| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| PixieSteve |
Posted - 01/19/2006 : 20:10:58
no, dave noisy didn't tell me to post this.
this is probably one of the most disgusting things i have ever seen in my life. you have been warned...
http://www.peta2.com/TAKECHARGE/t-ajerk.asp?c=918
Your mum |
| 35 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| floop |
Posted - 04/23/2007 : 15:55:38
only if they were skinned alive
jamming good with Weird and Gilly |
| Carl |
Posted - 04/23/2007 : 15:53:48
Wouldn't it be funny if they were ambushed by club-wielding seals? |
| floop |
Posted - 04/23/2007 : 15:47:01
some good news for the seals this year http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18185276/
jamming good with Weird and Gilly |
| PixieSteve |
Posted - 04/26/2006 : 15:26:51
quote:
Originally posted by VoVat
quote:
I remember Brigitte Bardot on French TV asking people not to eat horse meat. Like it is moral to kill cows but not horses.
She probably also thinks it's okay to eat Muslims.
"If you doze much longer, then life turns to dreaming. If you doze much longer, then dreams turn to nightmares."
the women taste like veal |
| darwin |
Posted - 04/26/2006 : 14:03:39
I think we know how the Canadians would solve this problem.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060426/sc_nm/environment_seals_dc_2 |
| VoVat |
Posted - 04/09/2006 : 13:58:31
quote:
I remember Brigitte Bardot on French TV asking people not to eat horse meat. Like it is moral to kill cows but not horses.
She probably also thinks it's okay to eat Muslims.
"If you doze much longer, then life turns to dreaming. If you doze much longer, then dreams turn to nightmares." |
| Fartbone |
Posted - 04/06/2006 : 10:08:43
the interweb, she's a scary one
Horale Cabrones |
| floop |
Posted - 04/06/2006 : 08:00:30
quote:
Originally posted by Cult_Of_Frank
And no, I'm obviously not accusing you of lying. Where did that come from? How do you know it's unedited? Have you suddenly discovered a way to rapidly reverse the aging process?
i worked on a documentary about this. i know the footage i saw was unedited because i was the one editing it. i've seen probably over a hundred hours of footage involving this subject. dating back from the first seal protests in the 70's up to last March, when 11 protesters were attacked and arrested.
to be honest i didn't know much about it before being involved with this project.
"May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't.” - General George S. Patton |
| lonely persuader |
Posted - 04/06/2006 : 06:44:13
Cult Of Frank, GOD damn, Im expecting you to sort out all these ethical issues with fact, forever !!! so i can sleep soundly at night |
| Homers_pet_monkey |
Posted - 04/06/2006 : 04:42:39
Who isn't enjoying it?
 I'd walk her everyday, into a shady place
|
| PixieSteve |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 16:34:20
quote:
Originally posted by darwin
This has been one of the few threads on this forum with any content in the past year.
thanks
 |
| darwin |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 16:18:22
This has been one of the few threads on this forum with any content in the past year. It hasn't always been sparkling and has teetered on the edge of a fight, but it's been fairly civil with some self-examination. So, if people aren't enjoying it, go find another thread. |
| pixiestu |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 16:14:32
"The arc of triumph" |
| Cult_Of_Frank |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 16:11:46
Cold, soaked in butter-like artery coagulant, and in the lobby.
 "If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." |
| Fartbone |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 15:57:50
where's the popcorn
Horale Cabrones |
| Cult_Of_Frank |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 13:31:27
Floop, no I'm not. I'm saying that may be the reasoning the government has. I then explicitly state that I disagree with this. It's called looking on the other side. I don't agree with it, but maybe this is why they are doing it.
And please show me where I'm deflecting. It occurs to me that I've answered or attempted to answer all your questions while YOU have consistently not discussed my own points/questions.
And no, I'm obviously not accusing you of lying. Where did that come from? How do you know it's unedited? Have you suddenly discovered a way to rapidly reverse the aging process?
Finally, I have EXPLICITLY stated where I stand on this. I'm not writing that up again. If you're unwilling to read my longish posts, that's understandable, but then don't imply that I haven't said something I clearly have. I think that's only fair.
Oh, and on the attacks, it's possible the sealers simply saw a placard and attacked unprovoked, I _haven't_ seen unedited footage, only activist propaganda. Where did you get that? Regardless, assuming as I was that neither of us had seen unedited footage, I said that the more likely situation was that tensions were high, protesters physically got in the way to protect the seals, sealers probably tried to remove them, and violence ensued. This is a lot less one-sided then "sealers attacked" as though they saw humans and instantly ran at them, spears in the air. Which may be what happened, I'll take your word on it if you are sure you've seen unedited footage of this. But if you haven't, maybe you'd agree that it seems a little less plausible.
