On 01/10/2020 11:03:08, T i m wrote:

snip

If you go for non 'ready meal' vegan foods and make your own from
scratch (just as many do with a vegetable casserole or veg soup or a
salad etc) then the chances are it would (could) be as if not more
healthy for you than something based around meat.

As part of a balanced diet it may well be healthy, but where taken to
the extreme for many adopting the change to total veganism, B12
deficiency will eventually creep up on them with disastrous consequences
especially with their mental health.

On 01/10/2020 10:53:31, T i m wrote:


snip

And there was me thinking you loved animals, turns out you are a
speciesist.

You show much evidence of hating dogs and enjoy torturing them, does
that make you a speciesist?

Or is that a good example of your cognitive dissonance?

On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 10:51:33 +0100, GB
wrote:

snip

It does seem to me very odd that people here are so outspokenly
anti-vegan. Is it just to taunt Tim?

Seeing the range of replies here so far I am reminded that in the 16
years I've been posting to uk.d-i-y, the most disgusting troll I've
ever come across is the one currently calling itself 'Fredxx'.

The lies, the disingenuous statements, the fabrication of 'my goals'
and that of vegans in general, the twisting of the facts are beyond
any that any other troll has managed so far. It is sick.

It does hate all vegans as they would be asking of it no more or less
than I have.

I gave it a chance, I tried to reason with it ... but (of course) it
was to no avail.

If it supported slavery (and I'm sure it would have as it supports
animal slavery), it's idea of 'campaigning for improved slave welfare
would be only that, getting the slaves lighter chains, whereas mine is
ending slavery completely.

https://ibb.co/nk46k96

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02GNr5DnPCk

Cheers, T i m

On 01/10/2020 00:45, williamwright wrote:
On 30/09/2020 22:30, T i m wrote:
Given the British and American Dietetic Associations have stated that
a well planned vegan diet (any diet should be well planned) is
adequate for people of all ages and we are all advised to cut back on
meat for loads of different reasons, it just makes good sense.

I don't want 'adequate'. I want another bacon sandwich.

Bill

The list of 'ingredients' on vegan foods like
'sausage' rolls is rather off-putting.

On 01/10/2020 09:22, RJH wrote:
On 1 Oct 2020 at 08:59:25 BST, "
wrote:

On Thursday, 1 October 2020 08:35:40 UTC+1, RJH wrote:
While I do tend to keep some vegan sausages or similar (Richmond very good!)
in the freezer for a treat,

Bloody hell, I thought my diet was cheap and nasty, but I've never regarded
any thing from Richmond as a 'treat'.

They are made of some very questionable ingredients, but do taste and look
good - even the 'meat' version IIRC. Salt and fat is my theory.

Mechanically-recovered 'meat'. Pink sludge that makers of uber-cheap
sausages and 'meat' pies happily buy.

And I'm a moderately enthusiastic consumer of Ye Olde Oake Hotte Dogges.

Probably a bit of burnt flavour added to the fat and salt.

On 01/10/2020 15:42, T i m wrote:
Add to that, anyone who takes a multivitamin tablet will also be
getting B12 (as we have been doing for a good few years) then you
don't have the problem.

You will if you develop an auto-immune disease that destroys
the cells in your stomach lining that produce an essential
substance needed to absorb B12 from any source. Commonly
called Pernicious Anaemia. Nasty if undetected before the
body starts stealing B12 from the nerve sheaths.

On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 20:58:52 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

snip

The list of 'ingredients' on vegan foods like
'sausage' rolls is rather off-putting.

And how does that compare with the same on 'conventional' sausage
rolls OOI?

Cheers, T i m

On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 21:05:44 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 01/10/2020 15:42, T i m wrote:
Add to that, anyone who takes a multivitamin tablet will also be
getting B12 (as we have been doing for a good few years) then you
don't have the problem.

You will if you develop an auto-immune disease that destroys
the cells in your stomach lining that produce an essential
substance needed to absorb B12 from any source. Commonly
called Pernicious Anaemia. Nasty if undetected before the
body starts stealing B12 from the nerve sheaths.

As with all things, it's all about taking the best line, sensible
precautions and remember the vegan goal:

"Veganism is a way of living which seeks to exclude, as far as is
possible and practicable, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty
to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose."

So if you can *prove* that eating a meat based diet is likely to put
anyone at less risk overall compared with someone on a 'well planned'
vegan diet then please present the evidence (given the current obesity
and heart / stroke related issues of omnivores eating too much meat is
very well documented) and going on a vegan diet normally suggests that
people become more aware of what they eat etc.

Cheers, T i m

GB wrote:
On 30/09/2020 21:39, ARW wrote:

Roasting joints, smoked bacon, scallops, Italian salamis etc ?


Why not just put ordinary goods on the shelf for Coeliacs? Much fun to
be had as you imagine them undergoing emergency treatment.

