Yabby, likewise.

The key difference is that animal welfare groups do not conduct fraudulent reviews and surveys (such as that apology for "an opportunity for public comment" about pig farming), nor do they (as LiveCorp does) try to buy favours by "sponsoring" Animal Welfare Strategy conferences. Unfortunately, it was extremely well-represented by animal welfare bodies (as the Egg Corporation representative discovered to his embarassment).

Nicky

Hi Nicky

Morgan and Yabby, the embodiments of arrogance, have practised the art of duckshoving and masking the "real circumstances" as a strategy to distract posters from reality.

It is glaringly obvious that this pair, with vested interests and a propensity for unrestrained greed, regards the poisoning of humans, by unscrupulous Chinese manufacturers, as mere collateral damage.

Note the skillful evasion by this pair, of the information provided in my previous post, on China's toxic imports? This is indicative of those possessed with a malignant egophrenia, who believe they are above human morality.

Their ignorance even exceeds that of the people who wear the skins of butchered animals - or does it? A British scientific experiment revealed that a coat made from these animals required a staggering 7,965,800 British thermal units (BTU) - 66 times more energy than what is needed for a fake fur.

Additionally, fur apparel is treated with various chemical brighteners and dyes that can damage the environment and pose a hazard to human health.

As far back as 1992, the Dutch Advertising Standards Authority ruled that fur apparel advertised as “eco-logical” was improperly and misleadingly labeled. In the past the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) fined six firms $2.2 million for illegally generating, storing, transporting, and disposing of hazardous materials used to process fur pelts.

Fur-processing materials such as formaldehyde and chromium can cause respiratory problems and are listed by the EPA as possible carcinogens. Some fur processors have been charged with endangering workers by exposing them to hazardous materials.

And those charged were Western furriers. One shudders to think of the short and long term health impacts from wearing fur manufactured in China - or any other product for that matter.

And in July this year, "thousands of people who suffered severe allergic reactions after sitting on their sofas were victims of a toxic gas emitted by an anti-mould agent, a study has concluded." Two have died.

"Hospitals across northern Europe have treated thousands of patients with symptoms which appeared to range from skin cancer and chemical burns to severe eczema:"

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/consumer_goods/article4374669.ece

CJ

"It appears that the most prolific animal welfare activists at OLO are not only exclusively female, but most of them have posted racist comments here over time as well. Nicky's and dickie's are good examples. I find this intriguing - while I'd expect to find some general misanthropic tendencies, that they express antipathies and ignorance about non-Western societies and peoples so consistently is a bit of surprise.

Has anybody else noticed this?"

I'm sure you've read far more of Nicky and Dickie's posts than I have CJ, but no, I can't say I've noticed this or certainly not as the consistent trend you seem to be implying.

I did think that Nicky's turn of phrase - "So back to the despicable Chinese .." - was an unfortunate choice of words. To me though it was more of a slip-up, than a deliberate racist slur. I knew she was referring to the behaviour, not the Chinese themselves.

I would need far more evidence to be convinced that either Nicky or Dicky habitually make racist comments. They are passionate in their beliefs and can both put the boot in at times, but I don't consider them racist.

Yabby, on the other hand, frequently makes sexist and patronizing remarks which I find far more offensive than anything Nicky or Dickie come out with.

(Back to the thread)= Fur and China

I suggested earlier perhaps, WSPA PETA made contact with operators supplying animal skins.

People with contacts to large fashion houses, - could possibly assist those using animals as raw material, to obtain large contracts that they would `not otherwise obtain if there were using dogs cats etc for fur`.

If we could provide them with the machinery and equipment + the alternative to manufacture, using other products, it might catch on.

Many of these people are very poor so possible it could look at as a humanitiran project also.

Spoken to people in China. One person is an Australian however living full time in China with quite good contacts to lawyers and some Gov officials.

He person has offered to help. The other people are Chinese and happy pay for a web site and assist regarding the lambs being tossed alive to lions.
( We wont be doing it before anybody suggests it having far too much already on our plate. However the offers there for anybody interested to ask for the email contacts.

Yabby

Re MLA- Where’s the survey btw?
Speaking of MLA, I am pretty sure they would provide some funding if any of the groups wanted to assist in promoting chilled meat in place of live.
Just imagine what would happen if all these people convincing one another they were contributing towards animal welfare – got out and competed against live exports.
What if they became so successful they had to approach the Minister to Immigration to allow the skilled workers in to be able to supply their products?
Wouldn’t that be dreadful for Australian farmers future not to mention the country itself. Dear me to value add and reopen our country towns.

Just as well, for you Yabbs, they are not seriously looking for alternatives.

here is what the ABA think of MLAs honesty btw

http://www.austbeef.com.au/Content.asp?regID=15403&id=73794

*try to buy favours by "sponsoring" Animal Welfare Strategy conferences. *

Ah so the farmers put money on the table, to publicly discuss animal
welfare, as you lot are too tight it seems. That is wrong too!
You just don't even realise, how extremely biased you are Nicky,
just like the religious nuts, just a different religion that you
preach.

MLA is publicly accountable and elections are held. Your little
animal welfare groups do as they please are accountable to nobody
when it comes to some kind of honesty or truth and are their
figures publicly available? I doubt it, just any lot of feelgood
fanatics with a website can join in and publish virtually
anything.

Major organisations are still MLA and RSPCA, they matter. Frankly
the rest of you, simply don't.

*Morgan and Yabby, the embodiments of arrogance,*

More like self assured Dickie. Finally somebody who tells you as it
is, not your crapola PC correctness etc. So you try to shoot
the messenger, with tirades of abuse. Sorry dear, true believers
like yourself are a dime a dozen and little more then highly
amusing :)

*I can't say I've noticed this or certainly not as the consistent trend you seem to be implying.*

Of course there is a trend Bronwyn. Alot of these girls simply want
to bemother all these creatures, rather then accept that we humans
eat them. There is a real world out there, but some of them live
in their own little dreamworld, away with the fairies of fantasyland.

Yabby

"Of course there is a trend Bronwyn. Alot of these girls simply want
to bemother all these creatures, rather then accept that we humans
eat them. There is a real world out there, but some of them live
in their own little dreamworld, away with the fairies of fantasyland."

I was very specifically discussing racism - in direct response to CJ's question as to whether or not others thought, as he did, that Nicky and Dickie's comments were racist.

It would be helpful if you read my posts properly and debated the points raised, rather than simply using them as a jump off point for yet another of your personal attacks, which have now become so frequent and so predictable that they are completely destroying any credibility you once had.