Anyway, you're right about one thing, this is getting a little dull if not frustrating. Thanks, though, it was interesting.
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." |
| floop |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 12:48:33
cult, listen to yourself. you're saying citizens shouldn't be allowed to view the hunt because activists would invariable slant the footage ? so the government decides that the public shouldn't see this event because, well, it will be misrepresented? you support a government that operates like that?
i've seen unedited footage of sealers attacking protesters. are you accusing me of lying?
it's pretty ridiculous that you say people would slant the coverage of this. i mean, you don't need to slant it, it's pretty straightforward: people beating baby seals with clubs and skinning them.
and i have looked at both sides. i've addressed every single one of your points and offered my opinion on it. i don't see how anyone can argue in favor of this hunt on any level. because i don't agree with the other side doesn't mean i haven't considered it.
talking about this with you is getting boring because i can't tell if you actually believe what you're saying or if you feel like arguing for the sake of arguing. if you actually support the seal hunt then that's your deal cult. maybe it's just the fact that you're Canadian and defensive.
you can keep deflecting the issue to other problems all you want, but this issue is not going away
"May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't.” - General George S. Patton |
| Cult_Of_Frank |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 12:30:21
Floop, I didn't state your question but I did answer it.
They don't allow it because obviously it's going to lead to violence...
Quoth the raven:
"If someone comes to your job and gets in your way/threatens your livelihood, it's probably going to get heated. If groups of zealots do so, it's sure to. So, you ban one or the other. You think people are going to trek up there and just simply hold a sign saying don't, while watching them do it? No! It's going to become violent, and unless you have complete and unedited footage from beginning to end of the confrontation, I can't say that I'd call it an 'attack'. It's certain not to be one-sided."
And sure, they probably don't allow it because activists modify it and use it to play on peoples' emotions. Which isn't acceptable but is probably true.
Do I think they don't allow it because they don't want photographic evidence that the Canadian government is allowing them to break the law unchallenged? Sounds like a somewhat far-fetched conspiracy charge to me, but I suppose it's possible. I would say unlikely also.
The dissociation from the violence is what largely keeps people from being against it. When people witness the killing of an animal and see blood everywhere, they're gonna be upset. It upsets me. It obviously upsets you. It would upset viewers and they would invariably slant coverage. Which, again, is not a good reason, just trying to consider the other side's reasoning.
Call up your local slaughterhouse and see if they allow you to take video. Still, I would like to see some media there with cameras and what not to ensure that the hunt is within the law and the law is enforced.
If you have, as you claimed, attempted to look at both sides, then go on, make me an argument from their point of view. If you can't do that, then sorry, you haven't considered their side. Every issue has two points of view. Where is all your information from? Are you weighing it all as inherently biased, or only stuff from the pro-hunt side? Do you think that all these animal rights groups are above slanting and obscuring fact to present their opinion (we obviously both agree that government is capable)?
And not only did you not read most of what I said in my last post, but you still didn't answer my question. Come on Floop, it's no fun if the other person doesn't at least make an effort to be open minded.
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." |
| floop |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 11:25:45
cult, you haven't answered my question. why would they make it illegal to witness the hunt?
they have footage from last year of sealers breaking regulations. as well as sealers physically attacking people.
i think i mentioned it before but i worked on a project about this and have viewed literally hundreds of hours of footage on this subject. including footage taken last year. i feel like i've seen more of the whole picture than most people (and more than i'd like to have seen)
the seal hunt is illeal to view because it's an embarassment to Canada
"May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't.” - General George S. Patton |
| Fartbone |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 11:19:23
Look Lorena, people are arguing over the internet.
Horale Cabrones |
| Cult_Of_Frank |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 11:12:15
LP, there are no facts in this, it's a matter of opinions. What sort of answer are you looking for? I gave it some thought and that's what I consider to be the difference in peoples' minds. Physically is there a difference? No.
Is that what you're looking for?
Floop, again you haven't answered my question but yes, if laws aren't enforced they're meaningless. Activists have footage that is fifteen years old and continue to use it. Footage itself is not anything.
