"my name and reputation are sterling" - Goo

dh@. wrote:
> "my name and reputation are sterling" - Goo


It's a misprint.

He probably said, "my name and reputation are shit"

Maybe not following things here in misc.rural, but I think your quote
in another group of:

"Shut the **** up you stupid ****ing moron. Do the world a favour and
go blow
your stupid ****ing head off with the biggest ****ing gun you can find.
"

pretty much sums up your reputation. Hope that's not the most
intelligent thing you have to say.

Does your mother know you talk like that????

Sometimes, if you don't have anything to say, the best thing to do is
not say anything.

dh@. wrote:
> "my name and reputation are sterling" - Goo

Pat wrote:
> Maybe not following things here in misc.rural, but I think your quote
> in another group of:
>
> "Shut the **** up you stupid ****ing moron. Do the world a favour and
> go blow
> your stupid ****ing head off with the biggest ****ing gun you can find.
> "
>
> pretty much sums up your reputation. Hope that's not the most
> intelligent thing you have to say.
>
> Does your mother know you talk like that????
>
> Sometimes, if you don't have anything to say, the best thing to do is
> not say anything.
>
> dh@. wrote:
> > "my name and reputation are sterling" - Goo


goo and f**kwit, aka the twins of the endless mad.

On 20 Aug 2006 12:24:22 -0700, "Ron" > wrote:

>
>dh@. wrote:
>> "my name and reputation are sterling" - Goo
>
>
>It's a misprint.
>
>He probably said, "my name and reputation are shit"

Honesty of that level? Goo? We're not likely to
ever see the day...nor is anyone else. It's interesting
that Goo is so blatantly dishonest and contemptible,
yet he displays his shame of those same qualities by
dishonestly lying about his reputation. As is often the
case with Goo, it's both amusing and pathetic.

On 20 Aug 2006 12:41:40 -0700, "Pat" > wrote:

>Maybe not following things here in misc.rural, but I think your quote
>in another group of:
>
>"Shut the **** up you stupid ****ing moron. Do the world a favour and
>go blow
>your stupid ****ing head off with the biggest ****ing gun you can find.
>"
>
>pretty much sums up your reputation. Hope that's not the most
>intelligent thing you have to say.

I didn't say that. Goo's boy and "ar" brother "Dutch" said it, because
I pointed out the huge difference between decent Animal Welfare
and the gross mi$nomer "animal rights". They feel that most contributors
to "ar" organizations are not really in favor of the elimination of domestic
animals, so they don't want everyone to understand the difference or
they're afraid it would result in fewer contributions to "ar" organizations,
and more contributions to AW organizations.

>Does your mother know you talk like that????

What I pointed out to cause Dutch's desperately insane reaction,
was the fact that:

"AW means better lives for animals. "AR" means the elimination of
farm animals, and as much as you obviously want to believe they're
the same thing, they are completely different objectives."

which is an excellent example showing "aras" are aware that the truth
is not their friend, but an enemy to be silenced.

>Sometimes, if you don't have anything to say, the best thing to do is
>not say anything.

It appears you're well familiar with being in the position, but enough
on that. Since you brought to mind the subject of "ar" quotes, here
are some which I feel help show their absurdity, dishonesty and
desperation in the things they want everyone to believe:

"No zygotes, animals, people, or any other living thing
benefits from coming into existence. No farm animals
benefit from farming." - Goo

"Causing animals to be born and "get to experience life"
.. . . is no mitigation at all for killing them." - Goo

"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude
than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo

"When considering your food choices ethically, assign
ZERO weight to the morally empty fact that choosing to
eat meat causes animals to be bred into existence." - Goo

"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing
of the animals erases all of it." - Goo

"I have examined the question at length, and feel
there is only one reasonable conclusion: life, per se,
is not a benefit." - Goo

"Being born is not a benefit in any way. It can't be." - Goo

""giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of
their deaths" - Goo

"The fact of the matter is, with 135,000,000 cats and
dogs in the U.S., the food to feed them simply cannot
be "leftovers" from the animals bred to feed humans." - Goo

