Why oh why do you continue to support modern day hitmen? Gone have the days of fighting for our country. These modern wars do not make heroes out of anybody. They just make cowardly individuals who are murdering for a pay check. Then you go and condemn those who retaliate on behalf of the invaded nations? What is it with you people, of UK? The recent death of the suggested soldier is nothing special other than it highlights the hypocrisy this nations fuels. We bemoan if another country retaliates but praise our own who put the fuel to the fire, so to speak. Those men and women on the current front line are not fighting for your freedoms. The war on terror is little more than an attempt to put a boogeyman at the edge of everyone's minds every time they see a person of a particular race. It also aids those in power to create more and more intrusive laws, as well as make it easier for them to control their populace. Whilst all your heads are turned towards 'terror attacks', legislation and other sneaky goings on are swifted through with little news coverage.
Also, for those demanding a state funeral? Why? What has one murdered man done that is so special to deserve further tax payer money to be wasted? He joined a corrupt and killing team in the name of oil and other government wants. That's not special. He died in a bloody manner. All the victims of our troops trigger presses died in a bloody manner too. Then there are all the other brutal murders in our country. Why no call for state funerals for them? It's silly, especially when we are facing cuts on our front line services.
No man or woman is above the other. All are equal, be they man, woman, old or young...and dare I say it, a different species. We should not put those who get paid to kill in illegal wars, on a pedestal. It further fuels the hatred of our victims and leads to the attacks on our people you so decry to be 'terrorism'. The West has decimated thousands more people in the countries it has invaded, than all of our supposed 'victims' of 'terrorists' put together.
Wake up. Take those rose tinted glasses off. We are not any more special than the sikh, the muslim, and so on in those other countries, and we certainly are not going to impress upon them superior ideals by waging war; particularly on the civilians. If you want to help those who need help, do so with words and aids (directly to the recipient; not through the corrupt dictator), not guns and ammunition.
Sunday 26 May 2013
Thursday 11 April 2013
No such thing as a 'responsible breeder'.
It annoys and pisses me off greatly when I see pro-adoption people talk about 'responsible breeders'. There is no such thing as a 'responsible' breeder.
Why? You might be thinking. Because all breeders add to the problem and do not subtract from the problem.
Here is an example.
Breeder A breeds a dog. Said dog has 5 puppies.
Rescue Centre B has 5 dogs, varying ages.
Breeder A sells the 5 puppies to 5 homes.
Rescue Centre B has no homes for those 5 dogs of varying ages.
Why does rescue centre b still have no homes? Because they were taken up by the puppies that were sold by breeder A. It's basic maths. The more bred dogs/cats/rabbits/etc in homes, the less homes there are for rescue animals. So, therein lies the problem. Some of these rescued animals end up being put to sleep for no other reason than their alloted 'find a home' time is up. Thankfully, a lot of the big shelters in the UK are 'no-kill' shelters (where they do not perform euthanasia on unwanted animals). However, there are still some that are. Wood Green, RSPCA, Battersea. And the kill shelters are more prevalent in America.
Simply put, breeding ANY domesticated animal that is so numerous that a healthy adoptable one is put down in their thousands every year, is entirely irresponsible. We do not NEED more cats, dogs, rabbits etc. There are plenty sitting in shelters waiting for forever homes already. So do the right thing. Adopt. Never buy.
The phrase is:
Don't sell and buy whilst shelter animals die.
This includes those sold in pet stores - of which for the most part, are mass bred in warehouses and then in tiny enclosures within the stores. Pets At Home, Jollyes. Both guilty as charged. And it does not help that small enclosures are sold as though they are adequate for any animal. The people that staff these places may know basic care, but are far from knowledgeable on any animals full needs. They cannot even guarantee the sex of most of the animals they sell. Partly because they sell babies - many of these animals are far to young to be away from mother, but babies is what gets the money rolling in. Also, there is no home check either. So a poor rabbit may end up in a home with a dog that sees rabbit as a tasty morsel, and not a new friend. Plus many other things needed to take into account when re-homing an animal.
So, basically, any store or breeder selling animals is not doing the animals a favour. Especially since the main aim is to make a profit. When you treat an animal as a money making machine, any respect or care for the animal often goes out the window. That's why there are so many puppy farms, and warehouse breeding of pet shop animals (including ones sold in garden centres).
An animal is not a thing to be bartered and sold. It is a living, breathing being that requires a life commitment. So please, spay and neuter your pets, adopt from a shelter (even if it means several hours drive) and don't perpetuate the myth of a 'responsible breeder'.
