SeaWorld Admits Spying On Animal Rights Group

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 12:39 am

First topic message reminder :

SeaWorld has acknowledged one of its workers infiltrated an animal rights group but has vowed to end the practice.

Joel Manby, the aquatic theme park's chief executive, admitted to the spying during a conference call with investors on Thursday.

SeaWorld San Diego worker Paul McComb was suspended last year after he was accused of posing as an activist by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).

An internal investigation revealed that Mr McComb worked for the theme park's human resources department, PETA said.

The group accused him of masquerading as an animal rights activist dating back to 2012.
Peta Virtual Reality project screengrab
Video: 2015: Animal Rights Meets VR

PETA said Mr McComb attempted to incite violence during peaceful protests and posted incendiary comments on social media.

SeaWorld, citing the confidential nature of its security practices, refused to say who authorised the spying, how long it had been going on, or how many of its workers were involved.

Mr McComb is still employed by SeaWorld, a fact which PETA claims shows the theme park's willingness to condone corporate spying.

given the long standing practice of these "animal rights organisations" of covert spying against individulas and corporations....

can they actually cry foul when its done to them ?????

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 5:41 pm

[quote="Didge"]

Lord Foul wrote:no didge the pest control is needed to keep your fat mouth full

not mine...I get better hunting where the environment is "nearer nature"

again you are a LIAR

I am no liar, are you saying you have not killed for pest control

Because you certainly have said before

Stop lying didge...its not nice to see you reduced to such shreds...you deman yourself entirely...

see...the lie.... I have NEVER said I dont pest control

why I pest control...cos theres pests that need controlling...due entirely to the farming methods used to feed your disingenious and lying mouth...

now you odious little man....since you are entirely irrelevent, I shall continue with the O/P

what part of .......PETA is not exactly covered in glory when it comes to animal rights.......... cant you comprehend??

Our Rspca is bad enough when it comes to fiscal ineptitude (BTW if you ever go to the various farmers markets (cattle markets) you will see that RSPCA inspectors are getting thin on the ground..this ISNT becasue there arnt enough of them or such...Its becasue the local councils are replacing them with their own animal welfare officers..who do the job properly, and according to the rules.) The american ASPCA, who have as I understand Police like powers and responsibilities is a far better way to go....

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 5:44 pm

I have never killed for pest control

So you admit that you have

Which makes you a blood thirsty backward idiot basically

You cannot get past your need to kill as again it is humans that have changed the eco system that now makes it a need to cull them

As to PETA you still fail to grasp the point on infiltration and equivalency, still not able to counter this point

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 5:48 pm

Didge wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:of course we know what "moral equvalency" is

You use it often enough in various forms to justify the gang rapes of white western kids and women by the primitives from over seas....

Well that is news to me, as can you show anywhere that I have ever justified gang rape?

No, did not think so, what I have done is show how you are also racist by referring to people over seas as primitive, and how we have a massive problem in this country with child sex offenders

You though only want to use the case of foreign ones to spout your racist babble to deny countless people who come here, who are not criminal at all

Your argument is guilt by association of course and is ro lame its beyond belief

you do it everytime you whinge "its only a few"
everytime you dilute THEIR culpability by quoting our own(common enough) offenders
everytime you run and hide behind your "racism" shield, when you know damn well that behaviour is culturally endemic (and accepted) in some places
You do it every time you dismiss one of these attacks as a mere "inevitability"

but then it doesnt really surprise me considering how you relate to women on here...and the terms in which you reference them...

SeaWorld Admits Spying On Animal Rights Group - Page 2 2190311264

SeaWorld Admits Spying On Animal Rights Group - Page 2 2190311264

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 5:54 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Didge wrote:

Well that is news to me, as can you show anywhere that I have ever justified gang rape?

No, did not think so, what I have done is show how you are also racist by referring to people over seas as primitive, and how we have a massive problem in this country with child sex offenders

You though only want to use the case of foreign ones to spout your racist babble to deny countless people who come here, who are not criminal at all

Your argument is guilt by association of course and is ro lame its beyond belief

you do it everytime you whinge "its only a few"
everytime you dilute THEIR culpability by quoting our own(common enough) offenders
everytime you run and hide behind your "racism" shield, when you know damn well that behaviour is culturally endemic (and accepted) in some places
You do it every time you dismiss one of these attacks as a mere "inevitability"

but then it doesnt really surprise me considering how you relate to women on here...and the terms in which you reference them...

No actually there is at least 40,000 convicted child sex offenders that has been compiled by the list on one website and it is estimated to go into 200,000 child sex offenders in this country the vast majority white British which seems to have no relevance to you. What does is using the foreign or British born ethnically asian to use then as a means to argue against people coming here. Its not about any few numbers but how there is a huge problem more so with men with child sex abuse
So I am not running behind anything
Are you seriously telling me millions should not b e here based off at best a few hundred foreign or British ethnically Asian child sex offenders?
That is your argument and its racist and ignorant

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 6:00 pm

Didge wrote:I have never killed for pest control

I didnt post that so stop LYING....you odious little man...now inventing things that folks havnt said

(wonder how long it will be before you call me a "whore" ???)

So you admit that you have

Which makes you a blood thirsty backward idiot basically

You cannot get past your need to kill as again it is humans that have changed the eco system that now makes it a need to cull them

I have never said differently...you are changing the argument...typical....

this is irrelevent...since I didnt change the environment specifically to provide hunting..its "how things are"...now I know YOU would justify millions starving just to "prove a point..but......

