The Forum > General Discussion > Why are Animal Welfare groups branded as extremist by some?
Why are Animal Welfare groups branded as extremist by some?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Page 6
- 7
-
- All
Posted by People Against Live Exports & Intensive Farming, Wednesday, 1 November 2006 10:35:32 PM
| |
And here is what the good MP had to say about your claims:
Andrew Bartlett says: April 28th, 2006 at 3:30 pm "Wendy you (or ‘we’) have it wrong - both in your statements about preferences and any suggestion that I bear responsibility for Labor’s policy on live exports or animal welfare in general. As to your suggestion that “the government agreed to hold its first enquiry into animal welfare only if it was put up as a vegatrian argument”, that is too ludicrous for words and the historical record also shows it is demonstrably wrong." As for your comment about AA and fund raising, how much do you think this latest campaign is costing? Nice to see them putting those funds to work isn’t it. Posted by PF, Thursday, 2 November 2006 5:23:13 AM
| |
Dickie.
I know what you are saying. Its good what you have done. PF let me tell you again please. My name is Antje and I have no wish to exchange posts with you. Stop following me around from post to post. Its very childish and I am not going response to you. I am posting here as a member of the public and if I choose to help animals it is none of your! business. ” Dickie , I don’t think Wendy would care what the good MP replied. I know for a fact Wendy has it in writing from one of the original founders of them along with Peter Singer. They claimed it was the only way they could get an enquiry up in those days. Considering the attitude way back then I have no reason to disbelieve her. I would suggest as an original founder she would know more than him. Andrew of course used to be the President of Animal Liberation in Brisbane years ago. Last year he called for a Senate Enquiry into Animals Welfare PALE lodged a joint sub along with AFIC and RSPCA QLD putting forward some real answers towards fazing out live exports and increasing free range farms. Andrews response was to take their petition against Live Animal exports off his web page?. According to his staff it was under his direct instructions. I personally think especially given it is in his local area and they are in Melbourne that it is of concern. I also think each member of the public and group should be treated equally. So Dickie eeeek is right I am in no doubt Andrew cares very much about animals. I do question his slant however just to the vegetation groups That’s a conflict of interest which does not help animals Nobody has ever challenged him on that in twenty years. He does not like it. Too Bad Dickie you might like to sign the petition. This is the one Andrew took down/ Interesting isn’t it? http://consciousevolution.com/onshu/view_signatures.php http://consciousevolution.com/onshu/Petition.php Posted by People Against Live Exports & Intensive Farming, Thursday, 2 November 2006 3:58:00 PM
| |
I made no reference to anyone anje .. copy and paste straight from Andrew Bartlett's website. His reference not mine :)
Do you have exclusive rights to these threads? No?? I will post where ever I like thanks. You dont want to respond then all you have to do is cease doing it :) Posted by PF, Thursday, 2 November 2006 4:30:04 PM
| |
I will respond this one time.
Read the letter I beleive were sent. Unreasonable harrasment is unexceptable. I repeat you have followed me from post to post trying to cause trouble. Everybody is sick to death of you creating dramas in each and every forum. You have been doing so for months. I see you are telling cilia to just get over it and move on. Why dont you do likewise Your continual posts are flaming. I am not Wendy and I will not put up with it. Stop Trolling and flaming me from one thread to another. last warning Antje Struthmann. Posted by People Against Live Exports & Intensive Farming, Thursday, 2 November 2006 5:25:06 PM
| |
If you wish to make irrational statements on this forum expect people to disagree with you and try to set the record straight. Andrew Bartlett's statement is a fact. I certainly did not write it.
I have not harrassed or flamed you in any way. Merely stated my opinions that you dont happen to like. Let me remind you of the topic for this thread. "Last warning" Are you threatening me antje? Rather 'extreme' dont you think. Posted by PF, Thursday, 2 November 2006 5:44:03 PM
|
Sorry I didnt see your post before. Yes. What erks me is the first animal welfare enquiry ever agreed to was done on the bassis it was only presented from one point of view [according to the founders] that was the vegetarian point of view. Nothing seems to have changed much Dickie. All sounds a bit to political to me. Ah.
Of course they totally over look the fact that 96 to 98 percent of Australians are meat eaters.
Nor will they support any free range farmers from a practicle point of view. Any farmer that has been doing the right thing that I know has contacted them has been told- Sorry but your still killing animals.
Soon another campaign is to commence to raise the publics awarness of the cruelty of intensive farming. Thats great- The Only real problem is Dickie there are not enough free range farmers to supply the stores after they educate the public to demand them because they wont! support them and are against people eating meat.
One would have thought they might in case case wrapped the ones up in cotton wool who contacted them instead of shunning them.
Yes sir re its got to be political because that type of thinking could only make sense to a politician. Anderw Bartlett seems to only work with Animals Australia and Animal lib and understands it very well
Gee its all aking sense now Dickie
Sort of. mean while the good farmers suffer along with the animals while they all fund raise. No wonder the farmers get angry.
cheers