Why? You might be thinking. Because all breeders add to the problem and do not subtract from the problem.
Here is an example.
Breeder A breeds a dog. Said dog has 5 puppies.
Rescue Centre B has 5 dogs, varying ages.
Breeder A sells the 5 puppies to 5 homes.
Rescue Centre B has no homes for those 5 dogs of varying ages.
Why does rescue centre b still have no homes? Because they were taken up by the puppies that were sold by breeder A. It's basic maths. The more bred dogs/cats/rabbits/etc in homes, the less homes there are for rescue animals. So, therein lies the problem. Some of these rescued animals end up being put to sleep for no other reason than their alloted 'find a home' time is up. Thankfully, a lot of the big shelters in the UK are 'no-kill' shelters (where they do not perform euthanasia on unwanted animals). However, there are still some that are. Wood Green, RSPCA, Battersea. And the kill shelters are more prevalent in America.
Simply put, breeding ANY domesticated animal that is so numerous that a healthy adoptable one is put down in their thousands every year, is entirely irresponsible. We do not NEED more cats, dogs, rabbits etc. There are plenty sitting in shelters waiting for forever homes already. So do the right thing. Adopt. Never buy.
The phrase is:
Don't sell and buy whilst shelter animals die.
This includes those sold in pet stores - of which for the most part, are mass bred in warehouses and then in tiny enclosures within the stores. Pets At Home, Jollyes. Both guilty as charged. And it does not help that small enclosures are sold as though they are adequate for any animal. The people that staff these places may know basic care, but are far from knowledgeable on any animals full needs. They cannot even guarantee the sex of most of the animals they sell. Partly because they sell babies - many of these animals are far to young to be away from mother, but babies is what gets the money rolling in. Also, there is no home check either. So a poor rabbit may end up in a home with a dog that sees rabbit as a tasty morsel, and not a new friend. Plus many other things needed to take into account when re-homing an animal.
So, basically, any store or breeder selling animals is not doing the animals a favour. Especially since the main aim is to make a profit. When you treat an animal as a money making machine, any respect or care for the animal often goes out the window. That's why there are so many puppy farms, and warehouse breeding of pet shop animals (including ones sold in garden centres).
An animal is not a thing to be bartered and sold. It is a living, breathing being that requires a life commitment. So please, spay and neuter your pets, adopt from a shelter (even if it means several hours drive) and don't perpetuate the myth of a 'responsible breeder'.
Margaret Thatcher, Milk Snatcher...a good thing.
Love her or loathe her. She's popped her clogs.
I personally don't know much about her other than she is a tory, so probably a complete asshole of a politician...and no doubt believed in the mantra of making the rich richer, and the poor poorer like our current tosspot, Cameron.
That said, the one thing annoying me about this whole thing is people are using the ending of free milk in schools for certain age groups as one of the 'bad' things she did. As usual, this reeks of dairy lobby brainwashing about milk supposedly being good for us.
Fact of the matter is, taking free milk away from schools was probably one of the only good things she did in her life. If you think a child should be consuming milk for health reasons...you're dead wrong - to the point of osteoporosis wrong. I see it everywhere; people so dumbfounded and brainwashed by the dairy lobby, they don't even understand where milk comes from and how it's made. Yes, there are people who think 'cows just eat grass and make milk'. They do not stop and think for one minute that, as a mammal (like humans), the cow has to be pregnant in order to lactate. Yes, milk is a cow's lactations. Just like ferret milk is a ferret lactation, goats milk...and you get the idea. And what is milk intended for? Babies! That is, the babies of the species the milk is coming from. Cows milk for calves, goats milks for kids (baby goats, not human children), human milk for human babies. This is how mammals feed their young in the early stages of life, and how the young receive all the necessary antibodies for their body. The first milk any baby animal or human drinks is colostrum. This is the most important of all milk suckled. Unfortunately, some animals do not even get this.
Calves are torn from them mothers within 24 hours or less just so the farmer can have his milk to sell. The females will be fed on powdered milk - yes, they get the crappy man made stuff, whilst we steal what is rightfully theirs. Males will be shot on sight, or if the farmer can make any money from it, sent for veal. Veal is where male calves are fed an iron deficient diet to make them anaemic. It is considered a delicacy. These calves, also, on most veal farms are crated and tied to one end of the crate via a rope attached to the neck.
