Pro-meat protesters fined for eating raw squirrels at vegan stall

First topic message reminder :

Two pro-meat protesters have been fined after eating raw squirrels at a food market.

Deonisy Khlebnikov, 22, and Gatis Lagzdins, 29, ate the still fur-covered dead animals in front of members of the public, including young children, outside a vegan stall in Soho, the West End of London.

The pair were asked to stop by onlookers, including the parent of an upset child, but continued their protest at the Soho vegan food market in Rupert Street on 30 March, the Crown Prosecution Service said.

They were found guilty of a public order offence at City of London magistrates court on Monday.

Natalie Clines, a senior CPS prosecutor, said: “Deonisy Khlebnikov and Gatis Lagzdins claimed they were against veganism and were raising awareness about the dangers of not eating meat when they publicly consumed raw squirrels.

“But by choosing to do this outside a vegan food stall and continuing with their disgusting and unnecessary behaviour despite requests to stop, including from a parent whose child was upset by their actions, the prosecution was able to demonstrate that they had planned and intended to cause distress to the public.

“Their premeditated actions caused significant distress to members of the public, including young children.”

The pair denied using disorderly behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress at a trial but were both convicted.

Khlebnikov, from Westminster, was fined £200 plus costs and a surcharge, while Lagzdins, from Ealing in west London, who did not attend the hearing, was fined £400 plus costs and a surcharge.


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jul/23/pro-meat-protesters-fined-eating-raw-squirrels-vegan-stall?CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium=&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1563886721


The world is truely going mad. Whether you think this is wrong or not, being arrested for this and fined is utterly ridiculous.

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

Of course there is a difference in the way humans and animals eat meat...... You are clutching at straws now Didge.

lol, I am showing up the absurdity of your claim. As again if people are not sickened by other animals eating meat. Then their should be no reason in regards to humans doing so.

The absurdity of my claim...yes...OK.

People are not sickened by wild animals pooing in public (though tbh I do draw the line at dogs on public footpaths)  but I imagine if random strangers squatted beside a market stall to empty their bowels the reaction would be somewhat different.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:

lol, I am showing up the absurdity of your claim. As again if people are not sickened by other animals eating meat. Then their should be no reason in regards to humans doing so.

The absurdity of [i]my[/b] claim...yes...OK.

People are not sickened by animals taking a dump in public (though tbh I do draw the line at dogs on public footpaths)  but I imagine if random strangers squatted beside a market stall to empty their bowels the reaction would be somewhat different.

Whataboutism with dumping, as again we are talking about eating prey, not having a shit. Which would be unhygenic. Which is a major difference. Your view was on being sickened with a human eating a dead animal. When you would not feel the same over any other meat eating animal. Hence the stance you hav is of extreme absurdity

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

The absurdity of [i]my[/b] claim...yes...OK.

People are not sickened by animals taking a dump in public (though tbh I do draw the line at dogs on public footpaths)  but I imagine if random strangers squatted beside a market stall to empty their bowels the reaction would be somewhat different.

Whataboutism with dumping, as again we are talking about eating prey, not having a shit. Which would be unhygenic. Which is a major difference. Your view was on being sickened with a human eating a dead animal. When you would not feel the same over any other meat eating animal. Hence the stance you hav is of extreme absurdity

Ahhh....so you only compare the habits of humans v animals when it suits your own argument.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Whataboutism with dumping, as again we are talking about eating prey, not having a shit. Which would be unhygenic. Which is a major difference. Your view was on being sickened with a human eating a dead animal. When you would not feel the same over any other meat eating animal. Hence the stance you hav is of extreme absurdity

Ahhh....so you only compare the habits of humans v animals when it suits your own argument.

You simple do not understand how bad a whatboutism argument is. Again I do not know of anyone that enjoys watching a dog or cat having a crap and now humans clean up after them. So on all fronts your comparrison, was evn more stupid

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

Ahhh....so you only compare the habits of humans v animals when it suits your own argument.

You simple do not understand how bad a whatboutism argument is. Again I do not know of anyone that enjoys watching a dog or cat having a crap and now humans clean up after them. So on all fronts your comparrison, was evn more stupid

Most dogs and cats are domesticated , you were talking about animals catching and eating their own prey....stop bringing in unrelated points then twisting them to suit yourself.

