olives, you fat orthorexic ex-greasemonkey?

I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but
stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or
something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to
maintain my ethical standard.
-- Derek "Squid Ink" Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3

There's no lie in there. Since learning how black olives
are sold in a medium containing squid ink I've stopped
eating them to maintain my ethical standard; something
you've proven incapable of doing, back-slider.

They're not sold in anything containing squid ink, dumb ass.


I'm reliably told that they are immersed in squid ink
to colour them black, and I've no reason to believe a
word you write that suggests otherwise, liar suspect


You're UNreliably told that.

I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but
stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or
something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to
maintain my ethical standard.
-- Derek Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3

You stopped eating them because of misinformation


Like I said but which you snipped away, "I'm reliably told
that they are immersed in squid ink to colour them black,
and I've no reason to believe a word you write that
suggests otherwise, liar suspect."

Now for the rest of the post you've snipped away in
utter embarrassment; address it if you can, queer.

unsnip
First you're vegan,

I called myself that under the misconception that veganism was about
food rather than animal rights.

You declared yourself vegan because you claimed

1) to "dislike flesh"

That's correct, with the exception of fish.

You didn't mention that exception when making
your statement about your dislike for flesh.

Was I supposed to enumerate every single like or dislike in every single
post I ever made, tosser?


Yes, you were,


Talk about a high standard.


You have no standard to begin with, so you
attack those who you've tried but failed to
aspire to instead.

Let's take your quotes concerning
hunting, for yet another example of many;

"*I* don't hunt."
usual suspect Jul 1 2003 http://tinyurl.com/e45k7

But then, just 4 days later you inadvertently confess
that you DO hunt after all;

"I know from my own hunting as well as from that
of family members and friends that nobody wants
to put a deer or rabbit or any other creature in pain."
usual suspect Jul 5 2003 http://tinyurl.com/c4h4d

You're an habitual liar.


That's not a lie.


It's one of many, usual liar. You just can't stop yourself
from lying and snipping away the evidence of your lies.
And you call yourself a Christian? Pah! You're a joke.

2) that "the consumption of meat, dairy, and eggs is
bad for me, animals, my environment, and the
whole world"
3) that "no animal must die for my nourishment or
enjoyment"

I now distinguish between healthful and unhealthful diets

Then you

The past is irrelevant.


Only according to those


Resto


unsnip
Only according to those with a past they would wish
to go away and forget about: you, for example. Your
past quotes reveal that you've lied about your dislike
for flesh. They also show that you have no grounds
to launch your pathetic tirades against vegans here
who abstain from meat, because like you, the majority
of them abstain from meat for the very same reasons
you gave, hypocrite.
end restore

Why do you continue to believe vegan lies and distortions, Nash?


I don't, queer.

My position now is consistent

Your position is

based on a learning process.


Confusion, more like.


No


Your quotes reveal your confusion, so there's
no use in trying to deny it, snippy.

unsnip

"I am vegan"
usual suspect 2002-05-09

"First, don't EVER call me "a vegan" or even just "vegan."
usual suspect 2003-06-10

"No thanks, I'm a vegan."
usual suspect 2003-08-14

"You'll find my views have been consistent."
usual suspect 2003-09-05

When you've finally made up your mind where your
own position is regarding veganism, you might have
some say here, but while you continue to attack
vegans that aren't as confused as you are regarding
their position, your feeble attacks can only be seen
as a swipe against those who've bettered you by
abiding by their stated principles. Your utter hatred
toward those you've tried but failed to aspire to is
ugly and so transparent.
end restore

It's a theological question, Derk, and in the above I refused to presume
the answer. I don't *know* if God endowed them with any rights

Then you have

The Bible is incongruent with AR, but consistent with AW.


The bible can be interpreted to mean whatever


It's incongruent with AR.


unsnip

The bible can be interpreted to mean whatever the
liar using it wishes it to mean, as you've proved quite
effectively in this one thread alone. Take another pet
subject I have, for example: personal responsibility.
When considering the expression "children carry the
sins of their fathers" Deut. 5:9 says, "You shall not
bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD
your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for
the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation
of those who hate me...", but Deut. 24:16 completely
contradicts that message (God's word) with, "Fathers
shall not be put to death for their children, nor children
put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own
sin."

The bible is a lie and used by liars like yourself to get
them out of tight corners or into people's pockets.
end restore

Keep snipping and altering posts if that's your only
option, but rest assured that your dodging and lies
are all held in Google archives to laugh at.


  #56 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 02:05 PM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

pearl wrote:
Support your troops - http://www.americasupportsyou.mil/ .

Your unethical edit is noted.

It wasn't unethical.

You altered

And again.


Why do you push the following?


resto
"veganism"
"inner earth beings"
"hollow earth"
that goofy patent for a MANUFACTURED globe
helium-inflated number(s) for feed:beef
rain forest destruction
Brazil's exports (based on *Argentina's* trade)
Stolen French flying saucer
Zapper
Foot massage (as cure-all)
Astrology
Numerology
Alien abduction
bestiality
Leprechauns
Channeling
Polar fountains
Sun gazing
Chemtrails
AIDS and ebola conspiracy theory
Crop circles
sexually aroused by violent ex-convicts
participation in skinhead subculture
the validity of online IQ tests
crackpot 9-11 conspiracy theories
Jeff Rense for "news"
end restore.

