Nicky
My comment was not off post. I followed the topic as it unfloded before me.
I ask you to now explain your attitude once and all towards pale.

I draw you attention now to a few posts only well before pales to which I responded to.>

1. Live export is not necessary - far easier, economical AND environmentally efficient to slaughter here.

.
Posted by Fractelle, Sunday, 31 August 2008 9:19:57 AM


Fractelle - like I said, I only agree with Yabby about half the time. I don't support live exports…

CJ Morgan, Sunday, 31 August 2008 9:49:28 AM


And the truth is this; livestock produce can and must be managed far more humanely than it is now. There is no justification for live export,..

Posted by Fractelle, Sunday, 31 August 2008 11:00:51 AM

Nor do I believe that all farmers are deliberately cruel. I certainly agree that without the intervention of PETA, nothing would be done about mulesing and pain relief though.
Nor is this about vilifying all farmers. I will, without hesitation, vilify farmers who are deliberately breeding animals for a live export trade which is egregiously cruel (and let's be clear here, 40,000+ animals die on the ships every year with the numbers rising, and that's BEFORE the survivors are brutalized in importing countries). Feedlots ARE an abomination in the context ….
Nicky
Posted by Nicky, Sunday, 31 August 2008 2:08:31 PM

Yes, some sheep die on boats. As some sheep die in feedlots, as some
sheep die in paddocks, or in yards, or on trucks. There are all

Posted by Yabby, Sunday, 31 August 2008 7:08:40 PM

Nicky
If you took in what I am saying you might actually learn something of importance.
I pointed out that feed lot owners set the standards.
Something that clearly has gone over your head and others.

I was also addressing Yabby and enquiring of him if he were aware of this fact.

I think you have made yourself look foolish and we will post what we like bt

Then either start a thread on which your comments are relevant to the discussion or stay on the topic of the ones you do post on. Your efforts here are manifestly irrelevant to this thread. Every discussion thread is not created as a soapbox for PALE to advertise its slaughterhouse interests over and over again ad nauseum. We have heard it all so often.

Where exactly do you see the value of copying and pasting the posts of others when we have already read them?

I have clearly stated my "attitude" to PALE as a matter of record many times, and quite frankly I am bored stiff with it. I do not want to be part of anything that implies profiteering from animal slaughter. Is that clear enough for you?

Feedlots in themselves do not "set the standards" (that's as fatuous a notion as stating that MLA determines where Councils approve slaughterhouses). In both cases, there are processes to be followed, in which all interested parties can make submissions (including MLA), and the processes apply varying degrees if democratic consultation. Councillors have their re-election future to consider, and while there may be some institutionalized corruption, it certainly does not come close to your conspiracy theories. In the other context the feedlot standards are determined partly by feedlot concerns, but in consultation with the RSPCA, AA and the PIMC for animal welfare.

I really don't think there is anything I would be interested in "learning" from you at all.

Certainly you can post what you like, but have you noticed that all rational, objective contributors disappear once you appear?

Nicky

Nicky Said

*Where exactly do you see the value of copying and pasting the posts of others when we have already read them?*
Nicky

I put the earier comments up to point out we were not off post and simply repying to the many comments.




That was my point which I was mainly directing to Yabby.


Yabby has a point you know when he says you need to go out and get some first hand experience.
Your problem I feel often with my posts is you dont understand the industry enough to follow what I am saying.
If its not in your PETA book then it seems you have difficulty in following.

I know you care and that is very much to your credit but dont try to stop others who understand the industry from making informed comments.

Yes people do leave threads usually about this time when you for no reason attack pale.

The people need to know this Nicky- That Pale are working in conjunction with RSPCA QLD on this project. They can look at these sites and read the information= I fail to see considering you claim to work alone why they wouldnt want information from RSPCA QLD and PALE.
if they click here they will see our CEO RSPCA QLD along with others and you never know especially the new posters might like to see what alternatives RSPCA QLD are supporting.
If thats ok with you.

http://www.halakindmeats.com/

Yeah well, this is exactly why I stopped posting on (or even reading) the animal welfare threads.

Animal welfare discussions seem to always start off well, like this one- but sooner or later end up in bickering, miscommunication, misunderstandings and personal insults.

I wonder why that is the case- perhaps animals, being so very cute and helpless, stir up very strong emotions in people.

Anyway, I've expressed my opinion about the very cruel fur industry in China and will leave it at that.

Thanks for spreading awareness about fur, Nicky.

Nicky

I think it was my 'bad' for introducing live export to the thread. I was just getting so tired of the same old personal insults from Yabby.

He may be a farmer, but knows nothing of the illicit fur trade in cat/dog/seal etc.

Perhaps Yabby, you could edify yourself with the following article. Then you might understand the issue under discussion here and cease with flinging insults at contributors.

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2003/s893417.htm

Extract:

"STRUAN STEVENSON: Here, for instance, is a coat that was bought in Berlin. This was made horribly from 42 Alsation puppies. It is a full length fur coat and it costs a considerable amount of money. It's made in China and it's been DNA tested in the University of Amsterdam and confirmed as dog fur.

GEOFF HUTCHISON: With the help of animal welfare investigators, Struan Stevenson has collected emphatic evidence of a grotesque trade; a large black blanket sewn from the pelts of dozens of cats, supposedly a therapeutic aid for arthritis sufferers and then a rug acquired in Copenhagen made from the fur of four golden retrievers.

STRUAN STEVENSON: Of course, the labels will describe this either as a mythical animal, like a subaki, gaywolf, Asian jackal, things that don't exist.

GEOFF HUTCHISON: Struan Stevenson then showed me the photographs of the Chinese farms which produced them...."

Be warned this article is not for the faint of heart.

Dickie, we understand the differences in sheep behaviour. Its due to temperament
and can be genetically selected for. Its not due to your anthropomorphisms about
intellectualising the minds of sheep. It shows yet once again why housewives
like yourself , get it all wrong and why we need professionals in the respective
fields.

But you missed the point of my argument completely. Sheep will do silly things,
for no good reason, which damages their health or damages other sheep. So
you will invariably have some losses, if you run them on a property or handle
them in yards, feedlots etc.

Nicky, I have challenged your qualifications before now, you have never been
able to name one, that was critical when it comes to livestock production.
If after all this time and your many posts, you are suddenly now going to pull
one out of your alleged qualifications hat, well then say so.

The term “livestock” is common in our language and is even used by the
RSPCA, in fact throughout society. You berate others for using it and
have lectured me about it as well. The point is, to go to those kinds of
extremes, shows how fanatical you are about this topic and that is
my point. This is not about Nicky caring about animal welfare, this
is about Nicky the vegan extremist, who would happily shut down
all livestock production, given half a chance