Originally posted by bbarrhey, who are you calling a kook? and anyway, only some plants can talk, such as elm trees. some people say that oaks and eucalypts can talk too, but that is plainly just silly.🙄
lol, you're kidding me, right? I'm sure I can find some kook on the web who claims that plants can talk, too. If you're going to provide evidence, can you try and do so from a reputable source, or perhaps a peer-reviewed scientific journal?
2 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderis this an indication that you have a personal vendetta against me and ivanhoe (who hasn't even posted in this thread)? if so, perhaps you would consider restricting your contributions to me to the exodus thread you started on my behalf, instead of spreading it all over other threads - even on a friday night!
If you want to keep defending the Pradtf's and Ivanhoe's of the world or continue some silly personal vendetta against me.
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by no1marauderI was not taking a stance of moral superiority. I was just commenting on you tearing someone down, over an issue that you would probably not even take an interest in if it was not written by prad. I commend you for your good works, but I certainly won't go out of my way to tear you down because you are you.
That's a hoot coming from you, Mike; when was the last antiwar or civil rights march you were at? I've been in both in the recent past. I represent people getting evicted pro bono even though I ain't living in a mansion; when was the last you unclogged a poor person's drain for free? If you want to keep defending the Pradtf's and Ivanhoe' ...[text shortened]... ut don't try to pretend you have some moral superiority over me because that's just too funny.
Justpointingoutsomethingtoyou.
Mike
Originally posted by pradtfThe title of this thread is " Australian Wool Boycott" and the first line you posted refers to the diligent effects of animal rights activists and organizations to launch this campaign. You include a press release with the subject “PETA has announced an international boycott of Australian wool”, complete with requests to send letters on behalf of the campaign. So I think it is reasonable to discuss PETA, this and other associated "animals for clothing" campaigns, the motivation for PETA's actions, the actions of animal rights activists you refer to and whether this campaign is worthy of support. I am looking at your first post and can not see how I have diverted this thread from its title and opening line. Please highlight anything from this list you deem inappropriate to discuss in this thread.
steerpike,
you are the one who diverted this thread into a AR activist bashing effort.
it seems to me that you would like to see AR activists punished or at least thought not too nicely of because of your beliefs
prad
I have never expressed the belief animal rights activists should be punished. I do believe criminals who assault people should be punished, regardless of the cause they believe in. Animal rights activists are not all criminals but I believe any responsible Animal Rights organisation should make clear where they stand regarding criminal actions taken on behalf of the cause they espouse - and the "Let us take the gloves off" slogans on the PETA fur page website makes it fairly clear PETA wants to add fuel to that particular fire.
I understand your frustration with the fact PETA does not stand up well when subject to scrutiny and any PETA organised campaign meets with considerable scepticism. Perhaps PETA should follow the quote on their own page. "The marketing genius of PETA's campaigns helped create a new idea: that you win people over to your cause with humor, playfulness and innovation, and not with sanctimonious self-righteousness." I see little evidence of a lack of sanctimonious self-righteousness on their site and on posts made here by their supporters.
Throwing paint as Bbar advocates is not a way that you win people over to your cause either. Perhaps you should find a more reputable organisation concerned with animal welfare to support.
Originally posted by pradtfI told you once, I'll tell you again: I'll post where and what I please, if you don't like it while you're still here alert it. I've stayed on the basic topic here: treatment of animals and why you and BBarr believe that animals have "rights" that human beings must abide by even if that means human beings will suffer because of it.
is this an indication that you have a personal vendetta against me and ivanhoe (who hasn't even posted in this thread)? if so, perhaps you would consider restricting your contributions to me to the exodus thread you started on my behalf, instead of spreading it all over other threads - even on a friday night!
in friendship,
prad
Mike likes to barge into threads (as is his right) and defend you and Ivanhoe. That's up to him. I don't have a personal vendetta against you and Ivanhoe: I just think both of you are intolerant, muddle-headed, not too bright people who haven't a clue on how to argue. I kinda like the debate I'm having with BBarr in the thread because he does know how to debate and isn't an idiot.
You are again trying to order me around, but I'm not one of your VeggieChess minions and I don't do what I'm told. No wonder why you prefer animals to human beings; they'll do what they're told by a pompous, self-righteous fool like you. But I ain't a sheep; I do what I want.
Originally posted by pradtfSavethesheep is part of PETA and all press releases refer to PETA - who else is behind the campaign?
it's not dishonesty, steerpike - quite the opposite in fact.
you are confusing PETA with the boycott which is a much bigger thing involving much more than PETA.
once the mulesing and live exports stop - the boycott will stop because that is what the boycott is about.
PETA will naturally remain opposed to wool because they are an animal rights organiza ...[text shortened]... cott is to stop mulesing and live exports and is localized to australia.
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by steerpikebut steerpike, what you have tried to do is malign the boycott, the movement (and even me, for some unknown reason!), by turning this into a PETA people are thugs routine. you even tried to do the PETA = ALF number here.