I don't.


http://tinyurl.com/h0br
http://tinyurl.com/h0bl
http://tinyurl.com/v5p8
http://tinyurl.com/v5pf
http://tinyurl.com/mh5w
http://tinyurl.com/mh6h
http://tinyurl.com/mh6r
http://tinyurl.com/mh71
http://tinyurl.com/mh7a
http://tinyurl.com/mh7j
http://tinyurl.com/mh7p
http://tinyurl.com/v5jj
http://tinyurl.com/v5kd
http://tinyurl.com/v5l6
http://tinyurl.com/v5ft
http://tinyurl.com/v5fj
http://tinyurl.com/v5fp
http://tinyurl.com/v5ft
http://tinyurl.com/v5ga
http://tinyurl.com/v5gc
http://tinyurl.com/v5i2
http://tinyurl.com/v5gk
http://tinyurl.com/v5h1
http://tinyurl.com/v5h9

WTF do you call all that, dummy?
  #57 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 02:08 PM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Claire's thick orthorexic Uncle Dreck wrote:
Why did you lie about black olives, you fat orthorexic ex-greasemonkey?

I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but
stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or
something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to
maintain my ethical standard.
-- Derek "Squid Ink" Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3

There's no lie in there. Since learning how black olives
are sold in a medium containing squid ink I've stopped
eating them to maintain my ethical standard; something
you've proven incapable of doing, back-slider.

They're not sold in anything containing squid ink, dumb ass.

I'm reliably told that they are immersed in squid ink
to colour them black, and I've no reason to believe a
word you write that suggests otherwise, liar suspect


You're UNreliably told that.

I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but
stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or
something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to
maintain my ethical standard.
-- Derek Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3

You stopped eating them because of misinformation


Like I said


You only persist in believing and spreading deceit, lard ass. You
stopped eating olives because of misinformation, not because of
"superior ethics."

These olives are processed in a lye curing solution that leaches
the bitterness out. California Ripe Olives have a firm texture
and smooth, mellow taste. Once curing is complete, a series of
cold water rinses removes every trace of curing solution. During
the curing process, which takes several days, a flow of air
bubbling through the olives produces the natural, rich dark
color. A trace of organic iron salt (ferrous gluconate) is added
to act as a color fixer so the olives will have less tendency to
fade after the cans are stored.

Canning is the final step. Ripe olives are canned in a mild salt
brine solution and, because they are a low-acid product, are
heat sterilized under strict California State health rules.
http://www.calolive.org/homecooks/facts.html

They're processed in LYE to change their color, fatso, yet you
deliberately LIE and say they "swim around in squid ink or something
close to it." Why do you continue to lie, you orthorexic sod?
  #58 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 02:09 PM
Derek
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 12:47:13 GMT, queer suspect wrote:

Why do you push the following?


That's a bit rich, coming from a meat pusher on
vegetarian and vegan-associated forums, especially
when we consider your failed efforts to aspire to
the high standards of those you push that meat onto.
  #59 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 02:11 PM
usual suspect
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Claire's orthorexic windbag Uncle Dreck wrote:
Why do you push the following?


That's a bit rich,


It's not rich, it's established.

http://tinyurl.com/h0br
http://tinyurl.com/h0bl
http://tinyurl.com/v5p8
http://tinyurl.com/v5pf
http://tinyurl.com/mh5w
http://tinyurl.com/mh6h
http://tinyurl.com/mh6r
http://tinyurl.com/mh71
http://tinyurl.com/mh7a
http://tinyurl.com/mh7j
http://tinyurl.com/mh7p
http://tinyurl.com/v5jj
http://tinyurl.com/v5kd
http://tinyurl.com/v5l6
http://tinyurl.com/v5ft
http://tinyurl.com/v5fj
http://tinyurl.com/v5fp
http://tinyurl.com/v5ft
http://tinyurl.com/v5ga
http://tinyurl.com/v5gc
http://tinyurl.com/v5i2
http://tinyurl.com/v5gk
http://tinyurl.com/v5h1
http://tinyurl.com/v5h9

But no wonder you're defending her given your own eating disorder:

I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but
stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or
something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to
maintain my ethical standard.
-- Derek Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3

You stopped eating them because of misinformation, not because of
superior ethics.

These olives are processed in a lye curing solution that leaches
the bitterness out. California Ripe Olives have a firm texture
and smooth, mellow taste. Once curing is complete, a series of
cold water rinses removes every trace of curing solution. During
the curing process, which takes several days, a flow of air
bubbling through the olives produces the natural, rich dark
color. A trace of organic iron salt (ferrous gluconate) is added
to act as a color fixer so the olives will have less tendency to
fade after the cans are stored.