Civilised human beings do not eat raw, uncleaned, fur covered animals, for a start its incredibly unhygenic, God knows what parasites or diseases they could have.
We dont eat said animals for the same reason we dont use the street as a toilet or a place to have sex.....we have evolved....well some of us have anyway.

For the oddballs who decide to buck the trend and do any of the above in public, they stand the chance of being arrested and charged and punished ....just as has happened in this case.

phildidge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

That has nothing to do with this! That is about vegan activists. The people around the stall weren't vegan activists! FFS Didge, get a grip.

I am provoing to you that many Vegans already are very hardened to such scenes and like I say unlikely to suffer truama. The above shows this as evidence for this. Its a no brainer, as again it is no doubt them seeing distressing clips or pictures of animal slaughter or dairy farming methods that would have been a factor in many becoming vegan

You're not proving anything! You're talking about vegan activists, not vegans. Do you really think that vegans go around looking at animal cruelty or people cutting up meat? Of course they don't. They might have seen something once, but that doesn't mean they want to see it again.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:

You simple do not understand how bad a whatboutism argument is. Again I do not know of anyone that enjoys watching a dog or cat having a crap and now humans clean up after them. So on all fronts your comparrison, was evn more stupid

Most dogs and cats are domesticated , you were talking about animals catching and eating their own prey....stop bringing in unrelated points then twisting them to suit yourself.

Civilised human beings do not eat raw, uncleaned, fur covered animals, for a start its incredibly unhygenic, God knows what parasites or diseases they could have.
We dont eat said animals for the same reason we dont use the street as a toilet or a place to have sex.....we have evolved....well some of us have anyway.

For the oddballs who decide to buck the trend and do any of the above in public, they stand the chance of being arrested and charged and punished ....just as has happened in this case.

The vast majority of domestic cats will catch and eat prey. So nothing is being twisted here, i am simple exposing the stupidity of your argument.

Lol, so now we get to an even more absurd and arbitrary claim. That now its "uncivilised" to eat raw meat. If that was the caaase, it would be illegal to do so, but no such law exists and nor should it. Well i guess al those Japanese and western people that eat raw fish, must also be uncivillised t you. What an abolsute ridiculous and stupid claim. Even more so you are saying the way of life for people who do hunt and eat animals are uncivilised. Its basically demeaning people based on some warped and arbitrary standard you have created inside your own head. Being civilized is simple nothing more than a human made concept

Your arguments are simple getting more stupoid by the minute. There is nothing uncivillised about eating animals whether cooked or raw. You are again simple inventing gibberish to back an absurd view you have here.

As again, if you are not sickened by meat eating animals catching and eating prey. Then it stands to the same reason, that you would not with humans. Being the fact humans are animals.

Raggamuffin wrote:

phildidge wrote:

I am provoing to you that many Vegans already are very hardened to such scenes and like I say unlikely to suffer truama. The above shows this as evidence for this. Its a no brainer, as again it is no doubt them seeing distressing clips or pictures of animal slaughter or dairy farming methods that would have been a factor in many becoming vegan

You're not proving anything! You're talking about vegan activists, not vegans. Do you really think that vegans go around looking at animal cruelty or people cutting up meat? Of course they don't. They might have seen something once, but that doesn't mean they want to see it again.

I have proved to you, you just want to deny the evidence.

phildidge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:


You're not proving anything! You're talking about vegan activists, not vegans. Do you really think that vegans go around looking at animal cruelty or people cutting up meat? Of course they don't. They might have seen something once, but that doesn't mean they want to see it again.

I have proved to you, you just want to deny the evidence.

No you haven't - you're talking about vegan activists. Do you think that all vegans are activists or what?

Raggamuffin wrote:

phildidge wrote:

I have proved to you, you just want to deny the evidence.

No you haven't - you're talking about vegan activists. Do you think that all vegans are activists or what?

Yes i have and again vegans often try to ghave people switch to veganism. How do you think they do this Rags? By showing how animals are treated in the farming process by any chance.?? How do you think many themselves came to be also? You simple are not opening up your mind to the reality of this

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:
Most dogs and cats are domesticated , you were talking about animals catching and eating their own prey....stop bringing in unrelated points then twisting them to suit yourself.