As to PETA you still fail to grasp the point on infiltration and equivalency, still not able to counter this point

Both are corporations one real, the other "de facto"
Both are NOT "good" in any real sense
there IS no "equivalency"

It is not a matter of national security
neither should do it really....
both DO it
why should one cry foul

as to the incittement..well thats perhaps a different matter, but from a corpoarte point of view, it makes sense...its hardly "fair " and certainly below the belt I would agree I suppose sabotage would cover it... But then again PETA isnt known for its objective honesty or objective reporting either.......

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 6:03 pm

Didge wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

you do it everytime you whinge "its only a few"
everytime you dilute THEIR culpability by quoting our own(common enough) offenders
everytime you run and hide behind your "racism" shield, when you know damn well that behaviour is culturally endemic (and accepted) in some places
You do it every time you dismiss one of these attacks as a mere "inevitability"

but then it doesnt really surprise me considering how you relate to women on here...and the terms in which you reference them...

No actually there is at least 40,000 convicted child sex offenders that has been compiled by the list on one website and it is estimated to go into 200,000 child sex offenders in this country the vast majority white British which seems to have no relevance to you. What does is using the foreign or British born ethnically asian to use then as a means to argue against people coming here. Its not about any few numbers but how there is a huge problem more so with men with child sex abuse
So I am not running behind anything
Are you seriously telling me millions should not b e here based off at best a few hundred foreign or British ethnically Asian child sex offenders?
That is your argument and its racist and ignorant

erm nope..try again

what about those attacks...which are still continuing...in countries that have kindly opened their hearts to the refugees....wow what grattitude...and YOU approve...

or at least you DONT DISAPPROVE and seek to minimise at every opportunity....

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 6:05 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Didge wrote:I have never killed for pest control

I didnt post that so stop LYING....you odious little man...now inventing things that folks havnt said

(wonder how long it will be before you call me a "whore" ???)

So you admit that you have

Which makes you a blood thirsty backward idiot basically

You cannot get past your need to kill as again it is humans that have changed the eco system that now makes it a need to cull them

I have never said differently...you are changing the argument...typical....

this is irrelevent...since I didnt change the environment specifically to provide hunting..its "how things are"...now I know YOU would justify millions starving just to "prove a point..but......

As to PETA you still fail to grasp the point on infiltration and equivalency, still not able to counter this point

Both are corporations one real, the other "de facto"
Both are NOT "good" in any real sense
there IS no "equivalency"

It is not a matter of national security
neither should do it really....
both DO it
why should one cry foul

as to the incittement..well thats perhaps a different matter, but from a corpoarte point of view, it makes sense...its hardly "fair " and certainly below the belt I would agree I suppose sabotage would cover it... But then again PETA isnt known for its objective honesty or objective reporting either.......

There is no equivalency

Well done you are learning as one is worse than the other, as one sets out only to do wrong and the other sets out to do good by saving animals.
Well as there is animal abusers continually out there I have no issue with a animals rights defender infiltrating an organisation say for example like a Halal slaughter house that then exposes it for malpractice, as has been the case already that has exposed at least two
So are you telling me that is equal to someone from the halal slaughterhouse infiltrating the organisation that exposed them to incite violence on a peaceful protest outside a slaughterhouse?

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 6:08 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Didge wrote:

No actually there is at least 40,000 convicted child sex offenders that has been compiled by the list on one website and it is estimated to go into 200,000 child sex offenders in this country the vast majority white British which seems to have no relevance to you. What does is using the foreign or British born ethnically asian to use then as a means to argue against people coming here. Its not about any few numbers but how there is a huge problem more so with men with child sex abuse
So I am not running behind anything
Are you seriously telling me millions should not b e here based off at best a few hundred foreign or British ethnically Asian child sex offenders?
That is your argument and its racist and ignorant

erm nope..try again

what about those attacks...which are still continuing...in countries that have kindly opened their hearts to the refugees....wow what grattitude...and YOU approve...

or at least you DONT DISAPPROVE and seek to minimise at every opportunity....

Err still guilt by association

As how many attacks are we talking about in regards to over a million refugees?

A few hundred at best?

Or have you even bothered to see how only actually 3 were refugees arrested out of 58 in the Cologne attack?

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/02/15/cologne-sex-attacks-refugees-prosecutor_n_9235358.html

Where does that leave your poor argument?

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 6:24 pm

Didge wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

erm nope..try again

what about those attacks...which are still continuing...in countries that have kindly opened their hearts to the refugees....wow what grattitude...and YOU approve...

or at least you DONT DISAPPROVE and seek to minimise at every opportunity....

Err still guilt by association

As how many attacks are we talking about in regards to over a million refugees?

A few hundred at best?

Or have you even bothered to see how only actually 3 were refugees arrested out of 58 in the Cologne attack?

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/02/15/cologne-sex-attacks-refugees-prosecutor_n_9235358.html

Where does that leave your poor argument?

that means nothing beyond the fact they couldnt identify them sufficiently...it does NOT mean they dont exist...

and here you go again...MINIMISING (and thus condoning) these activities

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 6:26 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Didge wrote:

Err still guilt by association

As how many attacks are we talking about in regards to over a million refugees?

A few hundred at best?

Or have you even bothered to see how only actually 3 were refugees arrested out of 58 in the Cologne attack?

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/02/15/cologne-sex-attacks-refugees-prosecutor_n_9235358.html

Where does that leave your poor argument?

that means nothing beyond the fact they couldnt identify them sufficiently...it does NOT mean they dont exist...

and here you go again...MINIMISING (and thus condoning) these activities

Well of those they did arrest, you had 3

Which really makes your point over exaggerated as much as many of the media articles have been that you have bought into

So who is minimizing here?

