Nicky, Dickie-

The goal of this thread was to show PETA as being populated by people who resort to harsh extremist rhetoric rather than cooperating to achieve the best outcomes for animals, as is undertaken by genuinely caring organisations, such as the RSPCA (who I've a great deal of respect for, because they can make the hard decisions when 'grey' issues approach).

I've just one question: do you really think your responses are

a) likely to reinforce this perception of PETA or
b) show PETA (or its supporters) to consist of level headed, reasonable people, who are willing to calmly discuss the issues without resorting to emotive rhetoric or mudslinging?

I'm sure you can level any number of additional jibes at the rhetoric of your opponents, but I hardly think that will change anything.

*Also, the creek fed story was your story, not mine.*
No Nicky its a serious question that MLA ought to be made answerable for.
I thought this was supposed to be about the animals and how to improve conditions for them.
At least thats why we are here but clearly thats not the case with you. You are not interested in helping improve things for animals. You have shown us that time and time again.


Why should MLA take accreditation off farmers because they let a few animals walk around a bigger yard instead of being crushed in.

* What was I supposed to do with it, for God's sake?*
Run a campagne against feed lot owners setting standards for feed lot acreditation via MLA.

Ask WHY afarmer should loose his accreditation simply because he gave his animals a slightly bigger space to walk around.
Check out Feed lot Accreditations.
You (ME) should be interested- But as usual!

Why not ask Yabby Nicely if he knows anything that might help us to lift the accreditation to allow these farmers offering more space to be allowed to keep their accreditation .

You never know what advise you might get from people if you ask in a nice manner. Oh but I forgot your not interested.

PALE, I am (as a single private individual) certainly not going to "run a campagne (sic) about feedlots/creek feeding simply on the say-so of a throwaway line from PALE with no substantial information, even if I had the means to do so. It's YOUR story, YOU run a campaign, for heavens sake. Why are you always looking for everyone else to do what you say is the work you do? YOU ask Yabby for whatever it is you want.

You don't even say where this is or what it's about, for God's sake.

I have more than enough to do at the local level here, which I do alone (and unpaid and at my own expense and without any government handouts. I have to work in order to be able to do what I do).

If you hadn't managed to alienate everyone else in the animal advocacy movement you might be able to encourage someone else into helping you out.

You still haven't answered any of my questions either, this is just a throwaway to avoid them. You just want to be able to say that because someone didn't run with what could well be completely fictitious information, that you are the only person who cares about animals, when what you care most about is slaughtering them.

Nicky

*That WOULD be an actionable allegation.*
Which would be up to 'that' person.

TurnRightThenLeft,
We have had our differences but thanks for your comments for the animals sake. I should have said thank you to CJ and myopinion and old Yabbs too. Others as well.


I should have said sorry to you long ago. When I reread your comment you had not really meant it the way I took it.
So I hope its not too late Trunrightleft to say Sorry.

Yabby and a few others pointed out to me that its easy to loose your cool but it works against the animals.

So now if I feel I am loosing it I write a silly poem to Yabby instead. Which he of course ignores. Hell I hardley notice it because he ignores me mostly anyway:)

In Nickys and Dickeys defence I can only say you dont know probably how terrible and frustrating it is to see gross animal abuse on a daily basis.
The utter frustration and rage that runs through your body. This is stuff you dont see in the media - trust me.

For anybody interested in Animal Welfare I believe we can made small differences right here right now.
I think even people like Yabby and other farmers might agree to assist if we dont appear like fruit cakes of an extreme nature.

After all if we can get them to agree to relax these so called self appointed feed lot laws it would be a help for animals.

pale are asking for is for a little more space to allow animals to move around and behave in a more natural manner.

The term creek fed is from the old school. Its the same as feed lots- sort of. Just a bigger area.

Instead of having animals jamed tight they allowed animals to walk around in a small padock and the farmer would drive around on his tractor twice a day and tip the feed into the bins which were usually just up from the creek.

"I'm sure you can level any number of additional jibes at the rhetoric of your opponents, but I hardly think that will change anything"

TRTL

I do not intend responding to your provocative questionnaire, which is simply to induce a vacuous argument on your part. And my how you relish selectively rebuking Nicky and me, when I recall the very vulgar Col Rouge on one these relevant threads proclaiming he "likes to eat pussy."

You are a spiteful bigot TRTL when you fail to acknowledge the insults from the animal haters on this thread:

"that you two obviously mentally challenged and sexually frustrated hags..."(myopinion.) There are many more.

Remaining in fine hypocritical form, you have also failed to address your own bigoted and snide remarks which you have directed at your "opponents":

"Though you are succeedingly admirably at convincing viewers that you're a hostile angry bigot.

"Nobody who has, would be so damn ignorant.

"And again Scotty - well done on utterly failing to actually present information to back your case. More stupid rhetoric without any supporting material, wrapped up with some wild accusations (again, nothing to support them) as well as the odd cliche. Oh wait, I forgot. You also managed to call on the spirit of 'bogan Australia' to rally behind you. Congrats on that one.

"I really don't see what you're hoping to a... wait a minute... have you considered running for Pauline's United Australia party? I'm sure they'd welcome someone with such a high calibre of debating skill..."

Incidentally I have a reasonably good memory and I recall reading that you advised you are teaching English. I sincerely trust it is not a paid position?

"Fractelle - I suspect we're in agreeance,"

I confess I have more concern for your students (though unknown to me) than you, therefore, before you launch into more of your thunderous condemnations, may I advise you "English" teacher that there is no such word as 'agreeance' in the English language?

Or perhaps only in New Zealand?

My, my, isn't it just amazing how you can get on this forum dickie and criticize other people because they criticized your viewpoints. Sensible criticism is part of a debate, but you and your other half nicky decided to 'play the man' and throw verbal insults at all and sundry. You two are then stunned when you get the same treatment as you gave.

PATHETIC & HYPOCRITICAL!

If you two clowns had kept to the topics of the threads and put forward sensible arguments instead of emotive, over the top statements then none of this probably wouldn't have happened. But you can't help yourself, you read or see something you don't like and then you claim everyone is cruel and doesn't care about animals etc.

You two have one viewpoint; that you are completely right and that if anyone else disagrees in the slightest, then they are wrong. Your style is autocratic, domineering and overbearing and you achieve nothing by being like you are.

Personally I don't care what you or anyone else thinks about me. I know what I'm like and I don't have a problem with it, if you do then that's your problem.

Be rest assured that the continuance of the behavior that you two display will only result in the same treatment being meted out by most forum members.