If someone comes to your job and gets in your way/threatens your livelihood, it's probably going to get heated. If groups of zealots do so, it's sure to. So, you ban one or the other. You think people are going to trek up there and just simply hold a sign saying don't, while watching them do it? No! It's going to become violent, and unless you have complete and unedited footage from beginning to end of the confrontation, I can't say that I'd call it an attack. It's certain not to be one-sided.
I agree that the rules as stated should be enforced or the hunt shouldn't be allowed. But again, I ask you to consider that what you're seeing is not the whole picture.
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." |
| floop |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 10:59:37
cult, the laws you're quoting are meaningless. they're on the books but they're not enforced. again, why do you think it's illegal to view a seal hunt?
there has never once been a case where the Department of Fisheries has charged a sealer for illegal conduct. but they'll go out of their way to arrest and press charges against people trying to view the seal hunt. last year 11 people were arrested. protesters have footage of sealers physically attacking them (i've seen footage of sealers hitting women). activists have footage of them breaking seal regulations, including kicking seals in the face, skinning seals alive and killing whitecoats. none have been charged. the laws don't mean anything if they're not enforced.
but the laws are a joke anyway. a 2 week old seal is considered an adult?
"May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't.” - General George S. Patton |
| lonely persuader |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 10:24:29
ya, that answers nothing.. and by the way the opposite argument is often used to justify abortion. |
| Cult_Of_Frank |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 09:43:54
Quoth the raven: "Killing babies, I don't know. It somehow seems different to kill a young animal in the wild then to kill one raised to be eaten, perhaps because an adult has a chance of escape/life in the wild where as a young animal in captivity is going to die sooner or later anyway. And it should be noted that seals that are not independent (i.e. too young to be on their own) are illegal to hunt and it is also illegal to hunt in breeding/birthing grounds."
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." |
| lonely persuader |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 09:29:10
whats the difference between killing an adult animal and killing a baby animal? |
| starmekitten |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 07:38:43
I had to kill a fish once for dissection class. I didn't particularly want to cut its head off so thought it would suffocate in the air fast enough.
Twenty minutes later I had to use the blade.
Crabs still wave at you even when you're messing with their guts. Just as an aside. |
| Carolynanna |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 06:41:49
Stop with the fish Dean!
I can't get Nirvana out of my head.
__________
Don't believe the hype. |
| Carl |
Posted - 04/05/2006 : 03:08:27
 Total nostalgia!
http://dvd.ign.com/articles/689/689660p1.html
 pas de dutchie! |
| Cult_Of_Frank |
Posted - 04/04/2006 : 21:05:41
Sorry Kathryn, Dan Jersey did not address me directly:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-771732261053295302&q=golden+girls&pl=true
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." |
| Cult_Of_Frank |
Posted - 04/04/2006 : 21:02:09
Well, I was quite against it for some time. I suppose arguing the other side I've started to see it a little bit, but yeah, I don't support killing seals for their skins any more than I do killing an elephant for its tusks (extinct or not), a croc for its skin, or as you say, any animal for decorative items. BUT, I think that particularly among the natives, seals are used for meat and certainly the government appears to be trying to develop an industry of seal meat, which, then, I would be for. The government, when this protest was last really big news, in the late 80s, banned selling, trading, or dealing in furs from seals, so I don't know how big this still is but certainly it's not above board or sanctioned if still happening.
Method of killing, as I think I stated before I started to argue the other side, I am rather disgusted by. Surely there's a more humane way. But then again, if you are able to knock out/kill a seal instantly with a single blow to the head, then, as far as killing goes, it probably doesn't get much more humane than that. The problem is when they don't die or become unconscious instantly.
Like you, I'm a meat eater, which is why I feel somewhat a hypocrite to be speaking out against the hunt if that's what it is. I enjoy a good steak, I enjoy fish, chicken, lamb, pretty much any meat under the sun. And I don't really have any qualms about veal, to be honest, so long as, like the other stuff, it's treated humanely.
My point, I guess, is just that - humane treatment as is applies, rather ironically, to killing. Is fishing, for example, a humane way to catch/kill a fish? I don't think so. Truthfully, the more I think about it, the more I think it's actually quite a bit more cruel. Yet many of us eat fish, including some so-called vegetarians. I guess that arguing against this made me wonder to myself, how can I oppose this when I support and continue to support fishing to provide a nice tasty filet of salmon on my plate? Or my patrons' plates?
Now, I suppose fishing with nets is probably a bit better than jerking them out through a pierced cheek, though you're then suffocating them for however long fish can live without being in water. Or growing them in hatcheries, where, again, I have no idea how they're killed.