Civilised human beings do not eat raw, uncleaned, fur covered animals, for a start its incredibly unhygenic, God knows what parasites or diseases they could have.
We dont eat said animals for the same reason we dont use the street as a toilet or a place to have sex.....we have evolved....well some of us have anyway.

For the oddballs who decide to buck the trend and do any of the above in public, they stand the chance of being arrested and charged and punished ....just as has happened in this case.

The vast majority of domestic cats will catch and eat prey. So nothing is being twisted here, i am simple exposing the stupidity of your argument.

Lol, so now we get to an even more absurd and arbitrary claim. That now its "uncivilised" to eat raw meat. If that was the caaase, it would be illegal to do so, but no such law exists and nor should it.  Well i guess al those Japanese and western people that eat raw fish, must also be uncivillised t you. What an abolsute ridiculous and stupid claim. Even more so you are saying the way of life for people who do hunt and eat animals are uncivilised. Its basically demeaning people based on some warped and arbitrary standard you have created inside your own head. Being civilized is simple nothing more than a human made concept

Your arguments are simple getting more stupoid by the minute. There is nothing uncivillised about eating animals whether cooked or raw. You are again simple inventing gibberish to back an absurd view you have here.

As again, if you are not sickened by meat eating animals catching and eating prey. Then it stands to the same reason, that you would not with humans. Being the fact humans are animals.

Your whole post is based round something I didn't write.

I actually said....Civilised human beings do not eat raw, uncleaned, fur covered animals, for a start its incredibly unhygenic, God knows what parasites or diseases they could have.

phildidge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No you haven't - you're talking about vegan activists. Do you think that all vegans are activists or what?

Yes i have and again vegans often try to ghave people switch to veganism. How do you think they do this Rags? By showing how animals are treated in the farming process by any chance.?? How do you think many themselves came to be also? You simple are not opening up your mind to the reality of this

No you haven't proved anything. You're lumping all vegans together. Not all vegans try to pursuade others to become vegan, they just mind their own business.

Do you think that anyone at that market stall were vegans who are very used to seeing animals being killed, cut up, or mistreated? Do you think they were there telling others they should become vegan?

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:

The vast majority of domestic cats will catch and eat prey. So nothing is being twisted here, i am simple exposing the stupidity of your argument.

Lol, so now we get to an even more absurd and arbitrary claim. That now its "uncivilised" to eat raw meat. If that was the caaase, it would be illegal to do so, but no such law exists and nor should it.  Well i guess al those Japanese and western people that eat raw fish, must also be uncivillised t you. What an abolsute ridiculous and stupid claim. Even more so you are saying the way of life for people who do hunt and eat animals are uncivilised. Its basically demeaning people based on some warped and arbitrary standard you have created inside your own head. Being civilized is simple nothing more than a human made concept

Your arguments are simple getting more stupoid by the minute. There is nothing uncivillised about eating animals whether cooked or raw. You are again simple inventing gibberish to back an absurd view you have here.

As again, if you are not sickened by meat eating animals catching and eating prey. Then it stands to the same reason, that you would not with humans. Being the fact humans are animals.

Your whole post is based round something I didn't write.

I actually said....Civilised human beings do not eat raw, uncleaned, fur covered animals, for a start its incredibly unhygenic, God knows what parasites or diseases they could have.

How is it unhygenic? You are simple invented more nonsense and again still inventing an arbitrary claim on what it is to be civilised. The reality is that people who claim to be sickened here, are in fact utter hypocrites if they do not feel the same when watching other meat eating animals doing the same

Raggamuffin wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Yes i have and again vegans often try to ghave people switch to veganism. How do you think they do this Rags? By showing how animals are treated in the farming process by any chance.?? How do you think many themselves came to be also? You simple are not opening up your mind to the reality of this

No you haven't proved anything. You're lumping all vegans together. Not all vegans try to pursuade others to become vegan, they just mind their own business.

Do you think that anyone at that market stall were vegans who are very used to seeing animals being killed, cut up, or mistreated? Do you think they were there telling others they should become vegan?

