Loz

Parkdrive Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well said. By the way did you know that I'm a Guardian reader? No nor did I!!! I love the way > Loz jumps to huge sweeping generalisations. > Pompous arse. Or I just know how to press your buttons...

Oh dear, Moos, now even the veggies are in trouble. Looks like it's only the vegans who can say all their food is 'cruelty free'. So no biscuits or cakes for the veggies. Unless they are a bunch of hypocrites.

Well, it is a bit of an assumption. But a lot of veggie nutters are Guardianistas.

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Like a trout to a fly!! I know. It's really too easy, but the self-righteous, sweaty, swivel-eyed Guardiantistas are always like that. I could have typed 'THIS POST WILL MAKE YOU LOSE YOUR RAG AND YOU CANNOT HELP NUT REPLYING ANGRILY' and they still would have bitten. And they will bite again. And have their nose tweaked.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not supporting the strike, but Fark me plenty of > people painting it as a very attractive job > > Why aren't more of us applying? Serious question Because you can't. The positions are only offered internally in LU.

Parkdrive Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ban - yes > > Battery chicken - no. Either you are kidding yourself or never eat chicken. Or (gasp) are a veggie. > Are you going to read posts in future before posting venomous and bile filled > rants in response to views you disagree with? What a terribly sheltered life you have lead if you think my posts are 'venomous and bile filled'. They are nothing of the sort. They are merely designed (and seemingly *very* successful) at tweaking the sensitive nose of the self-righteous. > Merry Christmas. But, yes, have a very Merry Christmas.

Merry Christmas one and all. And onwards to a even more entertaining EDF in 2013.

Because they are a pressure group, CIWF typically examine the worst case situation and sneakily present it as the norm. It isn't in their interest to present the wider case. There are many farms in France that still practice the traditional method that is nothing like civilservant described. As I said in an earlier post, I agree that there are FG factories with poor practices such as those described by civilservant, so why not concentrate on those, instead of seeking to ban foie gras outright? As others have noted, there is an big element of reverse snobbery going on here. You can quite easily write a similar piece on battery chicken farming, but no one here wants to run then fried chicken industry out of business, do they?

Parkdrive Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz, I've just re-read all of my posts regarding > this subject and I think I'm right in saying that > there's not a mention of banning the sale. Maybe, > as AM stated, you should read first, engage brains > and THEN write your posts. Well then, time to put your cards on the table: are you in favour of a ban or not then, Parkdrive. And have you possibly eaten battery-raised chicken lately?

Parkdrive Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Look if you don't like FG or don't like the way it produced then exercise your right as a consumer > > and don't buy it. Just stop trying to preach to the rest of us. In other words, stop trying to > > shove your petty beliefs down other's throats. > > > > > (Oh, the irony...) > > Irony indeed, for one who doesn't want their views > rammed down others throats you're having a bloody > good go at it. Says you? You can read my opinions or ignore them as you want (as I can yours), but when you try to ban things you just don't like then that's when you start to impose you own private beliefs on others. That's when it becomes objectionable. And that's when I'll tell you where exactly to shove your beliefs. As I said, if you want to refuse to buy FG, fine - that is your right. If you want to post on a forum that you refuse to buy FG, that's fine too. But stop trying to impose this on others.

I think that the photo was taken on your property and as long as you do not make any libellous comment, you would be within your rights to publish the photo.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The only thing you can really complain about with Foie Gras is the force-feeding, as other > complaints about battery farming apply equally to chickens or other fowl. Actually, I would argue there is *more* cruelty in battery hen farming that there is in the small French farm foie gras (as opposed to the bigger factory farms that are appearing, which even I have my doubts about). Being shoved into a cage in a shed with hundreds of other birds for your entire life, before being dispatched for cheap meat. That's much worse than being force fed, but otherwise free roaming. And we are talking millions of chickens suffering every year, as opposed to a very small number of FG geese. So for all of you non-veggies saying they would never buy foie gars, can you, hand on heart, say you never, ever eat battery chickens. So that's not just the cheap Sainsburys chicken, that's any chicken burgers, fried chicken, chicken curry, chicken in Chinese food... probably any chicken out there not specifically sold as free range. Or does that cruelty not require your action?

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What the @#$%& are you writing about Loz? PD is a male for a start(which you would know if you > bothered your arse to read the forum) and as for the rest of your post I'd suggest it was written > after too much consumption of drink. Yeah, because after near on 4000 posts in five years I quite obviously don't read the forum. Ever. Wow. Just... wow.

Look if you don't like FG or don't like the way it produced then exercise your right as a consumer and don't buy it. Just stop trying to preach to the rest of us. In other words, stop trying to shove your petty beliefs down other's throats. (Oh, the irony...)

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't think it's fanatical to want to stop > something as gross as this. PD can speak for > himself as I've no idea if he is vegetarian or > not. Oh, he/she is quite obviously a vegetarian. Look, if you people were to campaign about issues with factory farming with foie gras, then I would probably be on their side. But they aren't. They are, instead, going for the all-out, look-at-me-I'm-so-right-on let's ban all foie gras approach, which reeks of the standard "what we really want is to ban meat eating" approach that the self-righteous veggies of this world love to preach. So I make no apologies for unremittingly taking the piss out of your emotional, ill-thought-out argument.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Edited to add the stupid word 'wow'. You think you do sarcasm? And 'wow' isn't a stupid word. Why I once read of a lady that had a 'W' tattooed on each bum cheek just so it spelt 'wow' when she bent over naked.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Edited to add the stupid word 'wow'. You think you do sarcasm? I have a PhD in sarcasm. And origami.

aquarius moon Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz, you are comparing a 'live' duck with a potato? > > Shame on you, if you can't see the difference. You compared a duck (actually it's generally a goose) with a human, so you started it. Also, humans have a gag reflex whereas ducks and geese don't, so your original comparison was useless anyway.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Explain the important issues Loz then? You know them do you? I doubt it. What?? Are you saying that banning Foie Gras is one of the most important issues facing the world today? Really? Wow. On a scale of 0 to 10 (where 10 is really important), foie gras scores about a 0.00000000000000000000001

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Frankly the human race has gone to pot when people > don't think this is wrong. What? Campaigning to ban Foie Gras? Totally agree. There are far more important issues in this world.

Parkdrive Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lets hope any of you that enjoy this odious product never have a funnel shoved down your neck > and are force feed. Disgraceful. Let's hope that anybody who likes boiled potatoes never have their skin peeled off them and then dropped into boiling water. Now can you see the inanity your argument?

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Never really saw libertarianism as a conservative ideal. > > I'm sure there are many overlapping objectivess which could make them uneasy bedfellows, but > British conservatism is obsessed with natural order and hierarchy, authority and control. But you could also quite easily argue that the left wing is also obsessed with authority and control, in fact more so. Which is why I argue that libertarianism transcends simple left/right politics.

Lowlander Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Would highly recommend one of the premium Ardbegs > if he likes the Islay style (e.g. Serendipity at > ~?100) Seconded. I *love* Ardbeg

To answer the question posed in the title... to me, 'libertarianism' transcends simple left/right politics. But as you go too far left or right, the chances of the person being libertarian greatly diminishes.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I dunno. Snobbery/discrimination is unpleasant either way, but there is something particularly > distasteful about those in a privileged position looking down on those less fortunate. Well, just to break up the 'me too' style of this thread, I completely disagree with this (and Rosie!). Bigotry is bigotry, hate is hate. It is never acceptable. It is always distasteful.