Anyway, advantage wise, the seals don't live in captivity, and have some freedom that their brethren do not. Killing babies, I don't know. It somehow seems different to kill a young animal in the wild then to kill one raised to be eaten, perhaps because an adult has a chance of escape/life in the wild where as a young animal in captivity is going to die sooner or later anyway. And it should be noted that seals that are not independent (i.e. too young to be on their own) are illegal to hunt and it is also illegal to hunt in breeding/birthing grounds.
I am not perfect either. I think my analysis and indecision shows that if not my own actions. But I do try to be fair and open minded. I like to argue the side I'm against because I sometimes find myself reconsidering.
And finally, no, the fact that there is something wrong happening elsewhere does not make something wrong happening here okay. It simply raises the question, "Why is this topic so hot when something much larger and worse is happening in many of the countries where this is news? Moreover, why is this news when it happens everyday all over the place?" Ask yourself that honestly. If you have an answer, I'd honestly be interested in hearing your thoughts.
Or maybe swap me places. I'll argue against and you for.
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." |
| danjersey |
Posted - 04/04/2006 : 21:00:43
i like what you are wearing
i want my wife to feel
i never seen a thing
don't say i'll never
steal |
| floop |
Posted - 04/04/2006 : 20:34:31
quote:
Originally posted by Cult_Of_Frank
Floop, you have not answered what I think is my primary concern. Why is it so outrageous to hunt seals this way when you essentially do much worse when fishing? Imagine someone jabbing a hook into a seal, pulling it, against all its might by the skin so that it faces either coming along or fighting and risking a massive hole torn in itself, dragging it under water so it can't breathe, and then clubbing it? Yet you do fish, don't you? Or if not, you probably eat it (is that so much better?)
i thought i answered that question in response to monsieur. i'm opposed to the brutal slaughter of baby animals for vanity items.
how is it different? i think there's a difference between hunting animals for food and hunting animals for decorative items for rich people. i also think there's a difference between killing adult animals and killing newborn animals. and, i also think there's a difference in methods of killing.
i never claimed to be perfect. i'm not a vegetarian and i'm sure that some of the meat i've eaten has come from places where it wasn't a non-stop fiesta for the animals. but, as i said before, i'm not against subsistence hunting. i don't oppose eskimos who kill seals to eat them. i hardly ever go fishing but when i do i end up eating the fish myself (2 years ago i went walleye fishing with my dad. some of the best fish i've ever eaten).
there is no doubt room for improvement in farming practices, but do those issues somehow make the seal hunt okay?
devil's advocate aside: what is your real opinion on this dean? as a Canadian, do you support this seal hunt or are you against it?
"May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't.” - General George S. Patton |
| kathryn |
Posted - 04/04/2006 : 19:46:40
I will address you directly Dean for fear you will post another link to a Bea Arthur video!
I’m the only one who can say that this light is mine
|
| Cult_Of_Frank |
Posted - 04/04/2006 : 19:30:00
Anyway, I'm stopping now unless addressed directly for fear of seeming to be in unbridled support rather than simply an advocate for the devil.
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." |
| Cult_Of_Frank |
Posted - 04/04/2006 : 19:12:43
I would say they didn't given that her letter was made public.
I wouldn't have responded either, of course. First, it's like telling someone who fishes for a living that if they stop, you will give them a fish to eat tonight. Maybe if it was $16 million/year. Yes, I'm being facetious. Most importantly, I never have responded well to ultimatums.
Floop, you have not answered what I think is my primary concern. Why is it so outrageous to hunt seals this way when you essentially do much worse when fishing? Imagine someone jabbing a hook into a seal, pulling it, against all its might by the skin so that it faces either coming along or fighting and risking a massive hole torn in itself, dragging it under water so it can't breathe, and then clubbing it? Yet you do fish, don't you? Or if not, you probably eat it (is that so much better?)
Here's some admittedly bad (but what can you expect for hidden camera) footage that is probably a little closer to home for you:
These videos are probably offensive to most.
KFC Slaughterhouse, USA - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8200747733811046023&q=slaughterhouse&pl=true
Look, they even have celebrities!
Bea Arthur - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4035849470178575965&q=slaughterhouse&pl=true
But it's not so bad, because... ?
1) It happens in the US (and let us make no mistake, worldwide).
2) It happens behind closed doors and not in the wild.
3) These chickens are born and live their entire lives in captivity. So really, we're just ending their suffering.
4) Their celebrity isn't a former Beatle.
5) They taste good.
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." |
|
|