So I asked you questions, you avoid answering them. Quelle surprise

To answer your last point, very much so. People turn to veganism, due to what happens to other animals. This would require seeing this for the vast majority of people. Whether through pictures, videos etc. People simple have reasons for changing and for many vegans it is around standingf against farming methods. You simple cannot just imagine what goes on.

phildidge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:


No you haven't proved anything. You're lumping all vegans together. Not all vegans try to pursuade others to become vegan, they just mind their own business.

Do you think that anyone at that market stall were vegans who are very used to seeing animals being killed, cut up, or mistreated? Do you think they were there telling others they should become vegan?

So I asked you questions, you avoid answering them. Quelle surprise

To answer your last point, very much so. People turn to veganism, due to what happens to other animals. This would require seeing this for the vast majority of people. Whether through pictures, videos etc. People simple have reasons for changing and for many vegans it is around standingf against farming methods. You simple cannot just imagine what goes on.

Someone may well become vegan because they saw or heard something which upset them, but that doesn't mean they want to keep on seeing it and hearing about it! You surely don't think that all vegans are out demonstrating all the time.

Also, at that market stall there might have been non-vegans. It was a public place so there may well have been meat eaters there and vegetarians as well.

Nobody seems to know where they got the squirrels from. I hope they didn't catch them and kill them. Wildlife isn't there for idiots to make fools of themselves. Mind you, it's hard to catch a squirrel.

Raggamuffin wrote:

phildidge wrote:

So I asked you questions, you avoid answering them. Quelle surprise

To answer your last point, very much so. People turn to veganism, due to what happens to other animals. This would require seeing this for the vast majority of people. Whether through pictures, videos etc. People simple have reasons for changing and for many vegans it is around standingf against farming methods. You simple cannot just imagine what goes on.

Someone may well become vegan because they saw or heard something which upset them, but that doesn't mean they want to keep on seeing it and hearing about it! You surely don't think that all vegans are out demonstrating all the time.  

Also, at that market stall there might have been non-vegans. It was a public place so there may well have been meat eaters there and vegetarians as well.

Like i said for many it has hardened them to such images around the methods used. The reality is and as i have explained to Syl. Its hypocritical for a vegan to claim its distressing. If they never feel the same in regards to meat eating animals eating prey. Only if they found it always distressing for any animal. Would they have a valid reason. Again its like I have always said. When people come to view an animal in a loving and more so pet nature. They then view the eating of that animal as some how wrong. For example many people love horses, yet its delicious to eat. Yet those thast love horses have created in their mind to then not want to eat them. Hence its the attachment people have towards specific animals. Many would not bat an eyelid, if their house was infested with rats and then had an exterminated come in to kill them. As seen it shows how people pick and choose based on the specific type of animals that they love.

I read where one Vegan activist actually did this.

Anyway this is going around in circles and thus getting tedius. I have said my peace onthis.

Anyway have a great day people, catch you all later

Raggamuffin wrote:Nobody seems to know where they got the squirrels from. I hope they didn't catch them and kill them. Wildlife isn't there for idiots to make fools of themselves. Mind you, it's hard to catch a squirrel.

Wild grey squirrels will often eat out of your hand, so I would think it would be pretty easy to grab hold of one.
My grandson actually got bitten by a squirrel when he was young....I bet not many kids can claim that.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Nobody seems to know where they got the squirrels from. I hope they didn't catch them and kill them. Wildlife isn't there for idiots to make fools of themselves. Mind you, it's hard to catch a squirrel.

Wild grey squirrels will often eat out of your hand, so I would think it would be pretty easy to grab hold of one.
My grandson actually got bitten by a squirrel when he was young....I bet not many kids can claim that.

I hope they didn't do it that way. If they did, they should be fined a lot more!

phildidge wrote:Anyway this is going around in circles and thus getting tedius. I have said my peace onthis.

Anyway have a great day people, catch you all later  

You mean you got bored with talking shite. I'm not surprised.

Raggamuffin wrote:

phildidge wrote:Anyway this is going around in circles and thus getting tedius. I have said my peace onthis.

Anyway have a great day people, catch you all later  

You mean you got bored with talking shite. I'm not surprised.

Actually, I got bored of your stupidity Rags, but as seen you are screaming for my attention as usual.

phildidge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You mean you got bored with talking shite. I'm not surprised.

Actually, I got bored of your stupidity Rags, but as seen you are screaming for my attention as usual.