You have no details to give and all i dd was correct you on a misconception that you had

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 6:31 pm

Anyway laters old man and have a good evening

Laughing

by Ben Reilly Fri Feb 26, 2016 8:43 pm

Lord Foul wrote:since I made no comment on the "rightness" of what each was doing, merely that this seems to be a case of the biter bit....

firstly peta has no moral high ground on which to stand...as I have pointed out befor now...

secondly they are of the same ilk as those that would have research shut down

thirdly THEIR tactics are as imoral as anyone elses...

Sea world may well be immoral too, certainly their practices dont amount to "best practice"

however that is in many ways irrelevant...

IF yo are going to play "dirty games" then surely you cant complain when the same is returned???

PETA cant indulge in as they put it, corporate spying, then complain when one of their targets does the same.

@ didge..... you to faced hypocrite...6 months ago you agreed that hunting was no less ethical than farming....so I see thriough your pathetic game...

@ ben....I suppose I should have expected that from you....after all, when we bomb the ISIS we are "terrible" people

when they bomb us "its only a few" and a "price we must pay" etc etc

especially since (at least in tis current round) they threw the first one

NOW, granted it is likely 6 of one and half a dozen of the other, AND EVEN given that personally I'd pull out and just let em get on with killing one another, YOU seem to be content to vist any amount of horror on your own and marginalise the victims with some sort of bizzare justification (as long as you personally are safely out of the way)

THEN you whinge when I say "you dont care " and spend pages waffling on in some sort of justification.

we have had this conversation before....and you didnt answer.
either because you "missed it" why I dont know becasue it was a reply direct to a post you had made

OR becasue you recognised the truth in what I said...

You SAY you "care" and yet.......you expect us to "accept" more of the same

put simply...iof one side wants to play dirty, especially in an arena where such things are not actually greatly regulated, then it cant really complain too hard when it gets a dose of its own...

its like palestine and israel....neither side is exactly covered in righteous glory......

You know I'm all about bombing ISIS, so once again I'd thank you to not falsely accuse me of defending murderers.

In the very warped example you're providing, I suppose the refugees and ISIS are on the same side? That's idiotic, and it just goes to show once again what another here has said -- you think the good people and bad people are all on one side or the other. And you appear to think that the sexual assaults, etc. committed by a few (yes, it is only a very small percentage) of the refugees is somehow related to the fight against ISIS, which is thick beyond belief.

And, I never said the crimes committed by refugees must be accepted -- I never called for the suspension of law enforcement in those cases. I made a larger point about a merciful society accepting that when it welcomes a huge refugee population into its country, criminals will be among the ranks, but I never said those crimes must be tolerated or go unpunished -- a point which, of course, flew well over your head, which is why I stopped bothering.

Sorry, you can't compare the moral standing of PETA and SeaWorld. PETA has done nothing that could be construed as actual abuse of animals -- yes, the organization does euthanize dogs and cats at shelters, but they're not suffering.

Sneaky tricks are much easier to justify when they're done in the service of alleviating suffering than they are in the service of creating suffering. It is perfectly acceptable to condemn a group that not only promotes animal suffering, but engages in sneaky tricks on top of that.

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:11 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:since I made no comment on the "rightness" of what each was doing, merely that this seems to be a case of the biter bit....

firstly peta has no moral high ground on which to stand...as I have pointed out befor now...

secondly they are of the same ilk as those that would have research shut down

thirdly THEIR tactics are as imoral as anyone elses...

Sea world may well be immoral too, certainly their practices dont amount to "best practice"

however that is in many ways irrelevant...

IF yo are going to play "dirty games" then surely you cant complain when the same is returned???

PETA cant indulge in as they put it, corporate spying, then complain when one of their targets does the same.

@ didge..... you to faced hypocrite...6 months ago you agreed that hunting was no less ethical than farming....so I see thriough your pathetic game...

@ ben....I suppose I should have expected that from you....after all, when we bomb the ISIS we are "terrible" people

when they bomb us "its only a few" and a "price we must pay" etc etc

especially since (at least in tis current round) they threw the first one

NOW, granted it is likely 6 of one and half a dozen of the other, AND EVEN given that personally I'd pull out and just let em get on with killing one another, YOU seem to be content to vist any amount of horror on your own and marginalise the victims with some sort of bizzare justification (as long as you personally are safely out of the way)

THEN you whinge when I say "you dont care " and spend pages waffling on in some sort of justification.

we have had this conversation before....and you didnt answer.
either because you "missed it" why I dont know becasue it was a reply direct to a post you had made

OR becasue you recognised the truth in what I said...

You SAY you "care" and yet.......you expect us to "accept" more of the same

put simply...iof one side wants to play dirty, especially in an arena where such things are not actually greatly regulated, then it cant really complain too hard when it gets a dose of its own...

its like palestine and israel....neither side is exactly covered in righteous glory......

You know I'm all about bombing ISIS, so once again I'd thank you to not falsely accuse me of defending murderers.

In the very warped example you're providing, I suppose the refugees and ISIS are on the same side? That's idiotic, and it just goes to show once again what another here has said -- you think the good people and bad people are all on one side or the other. And you appear to think that the sexual assaults, etc. committed by a few (yes, it is only a very small percentage) of the refugees is somehow related to the fight against ISIS, which is thick beyond belief.

And, I never said the crimes committed by refugees must be accepted -- I never called for the suspension of law enforcement in those cases. I made a larger point about a merciful society accepting that when it welcomes a huge refugee population into its country, criminals will be among the ranks, but I never said those crimes must be tolerated or go unpunished -- a point which, of course, flew well over your head, which is why I stopped bothering.

Sorry, you can't compare the moral standing of PETA and SeaWorld. PETA has done nothing that could be construed as actual abuse of animals -- yes, the organization does euthanize dogs and cats at shelters, but they're not suffering.