Canning is the final step. Ripe olives are canned in a mild salt
brine solution and, because they are a low-acid product, are
heat sterilized under strict California State health rules.
http://www.calolive.org/homecooks/facts.html

They're processed in LYE to change their color, fatso, yet you
deliberately LIE and say they "swim around in squid ink or something
close to it." Why do you continue to lie, you orthorexic sod?
  #60 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 14-08-2005, 02:12 PM
Derek
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:08:44 GMT, queer suspect wrote:

Derek wrote:

Why did you lie about black olives, you fat orthorexic ex-greasemonkey?

I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but
stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or
something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to
maintain my ethical standard.
-- Derek "Squid Ink" Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3

There's no lie in there. Since learning how black olives
are sold in a medium containing squid ink I've stopped
eating them to maintain my ethical standard; something
you've proven incapable of doing, back-slider.

They're not sold in anything containing squid ink, dumb ass.

I'm reliably told that they are immersed in squid ink
to colour them black, and I've no reason to believe a
word you write that suggests otherwise, liar suspect

You're UNreliably told that.

I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but
stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or
something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to
maintain my ethical standard.
-- Derek Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3

You stopped eating them because of misinformation


Like I said but which you snipped away, "I'm reliably told
that they are immersed in squid ink to colour them black,
and I've no reason to believe a word you write that
suggests otherwise, liar suspect."

Now for the rest of the post you've snipped away in
utter embarrassment; address it if you can, queer.

unsnip
First you're vegan,

I called myself that under the misconception that veganism was about
food rather than animal rights.

You declared yourself vegan because you claimed

1) to "dislike flesh"

That's correct, with the exception of fish.

You didn't mention that exception when making
your statement about your dislike for flesh.

Was I supposed to enumerate every single like or dislike in every single
post I ever made, tosser?


Yes, you were,


Talk about a high standard.


You have no standard to begin with, so you
attack those who you've tried but failed to
aspire to instead.

Let's take your quotes concerning
hunting, for yet another example of many;

"*I* don't hunt."
usual suspect Jul 1 2003 http://tinyurl.com/e45k7

But then, just 4 days later you inadvertently confess
that you DO hunt after all;

"I know from my own hunting as well as from that
of family members and friends that nobody wants
to put a deer or rabbit or any other creature in pain."
usual suspect Jul 5 2003 http://tinyurl.com/c4h4d

You're an habitual liar.


That's not a lie.


It's one of many, usual liar. You just can't stop yourself
from lying and snipping away the evidence of your lies.
And you call yourself a Christian? Pah! You're a joke.

2) that "the consumption of meat, dairy, and eggs is
bad for me, animals, my environment, and the
whole world"
3) that "no animal must die for my nourishment or
enjoyment"

I now distinguish between healthful and unhealthful diets

Then you

The past is irrelevant.


Only according to those


Resto


unsnip
Only according to those with a past they would wish
to go away and forget about: you, for example. Your
past quotes reveal that you've lied about your dislike
for flesh. They also show that you have no grounds
to launch your pathetic tirades against vegans here
who abstain from meat, because like you, the majority
of them abstain from meat for the very same reasons
you gave, hypocrite.
end restore

Why do you continue to believe vegan lies and distortions, Nash?


I don't, queer.

My position now is consistent

Your position is

based on a learning process.


Confusion, more like.


No


Your quotes reveal your confusion, so there's
no use in trying to deny it, snippy.

unsnip

"I am vegan"
usual suspect 2002-05-09

"First, don't EVER call me "a vegan" or even just "vegan."
usual suspect 2003-06-10

"No thanks, I'm a vegan."
usual suspect 2003-08-14

"You'll find my views have been consistent."
usual suspect 2003-09-05

When you've finally made up your mind where your
own position is regarding veganism, you might have
some say here, but while you continue to attack
vegans that aren't as confused as you are regarding
their position, your feeble attacks can only be seen
as a swipe against those who've bettered you by
abiding by their stated principles. Your utter hatred
toward those you've tried but failed to aspire to is
ugly and so transparent.
end restore

It's a theological question, Derk, and in the above I refused to presume
the answer. I don't *know* if God endowed them with any rights

Then you have

The Bible is incongruent with AR, but consistent with AW.


The bible can be interpreted to mean whatever


It's incongruent with AR.


unsnip

The bible can be interpreted to mean whatever the
liar using it wishes it to mean, as you've proved quite
effectively in this one thread alone. Take another pet
subject I have, for example: personal responsibility.
When considering the expression "children carry the
sins of their fathers" Deut. 5:9 says, "You shall not
bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD
your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for
the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation
of those who hate me...", but Deut. 24:16 completely
contradicts that message (God's word) with, "Fathers
shall not be put to death for their children, nor children
put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own
sin."

The bible is a lie and used by liars like yourself to get
them out of tight corners or into people's pockets.
end restore

Keep snipping and altering posts if that's your only
option, but rest assured that your dodging and lies
are all held in Google archives to laugh at.


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
Tonight's Dinner Fare & Christmas Meals ~patches~ General Cooking 0 18-12-2005 11:13 PM
Fair Fare Melba's Jammin' Preserving 9 09-09-2005 02:04 AM
Dinner Party Fare Donna Rose General Cooking 11 05-07-2004 08:06 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:22 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"

 

Copyright © 2017