Oh you're back. Are you going to talk more shite about vegans being activists and spending their time watching animals being mistreated or killed?

Raggamuffin wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Actually, I got bored of your stupidity Rags, but as seen you are screaming for my attention as usual.

Oh you're back. Are you going to talk more shite about vegans being activists and spending their time watching animals being mistreated or killed?

See, still screaming for my attention.

phildidge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Oh you're back. Are you going to talk more shite about vegans being activists and spending their time watching animals being mistreated or killed?

See, still screaming for my attention.

You only came back to troll.

Raggamuffin wrote:

phildidge wrote:

See, still screaming for my attention.

You only came back to troll.

Came back? have not left, so the above is just you more than ever screaming for my attention..

phildidge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You only came back to troll.

Came back? have not left, so the above is just you more than ever screaming for my attention..

You did imply you were leaving though.

eta....I dont mean flouncing, I mean you implied you were logging off for the day.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Came back? have not left, so the above is just you more than ever screaming for my attention..

You did imply you were leaving though.

eta....I dont mean flouncing, I mean you implied you were logging off for the day.

Does that mean I have to provide an exact time on when I will be back online?

Holy crap, you really are at best a child at times Syl

The pair of you need to grow up

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

You did imply you were leaving though.

eta....I dont mean flouncing, I mean you implied you were logging off for the day.

Does that mean I have to provide an exact time on when I will be back online?

Holy crap, you really are at best a child at times Syl

The pair of you need to grow up

Well you contradicted yourself....no need to get defensive about it, we all make mistakes sometimes.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Does that mean I have to provide an exact time on when I will be back online?

Holy crap, you really are at best a child at times Syl

The pair of you need to grow up

Well you contradicted yourself....no need to get defensive about it, we all make mistakes sometimes.

At least i admit mine and apologise for them

You should try it sometime

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:So according to Vintage it’s the fact the meat was raw...meaning “People don’t mind seeing cooked meat being eaten but feel offended if the meat is raw”

How odd!

There is a difference between eating a clean and cooked animal and eating a raw furry animal...for a start the couple would have had blood dribbling down their faces, and it's not easy to tear at uncooked meat with human teeth....they must have looked like cannibals or vampires or something.
To be honest I think I would have found it stomach churning myself.

So what if there’s blood? Are meat-eaters scared of blood? They eat animals which are full of blood!

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

There is a difference between eating a clean and cooked animal and eating a raw furry animal...for a start the couple would have had blood dribbling down their faces, and it's not easy to tear at uncooked meat with human teeth....they must have looked like cannibals or vampires or something.
To be honest I think I would have found it stomach churning myself.

So what if there’s blood? Are meat-eaters scared of blood? They eat animals which are full of blood!

They eat clean prepared animals, even if they choose to eat raw meat, Steak tartare for eg, it's not full of fur (and God knows what else)

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:

So what if there’s blood? Are meat-eaters scared of blood? They eat animals which are full of blood!

They eat clean prepared animals, even if they choose to eat raw meat, Steak tartare for eg, it's not full of fur (and God knows what else)

I love my steak rare and bloody

I also love black pudding

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

There is a difference between eating a clean and cooked animal and eating a raw furry animal...for a start the couple would have had blood dribbling down their faces, and it's not easy to tear at uncooked meat with human teeth....they must have looked like cannibals or vampires or something.
To be honest I think I would have found it stomach churning myself.

So what if there’s blood? Are meat-eaters scared of blood? They eat animals which are full of blood!

They eat clean prepared animals, even if they choose to eat raw meat, Steak tartare for eg, it's not full of fur (and God knows what else)

Ah so the meat-eaters don’t like knowing how the animals look before they’re all tarted (or tartared) up.....

Perhaps that makes them a little in denial.

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

They eat clean prepared animals, even if they choose to eat raw meat, Steak tartare for eg, it's not full of fur (and God knows what else)

Ah so the meat-eaters don’t like knowing how the animals look before they’re all tarted (or tartared) up.....

Perhaps that makes them a little in denial.

Or just civilised.

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

They eat clean prepared animals, even if they choose to eat raw meat, Steak tartare for eg, it's not full of fur (and God knows what else)

Ah so the meat-eaters don’t like knowing how the animals look before they’re all tarted (or tartared) up.....