Female calves become herd replacers. And do you know what happens when their mothers don't produce the required amount of milk the farmer expects? She ends up at the slaughter house too. Those cheap burgers, pies, etc. She is probably in one of those. A mother, a mammal, a living breathing being. Not content on causing them incredible emotional distress from calf snatching, farmers milk them for all their worth with mechanical pumps - which contrary to popular belief, are nothing like the soft suckling of a calf. Then she may be chained at the legs if she begins to buckle underneath the weight of her udder (some cows are so over bred or had genes meddled with to cause bigger milk yields have bodies that can't handle it). Lastly she gets to hear the cries of her herd mates as they go through the slaughter house system in a quick and timely fashion. You've been told it's humane, clean, best way to do it, right? More agri lies. If you ever get undercover footage of a slaughterhouse you'll see this is not the case. Time is money, so minimal checks to no checks will be made to make sure any stunning has occurred properly. So often the cows (and most other animals) bleed out from the slice to the jugular. They literally bleed to death whilst hanging upside down by one leg on a chain linked to a conveyor belt. Humane? No. Clean? No. The Best? No.
And you know what? There is absolutely no need for any of this, let alone other meats or animal excretions in our diets. Most of the world is lactose intolerant. We certainly weren't consuming milk when we went 'ug'. Milk is for babies. Not for any other species. We are the only species to steal and consume the milk of another species. If that's not a clue as to it being wrong, I don't know what is. And you know what's funny? The pro-dairy people try to counter that claim by showing pictures of tigers suckling pigs and what not. Guess what? Those are human created interactions. You'd be hard pressed to find it in the wild. Plus they are also babies! All babies need a mother's milk. But not another species milk unless there is a dire need in the wild and one species goes against the norm and adopts a baby of another species. But again, these instances are rare and do not in anyway show we should consume milk, let alone enslave cows, take away their young and then kill the mothers. Even animals in the wild who do those rare scenarios do not do this! Plus appealing to nature always ends up as a fallacious argument since one can say that if we are to copy nature then we would allow such things such as infanticide based on territory and mating habits. And it can also be easily said about herbivores existing, so vegans can use that too.
If you're going to make a solid argument, don't use something that can be spun around and thrown back at you.
Anyways, I've gone on a bit and strayed from the original point.
I don't care if people want to celebrate the death of ole' maggie. I don't care if they dance on her grave. The whole respect the dead crap is just that, a pile of crap. The dead can't care. They're dead. So disrespect away. But please, for god's sake, don't complain about her milk snatching ways as though it was a bad thing. It was the best and probably only good thing she did. Use the brain you were born with and make the connection. Mammals = live young and fed on milk secreted from mammaries. Seriously, don't be a sheeple. The dairy lobby and agri lobby rely on sheeple. Prove to them you won't be their bitch!
I personally don't know much about her other than she is a tory, so probably a complete asshole of a politician...and no doubt believed in the mantra of making the rich richer, and the poor poorer like our current tosspot, Cameron.
That said, the one thing annoying me about this whole thing is people are using the ending of free milk in schools for certain age groups as one of the 'bad' things she did. As usual, this reeks of dairy lobby brainwashing about milk supposedly being good for us.
Fact of the matter is, taking free milk away from schools was probably one of the only good things she did in her life. If you think a child should be consuming milk for health reasons...you're dead wrong - to the point of osteoporosis wrong. I see it everywhere; people so dumbfounded and brainwashed by the dairy lobby, they don't even understand where milk comes from and how it's made. Yes, there are people who think 'cows just eat grass and make milk'. They do not stop and think for one minute that, as a mammal (like humans), the cow has to be pregnant in order to lactate. Yes, milk is a cow's lactations. Just like ferret milk is a ferret lactation, goats milk...and you get the idea. And what is milk intended for? Babies! That is, the babies of the species the milk is coming from. Cows milk for calves, goats milks for kids (baby goats, not human children), human milk for human babies. This is how mammals feed their young in the early stages of life, and how the young receive all the necessary antibodies for their body. The first milk any baby animal or human drinks is colostrum. This is the most important of all milk suckled. Unfortunately, some animals do not even get this.
Calves are torn from them mothers within 24 hours or less just so the farmer can have his milk to sell. The females will be fed on powdered milk - yes, they get the crappy man made stuff, whilst we steal what is rightfully theirs. Males will be shot on sight, or if the farmer can make any money from it, sent for veal. Veal is where male calves are fed an iron deficient diet to make them anaemic. It is considered a delicacy. These calves, also, on most veal farms are crated and tied to one end of the crate via a rope attached to the neck.