The title of this thread is " Australian Wool Boycott" and the first line you posted refers to the diligent effects of animal rights activists and organizations to launch this campaign. You include a press release with the subject ?PETA has announced an international boycott of Australian wool?, complete with requests to send letters on behalf of the cam ...[text shortened]... haps you should find a more reputable organisation concerned with animal welfare to support.
while PETA does have some bizarre campaigns (at least in my opinion), these do not reflect on the realities for the sheep we are talking about.
you may not have "expressed the belief animal rights activists should be punished", but you certainly seem to lump them altogether. i have explained to you in the past that AR is a wide field and the groups don't by any means agree with each other.
PETA actually stands up very well and there is no frustration on my part in case you are really concerned. despite the 'fabricated' negative media provided by some groups like CCF, PETA is not only highly respected in their hometown of Norfolk and beyond as well as at educational conferences of various kinds, their membership continues to grow worldwide (at 800 000 now, i believe) and they receive continued and dedicated support, just to name a few, from the likes of pamela anderson, woody harrelson mary tyler moore, alicia silverstone, steven seagal, melissa rivers, james cromwell - even the dalai lama!
i think if you really did investigate PETA, you'd find a lot more to admire and a lot less to criticize.
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by pradtfWrong, again! Go to http://www.geocities.com/hitlerwasavegetarian/ which conclusively shows, based on actual recorded transcripts of the Veg Fuerher's own table conversations, that Hitler was a vegetarian from the late 1930's until his death! There's also this interesting passage that may apply to your ALF friends and maybe even you:
btw, hitler wasn't a vegetarian and if you'd do some research on that topic too you'll find that you are again misinformed.
in friendship,
prad
Question:
Could anyone soft-hearted enough to love animals be hard-hearted enough to authorize the slaughter of millions of innocent humans?
Answer:
Animal lovers are acutely sensitive to the horrific suffering that humankind routinely inflicts on animals. Therefore, it is only logical that some animal lovers would develop an extremely hard-hearted attitude toward humans. In their minds, any suffering imposed on humankind might be seen as appropriate karmic payback on behalf of animals. For example, in order to justify his persecution of the Jews, Hitler used graphic films of how Jews slaughter animals.*
* [The Jewish tradition of "kosher" slaughter requires that animals be kept fully conscious as their necks are slit and they are bled to death. It is an unsightly practice which appears demonically cruel even to most meat eaters. It had been declared illegal by Hitler's 1934 animal protection laws.]
Source: ANIMALS IN THE THIRD REICH. Boria Sax. 2000. Continuum Publishing, New York.
Interesting, eh?
5 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderyes you are wrong again, because you like to consult only the source of information you see fit to.
Wrong, again!
take a closer look:
While it is true that Hitler's doctors put him on a vegetarian diet to cure him of flatulence and a chronic stomach disorder, his biographers such as Albert Speer, Robert Payne, John Toland, et al, have attested to his liking for ham sausages and other cured meats. Even Spencer says that Hitler was a vegetarian from only 1931 on: "It would be true to say that up to 1931, he preferred a vegetarian diet, but on some occasions would deviate from it." He committed suicide in the bunker when he was 56 in 1945; that would have given him 14 years as a vegetarian, but we have the testimony to the contrary of the woman chef who was his personal cook in Hamburg during the late 1930s - Dione Lucas. In her "Gourmet Cooking School Cookbook," she records that his favorite dish - the one that he customarily requested - was stuffed squab (pigeon). "I do not mean to spoil your appetite for stuffed squab, but you might be interested to know that it was a great favorite with Mr. Hitler, who dined in the hotel often."
http://www.veg.ca/newsletr/mayjun96/hitler.html
or
Biographical material about Hitler suggests a contradictoriness in reports about his diet. He is often described as a vegetarian who nevertheless had a special fondness for sausages and caviar, and sometimes ham. One of his biographers, Robert Payne ("The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler) took exception to the view of Hitler as an ascetic, and said it was deliberately fostered by the Nazis to project an image of Hitler as pure and dedicated.
Wrote Payne: "Hitler's asceticism played an important part in the image he projected over Germany. According to the widely believed legend, he neither smoked nor drank, nor did he have anything to do with women.
"Only the first was true. He drank beer and diluted wine frequently, had a special fondness for Bavarian sausages, and kept a mistress... "His asceticism was a fiction invented by (Nazi propagandist Joseph) Goebbels to emphasize his total dedication, his self-control, the distance that separated him from other men..." Biographer John Toland ("Adolf Hitler" ), describes Hitler's early student diet as consisting of "milk, sausage, and bread."