Perhaps that makes them a little in denial.

Or just civilised.

Ah okay. It’s civilised because cooked meat has no blood. Right.
Let’s “hide” what meat really is because.....

Don’t you see how odd that is?

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

Or just civilised.

Ah okay. It’s civilised because cooked meat has no blood. Right.
Let’s “hide” what meat really is because.....

Don’t you see how odd that is?

OK, do you eat meat Eddie, or do you serve it up for the family?
Is it cooked or raw, prepared or in it's natural form, ie complete with fur, tail, eyes etc..

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:

Ah okay. It’s civilised because cooked meat has no blood. Right.
Let’s “hide” what meat really is because.....

Don’t you see how odd that is?

OK, do you eat meat Eddie, or do you serve it up for the family?
Is it cooked or raw, prepared or in it's natural form, ie complete with fur, tail, eyes etc..

Whataboutism

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

Or just civilised.

Ah okay. It’s civilised because cooked meat has no blood. Right.
Let’s “hide” what meat really is because.....

Don’t you see how odd that is?

OK, do you eat meat Eddie, or do you serve it up for the family?
Is it cooked or raw, prepared or in it's natural form, ie complete with fur, tail, eyes etc..

It’s cooked? What’s that got to do with anything? If my son - the meat eater - said “Oh my god that meat is dripping blood all over their face!” I’d say “Erm yeah...that’s what it looks like before it’s cooked...der!”

What’s your point?

The point is you cook the meat....which is the civilised way of serving it..

Syl wrote:The point is you cook the meat....which is the civilised way of serving it..

Civilised because...?

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:The point is you cook the meat....which is the civilised way of serving it..

Civilised because...?

Because we have moved on from catching, skinning and cooking our own food.


Have you people not heard of M&S.

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:The point is you cook the meat....which is the civilised way of serving it..

Civilised because...?

Because we have moved on from catching, skinning and cooking our own food.


Have you people not heard of M&S.

Syl, that doesn’t negate what I’m saying. If meat eaters are offended by raw meat, should they be eating it, much less be offended by it?

“Oh! There’s blood! And skin! And flesh! Oh I don’t want to look because it’s disgusting!”

Erm yeah...that’s what your food looks like before you cook it and eat.

Does a raw vegetable do that to you? Dried oats? Uncooked fruit?

Come on. You get what I’m saying.

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

Because we have moved on from catching, skinning and cooking our own food.


Have you people not heard of M&S.

Syl, that doesn’t negate what I’m saying. If meat eaters are offended by raw meat, should they be eating it, much less be offended by it?

“Oh! There’s blood! And skin! And flesh! Oh I don’t want to look because it’s disgusting!”

Erm yeah...that’s what your food looks like before you cook it and eat.

Does a raw vegetable do that to you? Dried oats? Uncooked fruit?

Come on. You get what I’m saying.

Yes I get what you are saying, but everyone knowing what raw meat looks like  doesn't excuse what these two did.
Seriously, who eats raw animals complete with fur?

If they were trying to convert meat eaters into becoming non meat eaters I could see the point they were making even if I dont agree with the way they made it, but doing this in front of a vegan stall  to make the point that meat is good  was done to deliberately provoke and upset people..

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

Because we have moved on from catching, skinning and cooking our own food.


Have you people not heard of M&S.

Syl, that doesn’t negate what I’m saying. If meat eaters are offended by raw meat, should they be eating it, much less be offended by it?

“Oh! There’s blood! And skin! And flesh! Oh I don’t want to look because it’s disgusting!”

Erm yeah...that’s what your food looks like before you cook it and eat.

Does a raw vegetable do that to you? Dried oats? Uncooked fruit?

Come on. You get what I’m saying.

Yes I get what you are saying, but everyone knowing what raw meat looks like  doesn't excuse what these two did.
Seriously, who eats raw animals complete with fur?

If they were trying to convert meat eaters into becoming non meat eaters I could see the point they were making even if I dont agree with the way they made it, but doing this in front of a vegan stall  to make the point that meat is good  was done to deliberately provoke and upset people..

Forget the point about conversions and vegans and “deliberately provoking”. That’s irrelevant actually, and we all know it.