Sneaky tricks are much easier to justify when they're done in the service of alleviating suffering than they are in the service of creating suffering. It is perfectly acceptable to condemn a group that not only promotes animal suffering, but engages in sneaky tricks on top of that.

What more can I say?

A well deserved +1

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:14 pm

PETA

PETA's Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad History of Killing Animals

James McWilliams Mar 12, 2012 Health

The organization, which claims to be dedicated to the cause of animal rights, can't explain why its adoption rate is only 2.5 percent for dogs.

https://www.petakillsanimals.com/

http://wjtv.com/2015/11/25/virginia-family-suing-peta-after-worker-stole-dog-from-front-porch-had-dog-euthanized/

And

7 Things You Didn’t Know About PETA

1) According to government documents, PETA employees have killed more than 19,200 dogs, cats, puppies, and kittens since 1998. This behavior continues despite PETA’s moralizing about the “unethical” treatment of animals by farmers, scientists, restaurant owners, circuses, hunters, fishermen, zookeepers, and countless other Americans. PETA puts to death over 90 percent of the animals it accepts from members of the public who expect the group to make a reasonable attempt to find them adoptive homes. PETA holds absolutely no open-adoption shelter hours at its Norfolk, VA headquarters, choosing instead to spend part of its $32 million annual income on a contract with a crematory service to periodically empty hundreds of animal bodies from its large walk-in freezer.

2) PETA president and co-founder Ingrid Newkirk has described her group’s overall goal as “total animal liberation.” This means the complete abolition of meat, milk, cheese, eggs, honey, zoos, aquariums, circuses, wool, leather, fur, silk, hunting, fishing, and pet ownership. In a 2003 profile of Newkirk in The New Yorker, author Michael Specter wrote that Newkirk has had at least one seeing-eye dog taken away from its blind owner. PETA is also against all medical research that requires the use of animals, including research aimed at curing AIDS and cancer.

3) PETA has given tens of thousands of dollars to convicted arsonists and other violent criminals. This includes a 2001 donation of $1,500 to the North American Earth Liberation Front (ELF), an FBI-certified “domestic terrorist” group responsible for dozens of firebombs and death threats. During the 1990s, PETA paid $70,200 to Rodney Coronado, an Animal Liberation Front (ALF) serial arsonist convicted of burning down a Michigan State University research laboratory. In his sentencing memorandum, a federal prosecutor implicated PETA president Ingrid Newkirk in that crime. PETA vegetarian campaign coordinator Bruce Friedrich has also told an animal rights convention that “blowing stuff up and smashing windows” is “a great way to bring about animal liberation,” adding, “Hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it.”

4) PETA activists regularly target children as young as six years old with anti-meat and anti-milk propaganda, even waiting outside their schools to intercept them without notifying their parents. One piece of kid-targeted PETA literature tells small children: “Your Mommy Kills Animals!” PETA brags that its messages reach over 1.2 million minor children, including 30,000 kids between the ages of 6 and 12, all contacted by e-mail without parental supervision. One PETA vice president told the Fox News Channel’s audience: “Our campaigns are always geared towards children, and they always will be.”

5) PETA’s president has said that “even if animal research resulted in a cure for AIDS, we would be against it.” And PETA has repeatedly attacked research foundations like the March of Dimes, the Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and the American Cancer Society, solely because they support animal-based research aimed at curing life-threatening diseases and birth defects. And PETA helped to start and manage a quasi-medical front group, the misnamed Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, to attack medical research head-on.

6) PETA has compared Jewish victims of the Nazi Holocaust to farm animals and Jesus Christ to pigs. PETA’s religious campaigns include a website that claims—despite ample evidence to the contrary—that Jesus Christ was a vegetarian. PETA holds protests at houses of worship, even suing one church that tried to protect its members from Sunday-morning harassment. Its billboards taunt Christians with the message that hogs “died for their sins.” PETA insists, contrary to centuries of rabbinical teaching, that the Jewish ritual of kosher slaughter shouldn’t be allowed. And its infamous “Holocaust on Your Plate” campaign crassly compared the Jewish victims of Nazi genocide to farm animals.

7) PETA frequently looks the other way when its celebrity spokespersons don’t practice what it preaches. As gossip bloggers and Hollywood journalists have noted, Pamela Anderson’s Dodge Viper (auctioned to benefit PETA) had a “luxurious leather interior”; Jenna Jameson was photographed fishing, slurping oysters, and wearing a leather jacket just weeks after launching an anti-leather campaign for PETA; Morrissey got an official “okay” from PETA after eating at a steakhouse; Dita von Teese has written about her love of furs and foie gras; Steve-O built a career out of abusing small animals on film; the officially “anti-fur” Eva Mendes often wears fur anyway; and Charlize Theron’s celebrated October 2007 Vogue cover shoot featured several suede garments. In 2008, “Baby Phat” designer Kimora Lee Simmons became a PETA spokesmodel despite working with fur and leather, after making a $20,000 donation to the animal rights group.

so a terrorist supporting organisation that grooms kids, would stop all medical research regardles of HUMAN suffering

kills 90% plus of the animals entrusted to it, making little or no attempt to rehome, often taking large "legacys" to look after them

and is steeped in hypocrisy and lies.....

has cause for complaint...

okayyyyyy..........

so according to you thats fair play is it,

funny old world is the dimension inhabited by the liberalist and lefty....

the hands of PETA are NO cleaner than those of seaworld

and as quill will confirm "clean hands " is an important litigational concept.....

and it is even MORE important when you desire to establish some sort of moral ascendency....

