Well nothing whatsoever of substance from Yabby, Gryphon, Col Rouge or Cockroach Joe.

The usual inane defence from Yabby "if mulesing was banned blah blah". Stick to the issue, Yabby. Anaesthetic!

By the way, I omitted to advise Cockroach Joe and Yabby that I have also registered with Voiceless. They didn't ask for a donation. Hmmm. Better chase that one up. Every little bit helps in the crusade for justice.

I have noticed one common thread amongst Yabby, CJ, and Col Rouge. They seemingly have a fetish for sexual innuendo where they like referring to genitalia to support their argument.

This article is about the welfare of animals - so I don't get it? The above gentlemen continue to pepper their posts,with nouns such as "foreskins", "large breasts" and smutty innuendoes about "Dickie" and "Bollocks".

Then you have the very sick Gryphon attempting to nauseate the reader with gleeful, sadistic descriptions of animal slaughter. He will no doubt be frothing and slavering with the realisation that he has succeeded.

And CJ's obsessive references to "abused children"?

And the same members continuing to sabotage articles on animal welfare.

Smutty, sexual innuendoes? Psychotic, sick, descriptions of animal slaughter? Abuse of children?

When's your next farm orgy, gentlemen?

End of posts for Dickie

Dickie,

You have said you wont be posting again and that is OK by me. However, should you be reading I would like to tell you that I dont think I will take up your offer of coming into your "Age of Enlightenment".

It would seem that those already in that euphoric state have no idea of what majority means, some really dont know very much about animal husbandry practices, and they seem to get all tied up in knots about a minority of offenders who can be punished by existing legislation if the authorities want to get off their rear ends and enforce it.

The lights are on and the animals are happy and well cared for in the state in which I live. Things are in balance.

I will never support the regime that you and your kind promote, and I hope Australians all over will see through this charade for what it is.

Animal law is just more money for the legal profession. Punishing offenders is shutting the gate after the animals have been cruelly treated. Too late for the animals then. Fines do not put back feathers and fur.

A compulsory animal education system that involves the role of the primary producer and industry, as well as the environment, may be of more use than inflicting punishments that dont work. Promoting best practice in animal husbandry practices is the way to go - promoting animal husbandry practices that are suitable for Australian rural conditions - not the eclectic towns of urban Europe.

Look at the balance of nature in the Australian environment and determine what is killing what and the levels of cruelty that exist in nature. You may be surprised to find that the biggest devils are not those who work with animals at all.

Animal law is more money in the pockets of legal eagles and is rear guard action that is of little benefit to the real animals.

Bottom line.

Mimosa

"Stick to the issue, Yabby. Anaesthetic!"

Well dickie, if you have a bee in your bonnet about
anaesthetics, so see that they are freely available
to farmers, which they are not. Farmers don't make
them nor invent all sorts of laws to prevent them
being used. If they were available at the local
farmers stores, people would use them more often.
Its all these people in their offices, inventing
red tape, that are the problem.

If you think that foreskins and breasts are smutty
and not perfectly natural and normal, well clearly
that city life has not taught you the laws of
nature yet :) The birds and the bees, dickie, its
all very natural, forget the hangups that religion
taught you. Go spend some time on a farm for once
in your life.

Armchair animal libbers are a sad story. They sit back
and try to comment about issues, about which they mostly
really don't have a clue.Owning a pet pooch or moggie is simply
not enough! Its time to go and educate yourself.

The author raises many excellent points on pig pens and such however, the author demonstrates big city ignorance when it comes to issue's on animals such as kangaroos.

Due to farming practices, kangaroos have in fact over populated to the point where it does and can become a health risk to the Roo population. Where I live, kangaroos are hit by passing traffic on a weekly basis due to a combination of drought and ofcourse, over population.

We could stop the culling and just let them starve themselves to death. So much more humane for the foolish animal libertarian who needs to learn life from more than just a radical pamphlet.

Profile drawn from data collected by American Dr. Jon Hooper, reported in “Animal Welfarists and Rightists: Insights into an Expanding Constituency for Wildlife Interpreters,” in Legacy, November/December 1992, pp 20-25. The profile of the average AL supporter is a middle-aged white woman with a college education, average income of $40,000 USD in 1990, (66-70K 2007?) coastal & urban dwellers, politically liberal = (Democrat/ALP/Green combined CJ), supports environmentalist causes and owns several pets.

Redondo Beach, Calif, 11/1993, conference, Whose Wildlife is this Anyway?, by Friends of Animals. An attendee observed – bumper stickers were very popular .. HEART ATTACKS – GODS REVENGE FOR EATING HIS FRIENDS, SUPPORT THE RIGHT to ARM BEARS, and LAST CHANCE FOR ANIMALS. @150 attendees, mostly women, only two non-Caucasians, nicely dressed, polite and proper but when the meeting began tension permeated the atmosphere suggesting a hidden agenda behind the printed one. Organisers refused to tape the meeting. Reluctant credit was given to hunters and fishers as it was acknowledged their licence fees were the primary funding for habitat restoration.

Wayne Pacelle spoke citing “Thousands of years of prejudice”, for animals. Comparison made to the abolition of slavery, called Theodore Roosevelt a inveterate killer of animals” whose “behaviour was repugnant even though he set aside some lands as refuges” but “these were insignificant” (ie only Yellowstone Park CJ), went on to make several anti hunting statements. The observer pondered if animals should be treated as equals then why is it not ok for humans to hunt if animals hunt.

Next Paul Watson – began to describe his ramming and sinking of a pirate whaling ship, his scuttling of a Norwegian whaling ship in Antarctica and other various exploits. Mention his upcoming Newfoundland trial on 3 counts of criminal misconduct for the disruption of Cod fishing. Thanked Fund for Animals; buying his first ship which he sunk when being arrested. He was pleased that he had sold the movie rights, “When you live in a media culture you have to come up with new ideas all the time.” Thunderous applause. Meeting akin to a revival meeting and rally.

continued
Observer recollected the founder of PETA Ingrid Newkirk who often talked about the day when the lamb and the lion will lay down together. The falcons outside the conference that he observed attacking doves, were not listening, he concluded.

Hunters & hunting -- referred to as repugnant, barbaric, abhorrent, cruel, suffering, murderer, sadistic. Attendees were urged to “Leave science behind,” when you talk about animals, because “their survival is a moral obligation”. (Wanting animals to survive is a common desire CJ)

His summary – it was a rally, purpose to hunt dollars, no attempt to find creative answers to wildlife management, lively meeting; the tone was always prickly. Some speakers were entertaining, mixed good humour with images of violence and inflammatory calls for action, the act of clever political fund raisers. No speakers from a fish and game organisation were invited, no professors of wildlife management or even politicians.

No one in the audience appeared to spend much time outdoors except for P Watson. Alaskans call these folks “ninety nine fiftiers,” meaning 99% have never been more than fifty feet from their cars. The emotional undercurrent was fear and anger. People talked of animals but there were no discussions about how to raise money for habitat restoration. Pending legislation was identified and the attendees were urged to write in support but there was no attempt to help people think critically about it.

They were urged to join a group protesting about others, to give money for unclear reasons and to become vegetarians as a political act. The writer (a psychologist) believed the meeting was a primitive group as identified by Freud. Freud says these groups are characterised by, “intensification of the affects and the inhibition of the intellect” and are based upon passions. People are asked to give up their individual critical thinking and follow charismatic leaders. Freud considered political rallies, mobs (Cronolla) and religious meetings as primitive groups.

He recalled W Pacelle reckoning that generally speaking people were reasonably well off emotionally.