This is what you all hate. THE MEAT WAS RAW AND BLOODY AND COVERED IN FUR.
IE: In it’s NATURAL state.

So??

If they were eating COOKED MEAT THAT WASN’T RAW AND DIDN’T HAVE FUR....(as you stated)...then which is it?

*It’s not the offence - because it wasn’t the uncooked nor cooked, part of the animal.
*It’s not the fact it was meat - cooked or uncooked.
*It’s not the choice of animal - you never stated a specific animal.

Or

*It’s the fact that the meat was RAW and HAD FUR.

Right?

Because you are squealing at the fact that it’s uncooked rather than the fact that it’s cooked. And you’re offended because....?

If that’s what you’re saying then all I can say is this:

That’s what meat looks like before it reaches M&S supermarkets.

Your point is????


Am I making sense or pissing in a whirlwind?
Because I still haven’t had a real definitive answer on this thread.

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

Yes I get what you are saying, but everyone knowing what raw meat looks like  doesn't excuse what these two did.
Seriously, who eats raw animals complete with fur?

If they were trying to convert meat eaters into becoming non meat eaters I could see the point they were making even if I dont agree with the way they made it, but doing this in front of a vegan stall  to make the point that meat is good  was done to deliberately provoke and upset people..

Forget the point about conversions and vegans and “deliberately provoking”. That’s irrelevant actually, and we all know it.

This is what you all hate. THE MEAT WAS RAW AND BLOODY AND COVERED IN FUR.
IE: In it’s NATURAL state.

So??

If they were eating COOKED MEAT THAT WASN’T RAW AND DIDN’T HAVE FUR....(as you stated)...then which is it?

*It’s not the offence - because it wasn’t the uncooked nor cooked, part of the animal.
*It’s not the fact it was meat - cooked or uncooked.
*It’s not the choice of animal - you never stated a specific animal.

Or

*It’s the fact that the meat was RAW and HAD FUR.

Right?  

Because you are squealing at the fact that it’s uncooked rather than the fact that it’s cooked. And you’re offended because....?

If that’s what you’re saying then all I can say is this:

That’s what meat looks like before it reaches M&S supermarkets.

Your point is????


Am I making sense or pissing in a whirlwind?
Because I still haven’t had a real definitive answer on this thread.

I have answered you, not sure what else you expect me to say.

The outcome of this though the two men were seen by law to be deliberately upsetting, harassing and alarming members of the public....they went too far in trying to get their point across, which was a bloody silly one in the first place.

You dont agree with the outcome...I do...viva la difference.

I don't think you'll get a definitive answer because there isn't one. People will probably have all sorts of reasons for finding someone chewing on a furry bloody carcass in public offensive, even meat eaters.
There are many people who eat meat but have no desire to know how it got on their plates, many of those would stop eating meat if they did understand or acknowledge the process involved.
The two men's actions are at best odd but they did mean to offend and paid the price.

Vintage wrote:I don't think you'll get a definitive answer because there isn't one. People will probably have all sorts of reasons for finding someone chewing on a furry bloody carcass in public offensive, even meat eaters.
There are many people who eat meat but have no desire to know how it got on their plates, many of those would stop eating meat if they did understand or acknowledge the process involved.
The two men's actions are at best odd but they did mean to offend and paid the price.

I have never stopped eating knowing. The reality is people who found this offensive and dont when other meat eating animals do tthis would be hypocrites Vintage. The offnese is created within the individual like you that takes offense. That because you would never do this yourself. You have created a moral standard for yourself. Begging the question whether this moral standing is right or if others have to follow this. I mean i am really sorry, but how many people sepnd even a minute thinking about the squirrels in their back garden?

Your last point sums this up for me. I used to make people pay the rpice for offending me at football. How I was a complete dick. High on adrenaline wanting to beat the crap out of people to feel better about feeling offended by my team losing. Did the fans I beat up pay the price for offending me supporting and being happy their team won?

Hence the view on actions here is based more on how you perceive something to be wrong. The reality is, who was even harmed here? Nobody

When you make an argument for a defense to act when offended. You lose every moral argument.

I love the squirrels in my back garden.

Raggamuffin wrote:I love the squirrels in my back garden.

And yet they do not even know or care whether you exist...

If you love them, why have you not opened your door and house to them?