I take it from your support of PETA's corner then, that you actually think terrorism and child centered propaganda (grooming) is a valid way to conduct political and moral issues...(provided it isnt christians that are doing it)?

can we look forward to "vote democrat or we will blow you up" and

if your parents dont vote democrat they are bad people that we should kill

etc etc

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:25 pm

Well lets allow people to see or believe victor or their own words themself?

http://www.peta.org.uk/

Did victor actually back up a single claim?

Or go off bogus hysteria?

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:29 pm

What was said on the holocaust:

Ingrid Newkirk, the president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), has herself made the comparison unambiguously, saying: "Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouses."

Is that how it was explained above in the text minus a link by victor?

errrrr no

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:30 pm

erm links... the 7 things was from https://www.consumerfreedom.com/articles/134-7-things-you-didnt-know-about-peta/

of course the HOME page ...of the organisation will show different propaganda...

but then didge...you only see what suits you...

there ya go...I'll spoon feed you since you are dribbling again...

does didge EVER post reality...or just what suits him???

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:31 pm

Lord Foul wrote:erm links... the 7 things was from https://www.consumerfreedom.com/articles/134-7-things-you-didnt-know-about-peta/

of course the HOME page ...of the organisation will show different propaganda...

but then didge...you only see what suits you...

there ya go...I'll spoon feed you since you are dribbling again...

does didge EVER post reality...or just what suits him???

You mean something biased victor

I just disproved one of the awful claims

Do you want me to do the rest?

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:36 pm

Didge wrote:What was said on the holocaust:

Ingrid Newkirk, the president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), has herself made the comparison unambiguously, saying: "Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouses."

Is that how it was explained above in the text minus a link by victor?

errrrr no

errr here we go, finally the true face of didgeism

You know...I always thought didge actually liked the jews....

and here he is extolling the virtues of, and singing the praises for propaganda that trivialises 6 million HUMAN...jewish lives into chickens....

chickens no doubt he is quite happy to consume a fair number of over the year

hypocrit....twister....blind...dumb....

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:37 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Didge wrote:What was said on the holocaust:

Ingrid Newkirk, the president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), has herself made the comparison unambiguously, saying: "Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouses."

Is that how it was explained above in the text minus a link by victor?

errrrr no

errr here we go, finally the true face of didgeism

You know...I always thought didge actually liked the jews....

and here he is extolling the virtues of, and singing the praises for propaganda that trivialises 6 million HUMAN...jewish lives into chickens....

chickens no doubt he is quite happy to consume a fair number of over the year

hypocrit....twister....blind...dumb....

So nothing to refute my points

Just the usual immature insults

Checkmate sunshine

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:39 pm

Didge wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:erm links... the 7 things was from https://www.consumerfreedom.com/articles/134-7-things-you-didnt-know-about-peta/

of course the HOME page ...of the organisation will show different propaganda...

but then didge...you only see what suits you...

there ya go...I'll spoon feed you since you are dribbling again...

does didge EVER post reality...or just what suits him???

You mean something biased victor

I just disproved one of the awful claims

Do you want me to do the rest?

you didnt "disprove" anything...you tried to justify it.... SeaWorld Admits Spying On Animal Rights Group - Page 2 3489511464

whats worse is...you failed....utterly...becasue if thats what she said...then what I replied is the case....

it was simply wrong to use that as an example...it trivialised the holocaust..reduced those 6 milliojn humans to 6 billion chickens...

thats just plain sick and shows how quick you are to abandon your so called principles to further your rubbish.....

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:40 pm

So what Victor has just said is the life of one chicken means jack shit, let alone 6 billion

Is that right Victor?

She never even compared, she just said 6 billion would suffer, over where 6 million humans did. Did you see her actually say one was worse than the other?

Take your time slow one

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:41 pm

Didge wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

errr here we go, finally the true face of didgeism

You know...I always thought didge actually liked the jews....

and here he is extolling the virtues of, and singing the praises for propaganda that trivialises 6 million HUMAN...jewish lives into chickens....

chickens no doubt he is quite happy to consume a fair number of over the year

hypocrit....twister....blind...dumb....

So nothing to refute my points

Just the usual immature insults

Checkmate sunshine

the only "point yuo made was about the holocaust comparison...and i just dismantled that....

take a hike you sad old troll.....

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:42 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Didge wrote:

You mean something biased victor

I just disproved one of the awful claims

Do you want me to do the rest?

you didnt "disprove" anything...you tried to justify it....

whats worse is...you failed....utterly...becasue if thats what she said...then what I replied is the case....

it was simply wrong to use that as an example...it trivialised the holocaust..reduced those 6 milliojn humans to 6 billion chickens...

thats just plain sick and shows how quick you are to abandon your so called principles to further your rubbish.....

See its easy again, just immature insults

Game over boooooy.

He plays off something he now invents

Who has compared any Holocaust Victor

She me where she said one was worse than the other?

Is it actually you being thick here?

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:43 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Didge wrote:

So nothing to refute my points

Just the usual immature insults

Checkmate sunshine

the only "point yuo made was about the holocaust comparison...and i just dismantled that....

take a hike you sad old troll.....

What comparison?

The one you cannot explain or understand you mean?

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:49 pm

Didge wrote:So what Victor has just said is the life of one chicken means jack shit, let alone 6 billion

Is that right Victor?

She never even compared, she just said 6 billion would suffer, over where 6 million humans did. Did you see her actually say one was worse than the other?