"Cattle are specifically bred into existence to be
pet food. " - Goo

"The vast majority of the financial support for PeTA comes
from people who do NOT subscribe to the complete
elimination of animal use." - Dutch

"Taking moral credit for a livestock animal's very existence
is analagous to taking moral credit for the life of a daughter
you sell onto the streets." - Dutch

"What's important is the medium/long term implications,
that is no more animals "in bondage" to humans. THAT'S
the important issue to be debated" - Dutch

"Every consumer choice promotes animals to experience
life." - Dutch

"we need to consider group 1, those animals who WILL
exist under present rules" - Dutch

"abstaining from meat saves future animals from life" - Dutch

"Life does not justify death, more to the point, life does not
justify killing." - Dutch

"you should become a vegan. I've been saying that to you
for years." - Dutch

"I am an animal rights believer." - Dutch

"we must have at least the same right as every animal does,
which is to seek to compete successfully, sustain ourselves
and thrive." - Dutch

On 22 Aug 2006 13:03:02 GMT, Terri > wrote:

>"Pat" > wrote in
oups.com:
>
>> Maybe not following things here in misc.rural, but I think your quote
>> in another group of:
>snipped
>The problem ( besides you quoting that which a great many of us
>have already killfiled) is that you are responding to (as I am) a number
>cross-posted ngs that have nothing to do with misc.rural

The thread is questioning whether or not anyone believes Goo's
claim regarding his reputation. Since the Goober is known in several
groups--one being misc.rural--the question was asked in several groups.

>added in
>by the same people who always do this, spending their days squabbling
>about the same things they always squabble about for years on end.

Now you're referring to the question of whether or not animals raised
for food ever have lives of positive value, and "aras" insist that they don't:

"NO animals benefit from farming" - Goo

and insist that their lives should never be taken into consideration when
considering food choices and/or human influence on animals:

"When considering your food choices ethically, assign
ZERO weight to the morally empty fact that choosing to
eat meat causes animals to be bred into existence." - Goo

*because* doing so could create the impression that providing decent
lives and humane deaths for livestock--ie decent AW--could be ethically
equivalent or superior to their elimination--ie "ar".

>I've seen people who persist in quoting and playing with these types

It's useful to present some quotes of "aras", so people can judge for
themselves whether they feel the "aras" are the authorities on animals
they consider themselves to be, or not:

"Dogs NEVER anticipate, nor do cats, or cattle, or
any other animal you've ever encountered." - Goo

"Animals do not experience frustration." - Goo

"No zygotes, animals, people, or any other living thing
benefits from coming into existence. No farm animals
benefit from farming." - Goo

"Causing animals to be born and "get to experience life"
.. . . is no mitigation at all for killing them." - Goo

"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude
than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo

"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate killing
of the animals erases all of it." - Goo

"I have examined the question at length, and feel
there is only one reasonable conclusion: life, per se,
is not a benefit." - Goo

"Being born is not a benefit in any way. It can't be." - Goo

""giving them life" does NOT mitigate the wrongness of
their deaths" - Goo

"Animals cannot be or feel disappointed." - Goo

"Non human animals experience neither pride nor
disappointment. They don't have the mental ability
to feel either." - Goo

"Anticipation requires language." - Goo

"No animals anticipate." - Goo

"Dogs, cats, cattle, almost all animals "lower" than
the great apes have no sense of self." - Goo

"They are not aware that they can see. " - Goo

"They are *not* aware that they can smell." - Goo

"The fact of the matter is, with 135,000,000 cats and
dogs in the U.S., the food to feed them simply cannot
be "leftovers" from the animals bred to feed humans." - Goo

"Ranchers . . . have no idea if a steer they raise is
going to be used entirely for human consumption,
entirely for animal consumption, or for some
combination; nor do they care." - Goo