Moreover, Hitler never promoted vegetarianism as a public policy for either health or moral reasons. His lack of policies and public support for vegetarianism is significant in a leader who rigorously enforced other health policies, such as anti-smoking and anti-pollution legislation, and pregnancy and birthing measures for women.
http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/hitler.html
or
Following the latest letter on September, 1991, the New York Times published two rejoinders to this question. Under the headline, "Don't Put Hitler Among the Vegetarians," the correspondent(Richard Schwartz, author of Judaism and Vegetarianism ) pointed out that Hitler would occasionally go on vegetarian binges to cure himself of excessive sweatiness and flatulence, but that his main diet was meat-centered. He also cited Robert Payne, Albert Speer, and other well-known Hitler biographers, who mentioned Hitler's predilection for such non-vegetarian foods as Bavarian sausages, ham, liver, and game. Furthermore, it was argued, if Hitler had been a vegetarian, he would not have banned vegetarian organizations in Germany and the occupied countries; nor would he have failed to urge a meatless diet on the German people as a way of coping with Germany's World War II food shortage.
http://www.vegsource.com/berry/hitler.html
or
The continual allegation that Hitler was a vegetarian is usually motivated by a wish to discredit vegetarianism by those who opppose it. Good morality or good health policy should neither be motivated nor discredited by whether evil people embrace a certain principle. As Peter Singer said, "The fact that Hitler had a nose doesn't mean we should cut off our noses." The Nazis implemented many health policies such as anti-smoking and anti-pollution legislation, pregnancy and birthing measures for women, that we regard as good measures. However, the allegation that Hitler was a vegetarian is so qualified that one can only call Hitler a "vegetarian" by excluding from the definition of "meat" food such as ham and sausages, which he ate all his life.
http://www.micahbooks.com/readingroom/Hitlerveg.html
i can find you lots more, but i think these articles will suffice. being put on a veg diet (which he didn't stick to anyway) to cure flatulence, really doesn't a vegetarian make.
the 'hitler was a vegetarian' myth is propagated by people when trying to malign the veg or AR movement (the latter being a bit amusing since all AR activists aren't veg anyway) - just the way that tidbit you found tries to.
anyway, i hope some of this has been helpful and i'm glad to hear that you don't have a vendetta against ivanhoe or myself even though you don't always express that fact as clearly as you might.
in friendship,
prad
1 edit
I read every single one of those sources before I posted for the last time; none refute the statement made above: THAT HITLER WAS A VEGETARIAN FROM THE LATE 1930's UNTIL HIS DEATH. You ate meat earlier in life, but don't now so you are a vegetarian; Hitler ate meat earlier in his life but from the late 1930's on was a vegetarian. So the "myth" is true and your research is sloppy and ill-informed as always.
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderthen you didn't read very carefully because you'd see clearly that he ate meat all his life - and not just in his earlier part.
I read every single one of those sources before I posted for the last time; none refute the statement made above: THAT HITLER WAS A VEGETARIAN FROM THE LATE 1930's UNTIL HIS DEATH. You ate meat earlier in life, but don't no ...[text shortened]... " is true and your research is sloppy and ill-informed as always.
here are some of the directly relevant parts:
testimony to the contrary of the woman chef who was his personal cook in Hamburg during the late 1930s - Dione Lucas. In her "Gourmet Cooking School Cookbook," she records that his favorite dish - the one that he customarily requested - was stuffed squab (pigeon).
and
However, the allegation that Hitler was a vegetarian is so qualified that one can only call Hitler a "vegetarian" by excluding from the definition of "meat" food such as ham and sausages, which he ate all his life.
please read this and the earlier post as many times as you need to.
if after doing so, you still want to say hitler was a vegetarian, that is your right as believer in free speech, regardless of its content.
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by pradtfYou mean www.rspca.org.uk? They have about 30 campaigns from tortoises to bull fighting but I can't find the PETA campaign. Care to provide a link?
PETA organized and launched the boycott, but there are many more organizations involved here (eg england's RSPCA and AF of course).
in friendship,
prad
I thought you might have got confused with the American or Australian SPCA but could not find any reference to it there either. The Australians have a petiition against live sheep exports but no "boycott' calls. Isn't is strange how high profile organisations like that do not feature this PETA campaign prominently?
Is AF the Animal Liberation front ? You have already said they support you - but I didn't want to mention it in case you thought I was maligning animal rights by assiocating PETA with criminal activists again.
1 edit
Originally posted by pradtf[/i]If you are going to tell others not to divert the thread, how come you are discussing Hitler's flatulence?
yes you are wrong again, because you like to consult only the source of information you see fit to.
take a closer look:
[i]While it is true that Hitler's doctors put him on a vegetarian diet to cure him of flatulence and a chronic sto ...[text shortened]... express that fact as clearly as you might.
in friendship,
prad
1 edit
Originally posted by pradtfWhere EXACTLY does it say that in the sources you mentioned? And the link I gave gives direct quotes from Hitler's own recorded table conversations as proof of his vegetarianism! Whaddaya you got as evidence, other than your firm fanatical wish that it ain't true?
then you didn't read very carefully because you'd see clearly that he ate meat all his life - and not just in his earlier part.
in friendship,
prad
EDIT: The quotes you just cited go only to the 1930's not beyond; the recorded conversations are in the period 1941-1945. So you're wrong; admit it.