Take your time slow one

she didnt have to...she quite well made the point that she considered them comparable

also the life of a chicken...bred for food AS YOU POINTED OUR earlier, is clearly what ever you buy it at....

see this is where you are being a prat....

suppose I kept chickens for meat ?(I dont mine are for eggs, and when they stop laying they get to "retire" and live out as long as they do quite happily...I figure since they laid my breakfast egg for 5 years they can have whatever time is left (often another 5 years, depending on breed) happily pecking bugs on the yard....) but suppose I kept them for meat....

what then vis hunting v's buying it in with the dirty deed done for you

out of sight out of mind eh didge....hypocrit....

mmm...6 billion chickens...thats a whole lot of sunday roasts........

itrs called ...FARMING and it feeds YOU ....

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:52 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Didge wrote:So what Victor has just said is the life of one chicken means jack shit, let alone 6 billion

Is that right Victor?

She never even compared, she just said 6 billion would suffer, over where 6 million humans did. Did you see her actually say one was worse than the other?

Take your time slow one

she didnt have to...she quite well made the point that she considered them comparable

also the life of a chicken...bred for food AS YOU POINTED OUR earlier, is clearly what ever you buy it at....

see this is where you are being a prat....

suppose I kept chickens for meat ?(I dont mine are for eggs, and when they stop laying they get to "retire" and live out as long as they do quite happily...I figure since they laid my breakfast egg for 5 years they can have whatever time is left (often another 5 years, depending on breed) happily pecking bugs on the yard....) but suppose I kept them for meat....

what then vis hunting v's buying it in with the dirty deed done for you

out of sight out of mind eh didge....hypocrit....

mmm...6 billion chickens...thats a whole lot of sunday roasts........

itrs called ...FARMING and it feeds YOU ....

What are animals to any animal lover?

Answer that one question

More than humans to some?

Then ask yourself did she trivalise anything?

What matters more will be dependent on each person

So who the hell are you to judge?

You know you just got your arse firmly spanked again

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:53 pm

but thats besides the point really...a "minor issue of open mouth and big foot" for her

there are more important issues ...

like the terrorist funding
the grooming of kids ...you would go apeshit if a religious group did that...
let alone the kill ratio they keep on trying to justify (and repeatedly fail...)

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:55 pm

Lord Foul wrote:but thats besides the point really...a "minor issue of open mouth and big foot" for her

there are more important issues ...

like the terrorist funding
the grooming of kids ...you would go apeshit if a religious group did that...
let alone the kill ratio they keep on trying to justify (and repeatedly fail...)

Its completely the point

The only person here that made the comparison was you and your article

She never did

She just expressed the loss of so many animals

I know when you are desperate by the idiocy of the above last points

So again who the hell are you to say what matters most to a human?

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:57 pm

Didge wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

she didnt have to...she quite well made the point that she considered them comparable

also the life of a chicken...bred for food AS YOU POINTED OUR earlier, is clearly what ever you buy it at....

see this is where you are being a prat....

suppose I kept chickens for meat ?(I dont mine are for eggs, and when they stop laying they get to "retire" and live out as long as they do quite happily...I figure since they laid my breakfast egg for 5 years they can have whatever time is left (often another 5 years, depending on breed) happily pecking bugs on the yard....) but suppose I kept them for meat....

what then vis hunting v's buying it in with the dirty deed done for you

out of sight out of mind eh didge....hypocrit....

mmm...6 billion chickens...thats a whole lot of sunday roasts........

itrs called ...FARMING and it feeds YOU ....

What are animals to any animal lover?

Answer that one question

More than humans to some?

in which case they are twisted and probaly stupid to boot

Then ask yourself did she trivalise anything?

yes

What matters more will be dependent on each person

those 6 million dead jews matter considerably more than however many chickens to anyone with a rational mind

So who the hell are you to judge?

I might ask YOU the same question....careful you dont get your head stuck in the door way....

You know you just got your arse firmly spanked again

hardly since you made an absurd defence of something indefensible and proved just how "flexible" your principles are

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:59 pm

Didge wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:but thats besides the point really...a "minor issue of open mouth and big foot" for her

there are more important issues ...

like the terrorist funding
the grooming of kids ...you would go apeshit if a religious group did that...
let alone the kill ratio they keep on trying to justify (and repeatedly fail...)

Its completely the point

The only person here that made the comparison was you and your article

She never did

She just expressed the loss of so many animals

I know when you are desperate by the idiocy of the above last points

So again who the hell are you to say what matters most to a human?

hardly

PETA has given tens of thousands of dollars to convicted arsonists and other violent criminals. This includes a 2001 donation of $1,500 to the North American Earth Liberation Front (ELF), an FBI-certified “domestic terrorist” group responsible for dozens of firebombs and death threats. During the 1990s, PETA paid $70,200 to Rodney Coronado, an Animal Liberation Front (ALF) serial arsonist convicted of burning down a Michigan State University research laboratory. In his sentencing memorandum, a federal prosecutor implicated PETA president Ingrid Newkirk in that crime. PETA vegetarian campaign coordinator Bruce Friedrich has also told an animal rights convention that “blowing stuff up and smashing windows” is “a great way to bring about animal liberation,” adding, “Hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it.”

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:01 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Didge wrote:

What are animals to any animal lover?

Answer that one question

More than humans to some?

in which case they are twisted and probaly stupid to boot

Then ask yourself did she trivalise anything?

yes

What matters more will be dependent on each person

those 6 million dead jews matter considerably more than however many chickens to anyone with a rational mind

So who the hell are you to judge?

I might ask YOU the same question....careful you dont get your head stuck in the door way....

