The Forum > General Discussion > Selective perceptions of animal cruelty
Selective perceptions of animal cruelty
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Page 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- ...
- 27
- 28
- 29
-
- All
The National Forum | Donate | Your Account | On Line Opinion | Forum | Blogs | Polling | About |
Syndicate RSS/XML |
|
About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy |
As for "conspiracy theories", do you think it is simply an accident that countries which import live Australian animals (which also import massive quantities of meat) have placed artificial trade barriers in the form of tariffs to discourage importing meat over live animals? Nor is it any accident that AQIS charges the meat processing sector excessive fees while charging the live exporters virtually nothing. Do get a grip. You might also want to look into the Hassall reports and the jobs they claim are dependent on the live export industry and their highly questionable qualitative research methodologies (I refer in particular to their multiplicity factors) - in other words, the wife of the man who cleans the toilets at the local truck stop where the transporter buys the odd box of matches is included. One does not need to be a "conspiracy theorist" to see the gaping holes in the arguments.
Still - governments believe it - at this point, at least. That's why people despise politicians.
As for dogs not being suited to live export because they do not like fouling their "living quarters", I'd be prepared to bet that sheep do not like spending 3-4 weeks knee deep in their mature, crammed 3 to a square metre either, but what the hell? The industry took AQIS to court to make sure that didn't improve, too. And pigs? They hate it too, but 350,000+ of them in Australia are forced to do it.
Like PALE, I can't wait to hear your explanations of the "red tape" excuse.
Nicky