"Cattle are specifically bred into existence to be
pet food. " - Goo

"I'm right about all of it." - Goo
"I can explain myself in logical and coherent terms" - Goo
"my name and reputation are sterling" - Goo
"Why are you laughing at mental illness" - Goo
"I'm not stupid." - Goo
"I know exactly what I think" - Goo
"I educated the public" - Goo
"I haven't made any absurd claims" - Goo

<dh@.> wrote in message
...
> On 22 Aug 2006 13:03:02 GMT, Terri > wrote:

> >The problem ( besides you quoting that which a great many of us
> >have already killfiled) is that you are responding to (as I am) a
number
> >cross-posted ngs that have nothing to do with misc.rural
>
> The thread is questioning whether or not anyone believes Goo's
> claim regarding his reputation. Since the Goober is known in several
> groups--one being misc.rural--the question was asked in several
groups.

But you are being a pest. Either shut up or disappear.

Farm1 wrote:
> <dh@.> wrote in message
> ...
> > On 22 Aug 2006 13:03:02 GMT, Terri > wrote:
>
> > >The problem ( besides you quoting that which a great many of us
> > >have already killfiled) is that you are responding to (as I am) a
> number
> > >cross-posted ngs that have nothing to do with misc.rural
> >
> > The thread is questioning whether or not anyone believes Goo's
> > claim regarding his reputation. Since the Goober is known in several
> > groups--one being misc.rural--the question was asked in several
> groups.
>
> But you are being a pest. Either shut up or disappear.


Go back to pretend farming on misc.rural.

wrote:
> Farm1 wrote:
> > <dh@.> wrote in message
> > ...
> > > On 22 Aug 2006 13:03:02 GMT, Terri > wrote:
> >
> > > >The problem ( besides you quoting that which a great many of us
> > > >have already killfiled) is that you are responding to (as I am) a
> > number
> > > >cross-posted ngs that have nothing to do with misc.rural
> > >
> > > The thread is questioning whether or not anyone believes Goo's
> > > claim regarding his reputation. Since the Goober is known in several
> > > groups--one being misc.rural--the question was asked in several
> > groups.
> >
> > But you are being a pest. Either shut up or disappear.
>
>
> Go back to pretend farming on misc.rural.

please killfile this piece of filth known as David 'high-high' Harrison

Ronald 'More-More' Moshki wrote:
> wrote:
> > Farm1 wrote:
> > > <dh@.> wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > On 22 Aug 2006 13:03:02 GMT, Terri > wrote:
> > >
> > > > >The problem ( besides you quoting that which a great many of us
> > > > >have already killfiled) is that you are responding to (as I am) a
> > > number
> > > > >cross-posted ngs that have nothing to do with misc.rural
> > > >
> > > > The thread is questioning whether or not anyone believes Goo's
> > > > claim regarding his reputation. Since the Goober is known in several
> > > > groups--one being misc.rural--the question was asked in several
> > > groups.
> > >
> > > But you are being a pest. Either shut up or disappear.
> >
> >
> > Go back to pretend farming on misc.rural.
>
> please killfile this piece of filth known as David 'high-high' Harrison


So now you presume to tell *me* whose messages I'm allowed access to?

Go back to pretend farming on misc.rural.

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 20:41:18 +1000, "Farm1" <please@askifyouwannaknow> wrote:

><dh@.> wrote in message
.. .
>> On 22 Aug 2006 13:03:02 GMT, Terri > wrote:
>
>> >The problem ( besides you quoting that which a great many of us
>> >have already killfiled) is that you are responding to (as I am) a
>number
>> >cross-posted ngs that have nothing to do with misc.rural
>>
>> The thread is questioning whether or not anyone believes Goo's
>> claim regarding his reputation. Since the Goober is known in several
>> groups--one being misc.rural--the question was asked in several
>groups.
>
>But you are being a pest.

The name you use suggests you feel that you know something
about farming. Can you understand that some animals raised for
food have lives of positive value? Can you appreciate the significance
of the fact in regards to human influence on animals if you can
understand the fact at all?

> please killfile this piece of filth known as David 'high-high' Harrison
>

I second that. Vainglorious *******.