Female calves become herd replacers. And do you know what happens when their mothers don't produce the required amount of milk the farmer expects? She ends up at the slaughter house too. Those cheap burgers, pies, etc. She is probably in one of those. A mother, a mammal, a living breathing being. Not content on causing them incredible emotional distress from calf snatching, farmers milk them for all their worth with mechanical pumps - which contrary to popular belief, are nothing like the soft suckling of a calf. Then she may be chained at the legs if she begins to buckle underneath the weight of her udder (some cows are so over bred or had genes meddled with to cause bigger milk yields have bodies that can't handle it). Lastly she gets to hear the cries of her herd mates as they go through the slaughter house system in a quick and timely fashion. You've been told it's humane, clean, best way to do it, right? More agri lies. If you ever get undercover footage of a slaughterhouse you'll see this is not the case. Time is money, so minimal checks to no checks will be made to make sure any stunning has occurred properly. So often the cows (and most other animals) bleed out from the slice to the jugular. They literally bleed to death whilst hanging upside down by one leg on a chain linked to a conveyor belt. Humane? No. Clean? No. The Best? No.
And you know what? There is absolutely no need for any of this, let alone other meats or animal excretions in our diets. Most of the world is lactose intolerant. We certainly weren't consuming milk when we went 'ug'. Milk is for babies. Not for any other species. We are the only species to steal and consume the milk of another species. If that's not a clue as to it being wrong, I don't know what is. And you know what's funny? The pro-dairy people try to counter that claim by showing pictures of tigers suckling pigs and what not. Guess what? Those are human created interactions. You'd be hard pressed to find it in the wild. Plus they are also babies! All babies need a mother's milk. But not another species milk unless there is a dire need in the wild and one species goes against the norm and adopts a baby of another species. But again, these instances are rare and do not in anyway show we should consume milk, let alone enslave cows, take away their young and then kill the mothers. Even animals in the wild who do those rare scenarios do not do this! Plus appealing to nature always ends up as a fallacious argument since one can say that if we are to copy nature then we would allow such things such as infanticide based on territory and mating habits. And it can also be easily said about herbivores existing, so vegans can use that too.
If you're going to make a solid argument, don't use something that can be spun around and thrown back at you.
Anyways, I've gone on a bit and strayed from the original point.
I don't care if people want to celebrate the death of ole' maggie. I don't care if they dance on her grave. The whole respect the dead crap is just that, a pile of crap. The dead can't care. They're dead. So disrespect away. But please, for god's sake, don't complain about her milk snatching ways as though it was a bad thing. It was the best and probably only good thing she did. Use the brain you were born with and make the connection. Mammals = live young and fed on milk secreted from mammaries. Seriously, don't be a sheeple. The dairy lobby and agri lobby rely on sheeple. Prove to them you won't be their bitch!
Wednesday 27 February 2013
"Disabled children should be put down"...so says counciller
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/02/27/cornwall-councillor-colin-brewer-disabled-children-put-down_n_2771826.html
To be honest, I have no problem with this statement. It's no different to those who put down animals due to not finding homes or lack of money etc. Just the usual hypocrites crying 'cruel, evil man'. At least he is being honest.
And to be honest, if a parent knows their baby is going to be disabled before it's even born, I think they should be guilty of child cruelty for letting said child be born into a world where they are going to have a poor quality of life.
Do not bare children you know will not be able to have a good quality of life. Do not bare more than two children. Do not bare children if you can successfully adopt. If you cannot physically have children, do not attempt to get IVF on the NHS. Having children is a lifestyle choice. Not a right.
To be honest, I have no problem with this statement. It's no different to those who put down animals due to not finding homes or lack of money etc. Just the usual hypocrites crying 'cruel, evil man'. At least he is being honest.
And to be honest, if a parent knows their baby is going to be disabled before it's even born, I think they should be guilty of child cruelty for letting said child be born into a world where they are going to have a poor quality of life.
Do not bare children you know will not be able to have a good quality of life. Do not bare more than two children. Do not bare children if you can successfully adopt. If you cannot physically have children, do not attempt to get IVF on the NHS. Having children is a lifestyle choice. Not a right.
Monday 11 February 2013
43 year old playground bullies.