You know you just got your arse firmly spanked again

hardly since you made an absurd defence of something indefensible and proved just how "flexible" your principles are

1) Subjective based on your views, not theirs

2) No actually you did, as it was your comparrison, not hers, as her view is most on animals

3) Well 11 million died through extermination process from starvation, to gas chambers, shooting etc, that matters to me how all of them were murdered, but its not up to me to say it is for others and neither is it for you to decide

4) Your last post was just gibberish

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:01 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Didge wrote:

Its completely the point

The only person here that made the comparison was you and your article

She never did

She just expressed the loss of so many animals

I know when you are desperate by the idiocy of the above last points

So again who the hell are you to say what matters most to a human?

hardly

PETA has given tens of thousands of dollars to convicted arsonists and other violent criminals. This includes a 2001 donation of $1,500 to the North American Earth Liberation Front (ELF), an FBI-certified “domestic terrorist” group responsible for dozens of firebombs and death threats. During the 1990s, PETA paid $70,200 to Rodney Coronado, an Animal Liberation Front (ALF) serial arsonist convicted of burning down a Michigan State University research laboratory. In his sentencing memorandum, a federal prosecutor implicated PETA president Ingrid Newkirk in that crime. PETA vegetarian campaign coordinator Bruce Friedrich has also told an animal rights convention that “blowing stuff up and smashing windows” is “a great way to bring about animal liberation,” adding, “Hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it.”

So one person?

Wow, big round of applause

Is that is?

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:03 pm

but \i suppose I shouldnt be surprised that you condone terrorism....as long as it doesnt affect you...

and yet....your hipocrisy is such that you....
eat meat,
take medication that has been tested on animals
wear leather (shoes?)
wear wool
you may quite possibly have had or will need a surgical procedure at some time that was perfected first on an animal....

Now...if you did non of those EVER

you might...just might, have a corner from which to argue...

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:04 pm

Lord Foul wrote:but \i suppose I shouldnt be surprised that you condone terrorism....as long as it doesnt affect you...

and yet....your hipocrisy is such that you....
eat meat,
take medication that has been tested on animals
wear leather (shoes?)
wear wool
you may quite possibly have had or will need a surgical procedure at some time that was perfected first on an animal....

Now...if you did non of those EVER

you might...just might, have a corner from which to argue...

1) Reeks of desperation, so you invent a lie

2)( You are backing to debating me

Game over weasel

You lost

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:06 pm

What I view on animals is irrelevant to what PETA supporters back

Hence why you had to fuck up you poor child lol

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:07 pm

Didge wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

hardly

PETA has given tens of thousands of dollars to convicted arsonists and other violent criminals. This includes a 2001 donation of $1,500 to the North American Earth Liberation Front (ELF), an FBI-certified “domestic terrorist” group responsible for dozens of firebombs and death threats. During the 1990s, PETA paid $70,200 to Rodney Coronado, an Animal Liberation Front (ALF) serial arsonist convicted of burning down a Michigan State University research laboratory. In his sentencing memorandum, a federal prosecutor implicated PETA president Ingrid Newkirk in that crime. PETA vegetarian campaign coordinator Bruce Friedrich has also told an animal rights convention that “blowing stuff up and smashing windows” is “a great way to bring about animal liberation,” adding, “Hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it.”

So one person?

Wow, big round of applause

Is that is?

are you a total idiot, or are some bits missing???

the organisation ..itself paid out the money...so it MUST have been a corporate decision.... to at least 2 terrorists
the PRESIDENT of the organisation was implicated
a senior member (the veggie campaign organiser) praised them publicly

hardly one person

and even if they ONLY paid one person...its still financing terrorism

as I said.... no surprise to find you an advocate thereof....

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:09 pm

So now only insults

You lost big time

Too easy for me these days

You are not a challenge anymore

When you man up, then come and see me

Untill then, wash your mouth out potty mouth

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:10 pm

That means hearsay counts for jackshit victor

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:11 pm

erm didge....you cant defend an organisation the procures terrorism

and then try to disassociate yourself from that.....

if you are supporting peta then you support their actions...simples...

by Guest Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:11 pm

Now I am going to leave you to suffer more looking even more stupid

You do not decide what others feel most precious to them

Got that Victor?

Good

When you have some evidence for your bull, then left me know

Night

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:13 pm

I notice that you attempt to avoid te point ..yet again...running away

PETA has given tens of thousands of dollars to convicted arsonists and other violent criminals. This includes a 2001 donation of $1,500 to the North American Earth Liberation Front (ELF), an FBI-certified “domestic terrorist” group responsible for dozens of firebombs and death threats. During the 1990s, PETA paid $70,200 to Rodney Coronado, an Animal Liberation Front (ALF) serial arsonist convicted of burning down a Michigan State University research laboratory. In his sentencing memorandum, a federal prosecutor implicated PETA president Ingrid Newkirk in that crime. PETA vegetarian campaign coordinator Bruce Friedrich has also told an animal rights convention that “blowing stuff up and smashing windows” is “a great way to bring about animal liberation,” adding, “Hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it.”

hardly hearsay

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:14 pm

PETA has given tens of thousands of dollars to convicted arsonists and other violent criminals. This includes a 2001 donation of $1,500 to the North American Earth Liberation Front (ELF), an FBI-certified “domestic terrorist” group responsible for dozens of firebombs and death threats. During the 1990s, PETA paid $70,200 to Rodney Coronado, an Animal Liberation Front (ALF) serial arsonist convicted of burning down a Michigan State University research laboratory. In his sentencing memorandum, a federal prosecutor implicated PETA president Ingrid Newkirk in that crime. PETA vegetarian campaign coordinator Bruce Friedrich has also told an animal rights convention that “blowing stuff up and smashing windows” is “a great way to bring about animal liberation,” adding, “Hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it.”

A matter of public recors...not spoken in a closed meeting.....therfor not hearsay either....

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:17 pm

Didge wrote:Now I am going to leave you to suffer more looking even more stupid

You do not decide what others feel most precious to them

Got that Victor?

