This comment is transferred from the fatuous thread about Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman:-

PALE, Where did I say that I believe that AWB was profiteering from live exports and the Iraqi regime? YOU said that and I asked you to prove a factual, conclusive link about money directly channeled to that regime from live animal exports. You have failed to do so (again). You have found a business transaction, nothing more, nothing less.

Nor did I say that I worked full time in animal welfare (someone has to work and pay taxes in this country, you know, to fund all those people on pensions). Nor have you told us how many members PALE has "working 24/7 without pay". And who is on Animals Australia's Executive?

Not involving itself in "domestic" matters would seem to be a bit of a strategic blunder, since PALE has not been able to even make a dent in live exports, particularly the expansion in its home state. Perhaps its "24/7" work "without payment" would be better spent supporting RSPCA Queensland's local efforts rather than discrediting everyone and everything else involved in animal advocacy in the country. Cuphandle is absolutely right; no-one is interested in the old news and old vendettas, yet they re-surface on every thread as - yes, a witch hunt - against people like Glenys Ooogjes (who CAN put together coherent documents). As for me, Cuphandle, I go through this on every thread that PALE infiltrates. I have broad shoulders.

What the courts fail to recognise is that drug use is a lifestyle choice not a mental illness. And what society fails to realise is that alcohol is a drug (and it may cause people to become hopelessly incoherent writing posts on forum threads, which I reckon is how the Kidman/Jackman thread came about).

Nicky

Nicky
The fact is AWB were not just selling wheat- It was money from live exports as well. -Still is.

So you mean to tell me you think its ok to have a peak group in Australia- according to you not know these facts?

Crickey no wonder why we still have live exports

When you are lobbying it’s extremely slack to have missed something as major as that.

The journalist who covered the story (as I said )ended up spending six weeks checking out all the facts he was given.

After all AWB Enquiry was the biggest ever held in Australia?

Same regarding Nicole and our tourism dollar.
Pls note the vast funds now pumping into Bowen for the shipping ports.
Dominique has left her position and I couldn’t care less that’s taken over TBO.
You’re the one obsessed with AA. I didn’t mind the lady myself.

You girls seem to all have the same extreme personalities and that’s a great pity for animals.

RSPCA waltz and all have mostly fantastic people with great personalities which what makes them the leaders by miles. Which brings me back to this thread title. RSPCA National should first inform us if they would hand over the poweres the want to AQIS or dPI before we go any further.



The fact you choose to go to work to keep your partner is your ‘own ‘business.
Everybody is different but it wouldn’t suite me TBO.

I am very happy to pay to help aged pensioners who gave Australia its start. I have worked hard all my life and own an investigation company which enables me to spent full time working to support RSPCA QLD.

We also have other interests. (Not that it’s your business)

"RSPCA waltz"? Good heavens, I thought they would be too busy for that.

We have an expanding live export trade out of Queensland partly because no-one there is doing anything about it. BTW, what happened to the "And Intensive Farming" tag? That has gone nowhere either.

Still I see no direct evidence of AWB directly channeling money from live export shipments to the Iraqi regime (BTW, that regime fell over some time ago, so it's unlikely that they "still are"), just more wasted space about a piddling business transaction. If your regional Gold Coast journo took six weeks to investigate that, he mustn't be a particularly effective researcher.

As for the Kidman claptrap, I am convinced you were on something when you did that. It was arguably one of your greatest credibility failures to date. I also still see nothing about the number of members PALE has. If I were considering joining any group that would be one of my first questions - so why can you not answer it?

And of course you would not be telling us about your "achievements" with Muslim leaders, because they were so long ago.

What makes you think I "keep" a partner? I work because I have a strong career ethic, to support my animals, my animal advocacy activities, and those countless people, some of whom should, and some of whom should not be, on pensions. But we won't go there.

I don't need to know who is on the Executive of Animals Australia. I do, however, know that not all of them would have been there for 20-odd years, and further, those people are elected representatives. That, even to you, should speak for itself.

Nicky

Nicky
Quite frankly my dear we do not give a dam as to what you think as you are not even on the map of animal welfare.

We prefer to work with RSPCA QLD Farmers and Muslim people because THATS where a difference can be made.

Our efforts are ENTILEY from our own hearts and pockets in conjunction with RSPCA QLD. We do NOT report EVERYTHING we are doing to people such as yourself.

You are asking for privy confidential information regarding not only our organisation but RSPCA QLD and Muslim Leaders of Australia.



. You just get on and do whatever it is you 'think you do to help animals.
From what we can see thats nothing other than be paranoid about the fact our organisation WONT conform to extremists. All you do is get the farmers and public off side.

I was requested by 'everyone we work with to ignore your rants and to be honest YOU especially.

I was not willing to do that at the time because I wished to give you credit for at least showing an interest in animals.

I was however wrong in my judgment of you. You clearly DONT want to know about important issues- So consider it now done.

PALE&IF:

I refer to your comment directed at myself on Wed 31 DEC at 11.03.22pm
which was as follows:
"Cuphandle,
G,day
Thats howdy in real language.Would you mind explaining to
us why this is your first comment and yet you claim you
cant follow?

Then Nickys timely argument with herself."

I would strongly suggest that you learn to read, write, spell and count as that was NOT my first comment on this Thread,.....if you had bothered to look, you may have noticed that I made comments on Mon 01DEC (Comment 5), Tue 02DEC (Comment 18), Mon 08DEC (Comment 46) and again on Wed 31DEC (Comment 96?)

Using your methodology in replying, I would advise you that I do NOT respond to "howdy", it is NOT "real language" ( and you will note that I have inserted the missing letter "u" in your spelling, although I have left your original quotation, as above, uncorrected!).... "Howdy" is "Americo" in "new-speak" and I refuse to converse in "foreign euphemisms"!

I do NOT have to explain anything to you ( until you start paying my wages!) Your arrogance has once again illustrated to all concerned that your feeble ongoing efforts to hijack this Thread have once again failed and your consistent attempted character assassination of your fellow participants does not go far in making friends or recruiting supporters for your cause!

If this is all we can look forward to,...may I suggest that you seek some sort of help with your English composition and punctuation skills(?), before showering us with your anally retentive gibberish!

Happy New Year to you!

A special Happy New Year to Nicky!

Dear Cuphandle, thank you for that, it is much appreciated. I hope 2009 is a happy year for you too. I have absolutely no idea where the "howdy" and "G'day" came from either. I'm also and equally mystified about my "timely argument with (myself)".

Sadly, I think any well-meaning advice from any of us falls on deaf ears with PALE. What is especially sad about that is that members of the community, and these fora, may see all animal advocates as abusive, aggressive, incoherent rabble, and I can assure everyone that that is far from the truth - it is only PALE which behaves so appallingly.

Other animal advocacy organisations are able to support their claims with evidence of real achievement, and are able to conduct rational, informed debate. They do not make high-flying, but false and unsubstantiated claims of dubious achievements, which may at one time have had some merit, but were a long time ago.

PALE's sole purpose for being really seems to be nothing more than a vendetta against the real (and often quiet) achievers in animal welfare, and its only mechanism for doing so appears to be hijacking these threads for the purpose of empty self-aggrandizement to the discredit of others. We have the same tired old arguments every time PALE enters any thread started with the very best of intentions.

Here's to a better 2009!

Nicky