Shurely coeliacs should be able to read by now?

And vegans are so stupid they cannot read the label.


Even if so, they wouldn't put a chunk of meat in their basket. On the
other hand, coeliacs are so easy to poison ...

It does seem to me very odd that people here are so outspokenly
anti-vegan. Is it just to taunt Tim? It seems to me that cats make
terrible pets compared to dogs, but out of politeness I wouldn't dream
of saying so to a cat lover. (Oops!)


The problem isnt vegans it is bigoted vegans it isnt unusual for us to
have vegetarian meals because we like them not because some bigot tells us
we cant have meat.

On 01/10/2020 20:58:02, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 10:51:33 +0100, GB
wrote:

snip

It does seem to me very odd that people here are so outspokenly
anti-vegan. Is it just to taunt Tim?

Seeing the range of replies here so far I am reminded that in the 16
years I've been posting to uk.d-i-y, the most disgusting troll I've
ever come across is the one currently calling itself 'Fredxx'.

Seeing the off-topic posts here so far I am reminded that in the 17
years I've been posting to uk.d-i-y, the most disgusting troll I've
ever come across is the one currently calling itself 'T i m'.

The lies, the disingenuous statements, the fabrication of 'my goals'
and that of vegans in general, the twisting of the facts are beyond
any that any other troll has managed so far. It is sick.

The lies, the disingenuous claims that as a meat eater I like to harm
animals which are not shared by vegans in general, the twisting of the
facts are beyond any that any other troll has managed so far. Tim is sick.

It does hate all vegans as they would be asking of it no more or less
than I have.

No, most vegans embrace the meat eater lifestyle.

I gave it a chance, I tried to reason with it ... but (of course) it
was to no avail.

Gave what a chance? Consuming B12 laden meat?

If it supported slavery (and I'm sure it would have as it supports
animal slavery), it's idea of 'campaigning for improved slave welfare
would be only that, getting the slaves lighter chains, whereas mine is
ending slavery completely.

Animals are not the same as slaves as shown by your desire to keep pets.
If you kept a child or adult locked up all day made them eat food that
is unnatural for them, allowed them to fill their bladders and bowels to
bursting, and endorse the mutilation of their genitals for your
pleasure, then you should spend the rest of your life behind bars.

See, even you treat animals as though you are a higher animal with the
right to control animals at your will.

I find it interesting you mention your dogs show you love. That is
precisely the same feeling paedophiles get with their prey too.

https://ibb.co/nk46k96

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02GNr5DnPCk

Yes, we can.

On 02/10/2020 00:43:00, Radio Man wrote:
GB wrote:
On 30/09/2020 21:39, ARW wrote:

Roasting joints, smoked bacon, scallops, Italian salamis etc ?


Why not just put ordinary goods on the shelf for Coeliacs? Much fun to
be had as you imagine them undergoing emergency treatment.

Shurely coeliacs should be able to read by now?

And vegans are so stupid they cannot read the label.


Even if so, they wouldn't put a chunk of meat in their basket. On the
other hand, coeliacs are so easy to poison ...

It does seem to me very odd that people here are so outspokenly
anti-vegan. Is it just to taunt Tim? It seems to me that cats make
terrible pets compared to dogs, but out of politeness I wouldn't dream
of saying so to a cat lover. (Oops!)


The problem isnt vegans it is bigoted vegans it isnt unusual for us to
have vegetarian meals because we like them not because some bigot tells us
we cant have meat.

+ 1

On 01/10/2020 18:33, Fredxx wrote:
On 01/10/2020 11:03:08, T i m wrote:

snip

If you go for non 'ready meal' vegan foods and make your own from
scratch (just as many do with a vegetable casserole or veg soup or a
salad etc) then the chances are it would (could) be as if not more
healthy for you than something based around meat.

As part of a balanced diet it may well be healthy, but where taken to
the extreme for many adopting the change to total veganism, B12
deficiency will eventually creep up on them with disastrous consequences
especially with their mental health.

All this bandwidth being dedicated to B12. ****, of the almost 8 billion
people on the planet, I think the only one's who give a **** about B12
are those posting and countering in this group.
Jesus, give it a rest.
If the lack of B12 causes mental issues and the vegans turn into
cabbages, legalise cannibalism.

On 01/10/2020 11:07, T i m wrote:
On 1 Oct 2020 08:53:01 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:

On 01 Oct 2020 at 00:45:11 BST, williamwright wrote:

On 30/09/2020 22:30, T i m wrote:
Given the British and American Dietetic Associations have stated that
a well planned vegan diet (any diet should be well planned) is
adequate for people of all ages and we are all advised to cut back on
meat for loads of different reasons, it just makes good sense.

I don't want 'adequate'. I want another bacon sandwich.

T r o l l hasn't grasped that I'm not on a diet, therefore what any "Dietetic
Association" may have to say is neither here nor there.