Good

try applying that to yourself the big head.....

AND...whilst I dont get to decide...I DO get to judge, if and when their abberant ideals conflict with mine...

they can "love" their chickens all they want
they dont get to tell me I cant eat em.....

got it oh simple one.....

When you have some evidence for your bull, then left me know

Night

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:20 pm

funny old world innit...when you consider how flexible you are didge....
and how you change your tune to suit your agenda (whatever that is SeaWorld Admits Spying On Animal Rights Group - Page 2 2190311264

)

the mind of a liberalist is like a bog...ever shifting and unreliable....

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:38 pm

Didge wrote:Now I am going to leave you to suffer more looking even more stupid

You do not decide what others feel most precious to them

Got that Victor?

Good

When you have some evidence for your bull, then left me know

Night

oh and...

we can apply the very point you just made there to my views on immigration and refugees

YOU do NOT decide what I feel is most important to me ....

got that didge

GOOD

by HoratioTarr Fri Feb 26, 2016 11:38 pm

Lord Foul wrote:poor decision...what would that be then moron??

disagree with you ?

hey ho

insult your family...oh do grow up...or do you hate ragga THAT much

I merely wondered if she was married to you...or perhaps she was your sister(which of course you tried to twist..... and failed)

since she has some habits in common (sorry ragga )

personally I think ragga was the insulted one......

and YOU (not your family) that is the insult

oh and you are playing the "its just words again are you2

no didgeslap...that describes you entirely , with no modification or changes needed

and it doesnt change the fact you are an hypocritical LIAR

whats up...pissed again and found the bottom of the barrel, or have work "found you out" and sacked you for misconduct?????

I'm wondering why you shoot your food? In this day and age, is that necessary?

by Victorismyhero Fri Feb 26, 2016 11:39 pm

HoratioTarr wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:poor decision...what would that be then moron??

disagree with you ?

hey ho

insult your family...oh do grow up...or do you hate ragga THAT much

I merely wondered if she was married to you...or perhaps she was your sister(which of course you tried to twist..... and failed)

since she has some habits in common (sorry ragga )

personally I think ragga was the insulted one......

and YOU (not your family) that is the insult

oh and you are playing the "its just words again are you2

no didgeslap...that describes you entirely , with no modification or changes needed

and it doesnt change the fact you are an hypocritical LIAR

whats up...pissed again and found the bottom of the barrel, or have work "found you out" and sacked you for misconduct?????

I'm wondering why you shoot your food? In this day and age, is that necessary?

before we go into that...do yo eat meat?

by HoratioTarr Fri Feb 26, 2016 11:52 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:

I'm wondering why you shoot your food? In this day and age, is that necessary?

before we go into that...do yo eat meat?

I've already told you on here that I do.

by Victorismyhero Sat Feb 27, 2016 12:17 am

hokay

firstly why does it matter...

you COULD take the view that dead is ...well .....dead regardless of how that lamentable condition is arrived at.

however

firstly i enjoy shooting , as a skill...I also shoot a lot of clay targets...

at about 85-95%

and edible targets are of course a bonus

Now...

firstly game meat is FAR superior to farmed meat, it is lean and tasty. It has few chemicals in it...
secondly what i Shoot in the main is vermin...rabbits pigeon and crow (and a fair number of rats and grey squirrels

hint I dont eat crow, rat of squirrel, although I'm told squirrel is tasty too...but tree rats...nah...give over

I dont do "driven game" personally I dont like it...but I will have the odd pheasant or duck in season as the oppertunity arises

now we come to the interesting bit

I consider the hunting of game , as I do it to be at least as , and in all concience more ethical than farmed meat...

Its not mistreated on the farm, its not mistreated during transport and its not mistreated during slaughter.

on the few occaisions where its not a clean instant kill using the shotgun, the bird or rabbit is retrieved in very quick order by my retriever and dispatched humanely immediately...or if it is evident its not sufficiently well hit to "down it" it gets barrel number 2.
If im using a rifle for small game there is always a second round to follow if needed...

so the level of suffering inflicted is minimal

I "keeper" over 350 acres of good farm land and 25 acre of woodland

shooting rabbits etc is necessary for balance,and stock safety, the woods have improved markedly in terms of diversity since I thinned out the crows and magpies that were devastating the songbirds...and the health of the woodland itself has improved somewhat for removing the resident grey squirrels...

so ...

whilst it may not strictly speaking be necessary to hunt for food...there are a number of perfectly good reasons to do so...

and

necessity is NOT the arbiter of what you should or should not do....
and
as i say to the anti who gets stroppy ...but eats meat non the less....that is moral cowardice...you (as the anti but meat eater) are merely shifting the blame effectively to the "judas goat" i.e slaughterman

at least I have the balls to strangle my own dinner (thats a metaphore btw...just in case you think I meant "strangle" literally)

now...just as a matter of info

rabbits did 390 MILLION pounds worth of damage at least last year to land, stock and crops.....

yep...thats NOT a typo....

6 rabbits eat as much as a sheep.....

get an infestation of rabbits and thats like well....... depending on land area...6000 rabbits would NOT be an over estimate.....they breed like......rabbits..... SeaWorld Admits Spying On Animal Rights Group - Page 2 2190311264

as I said to didge...what about the guy who keeps chickens for meat...????

I bet they are better treated in general than those kept commercially...and killed just as humanely...

so whats the difference between that and me hunting ?

oh and dont beleive the ranting idiot...my dog doesnt "rip it to bits" thats just his lies....I mean..what good would that be to me...I want the rabbit/pigeon/pheasant back in one piece thanks....

by Sponsored content