It seems some 43 year olds need to grow up. Posting a private message publicly so others can berate the person you are speaking to is pathetic. Let's see:
"This silly girl needs to grow up, domestic animals are bred to improve the genetic strain and improve the survival of the species."
Are they really? Is that why so many dogs today have health problems? And I actually referred to in the private message that no domesticated animal should be bred since it causes overpopulation problems.
" I'm willing to bet that this silly girl and her 'cuddlytarian' is a veggie and a sanctimonious one at that, who thinks she is better than everyone else, yet will have no idea of the farming practices employed to get her tofu, or how much damage is done to the environment by her organic veggies (no they are not the best option for the environment). I HATE PEOPLE LIKE THIS!!!!! Think they know everything and know f**k all."
Vegan, actually, and who said anything about organic? And clearly thinks I know nothing of my own food. Rather presumptuous of her to assume I don't know such and such. I don't know everything, but I know a lot more than most people when it comes to animals and food production. There's a reason I'm bloody vegan, because of what I know.
"Hamster warrier!!!! I hate them too-they are pointless little rodents!"
Much like humans are pointless. Hmm, I don't find Spice, the darling little thing in the room adjacent to me, 'pointless'. I find him lovely and it was MY and my partners and a friends TLC that got him out of his aggressive nature. But of course, I must know nothing about animals....*rolls eyes*
"Anyways-hamster freak!!!!!"
Why thankyou, I would rather be that than a hypocrite who munches on a burger (with added horse) whilst petting a kitten.
"She said you only care about cute and cuddly...didn't you have snakes at one point??? This woman sounds crazy lol!!"
Clearly does not know what the cuddlytarian word means. It refers to anything nice looking or 'cute'. Snakes are pretty animals, not animals UK citizens tend to think of eating.
"I'm sorry but I hate hamsters- yuk!!! There bitey stinky wee things & she's a prime example of why certain humans are arseholes!!!!"
Not all hamsters bite, and if anyone has been bitten by a hamster, it will be their fault. Myself included. Also, all humans are assholes at one point or another, least I'm not a constant asshole to animals.
"Exactly she's a weirdo! Speaking of weirdos I shall inbox you, because I know where a certain person lives xxx"
Giving out a personal address to incur malicious goings on is illegal.
"If she knows so much about animals & what they do and don't like, why was she bitten by a lemming, horse, dog, etc.....lol!!! X"
Another who has no idea of circumstances. The horse was wild, and aggressive anyway and did not like me giving a carrot to his herd mate, go figure. The lemming did not want me tampering with his envrionment (cleaning out at college), the dog was a dog that had been abused and I was attempting to muzzle him so I could take him safely to a rescue place. It's nothing to do with not knowing about animals, it's to do with circumstances. Did I get upset and angry at all those animals for biting me? No, because I know it is my fault. I upset them in some manner. And that's that. I'm not like other arrogant humans who think any animal that bites them must be 'evil'.
" i had to laugh when i read this..how can she say all that to u when all u do is live and breath animals?..there r things u have told me that amazed me so shes just chatting shit.."
Is this why this 43 year old still eats animals, uses iams even though she knows about the intramuscular vivisection, who 'hates' hamsters just because she got bit by one? Doesn't sound to me like she lives and breathes animals, more like lives and eats animals and cares for a select few species she happens to like. A bit like most people who feel ok eating an abused cow yet moan about abused dogs in China that get eaten.
"Methinks the little girl needs to start by learning some manners."
Manners like what started this whole debacle? - 'oh ffs im 43 had animals all my life i know how to handle and stroke them lol i was the 1st breeder in this contry to breed champagne rats now known as siamese rats before u were even born' - those words are what made me retaliate. I believe those words lack manners too...funny that they can't see that and point the blame at me.
"im with anna....crazy...she obviously doesnt know you at all"
I know enough, considering I've sold to her twice and given her cat litter trays. Also, I know she smokes terribly around her animals...especially little birds. Nobody should smoke around an animal or anyone who cannot consent to breathing in the second hand smoke. It is a disgusting habit and a sign of a bad 'pet owner' to boot.
"She seems like shes turned her opinions into 'facts'."
An opinion cannot be a fact, I just happen to know a lot of 'facts' about animals, it irks people that I do.
So there you have it, a 43 year old smoker who supposedly lives and breathes animals, yet lets them breathe second hand smoke, does not use proper means of rehoming animals, admits to being a breeder, uses animal food tested inhumanely on dogs and cats and acts like a school yard bully.
And people think I'm the bad guy/gal? Pfft.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