Feck, just when I thought the Squeaker Goblin couldn't faceplant any
harder, he goes and surprises us all again!

Everone who eats is 'on a diet', it's the range of things that they
eat.

" Diet

1.
the kinds of food that a person, animal, or community habitually
eats."

Oh dear. When I posted that very definition in response to your dross a
while ago, you got very upset and insisted that you were not on a diet.
See below.


(You really can't make this sort of thing up can you?!)

What a thick, faceplanting, stupid Squeaker Goblin!!!

On 02/10/2020 00:43, Radio Man wrote:
GB wrote:
On 30/09/2020 21:39, ARW wrote:

Roasting joints, smoked bacon, scallops, Italian salamis etc ?


Why not just put ordinary goods on the shelf for Coeliacs? Much fun to
be had as you imagine them undergoing emergency treatment.

Shurely coeliacs should be able to read by now?

And vegans are so stupid they cannot read the label.


Even if so, they wouldn't put a chunk of meat in their basket. On the
other hand, coeliacs are so easy to poison ...

It does seem to me very odd that people here are so outspokenly
anti-vegan. Is it just to taunt Tim? It seems to me that cats make
terrible pets compared to dogs, but out of politeness I wouldn't dream
of saying so to a cat lover. (Oops!)


The problem isnt vegans it is bigoted vegans it isnt unusual for us to
have vegetarian meals because we like them not because some bigot tells us
we cant have meat.



€œSome hae meat and canna eat,
And some wad eat that want it,
But we hae meat and we can eat,
And sae the Lord be thankit.€�

typical mason .....

On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 06:39:48 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip

T r o l l hasn't grasped that I'm not on a diet, therefore what any "Dietetic
Association" may have to say is neither here nor there.

Feck, just when I thought the Squeaker Goblin couldn't faceplant any
harder, he goes and surprises us all again!

Everone who eats is 'on a diet', it's the range of things that they
eat.

" Diet

1.
the kinds of food that a person, animal, or community habitually
eats."

Oh dear. When I posted that very definition in response to your dross a
while ago, you got very upset and insisted that you were not on a diet.

And still aren't, and why you (and the Squeaker Goblin) are talking
BS.

See, left brainers really can't differentiate between the use of the
phrase 'on a diet' (implying a diet to address some specific need or
issue, like weight loss or less commonly, some food intolerance) and
'a vegan diet' where the emphasis is on the range of foods that you
don't eat for *ethical reasons*. So, a 'Kosher diet' is very different
(in spirit) to a 'Weight watchers diet'.

If you don't drink milk because you are intolerant to the milk (that
was never designed for you and you react badly to), you wouldn't tell
someone you 'were on a diet' but that 'your diet excludes the
consumption of baby cows milk'

The first one is about the quantity or type of food for nutritional /
allergy reasons and the second is neither.

If your friends under the bridge said 'Dicky, you coming to the hog
roast later?' and you were previously actively trying to lose weight,
you might say, sorry, 'I'm on a diet' (and that would be understood as
being little to do with the event but the fattening quality of the
foodstuffs, eg a 'Salad buffet' would probably be ok ... compared
with me where I would say, 'I'm a vegan so no thanks', I wouldn't say
'I'm on a vegan diet'.

Nice faceplating though!

Cheers, T i m

On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 12:30:02 +0100 (GMT+01:00), Jimk
wrote:

"Jim GM4 DHJ ..." Wrote in message:
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...rkets-19012844


Who TF wants to find h i m anyway?

You for one as you seem besotted with me? ;-(

Cheers, T i m

On 02/10/2020 12:23:18, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 06:39:48 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip

T r o l l hasn't grasped that I'm not on a diet, therefore what any "Dietetic
Association" may have to say is neither here nor there.

Feck, just when I thought the Squeaker Goblin couldn't faceplant any
harder, he goes and surprises us all again!

Everone who eats is 'on a diet', it's the range of things that they
eat.

" Diet

1.
the kinds of food that a person, animal, or community habitually
eats."

Oh dear. When I posted that very definition in response to your dross a
while ago, you got very upset and insisted that you were not on a diet.

And still aren't, and why you (and the Squeaker Goblin) are talking
BS.

See, left brainers really can't differentiate between the use of the
phrase 'on a diet' (implying a diet to address some specific need or
issue, like weight loss or less commonly, some food intolerance) and
'a vegan diet' where the emphasis is on the range of foods that you
don't eat for *ethical reasons*. So, a 'Kosher diet' is very different
(in spirit) to a 'Weight watchers diet'.

If you don't drink milk because you are intolerant to the milk (that
was never designed for you and you react badly to), you wouldn't tell
someone you 'were on a diet' but that 'your diet excludes the
consumption of baby cows milk'

The first one is about the quantity or type of food for nutritional /
allergy reasons and the second is neither.

If your friends under the bridge said 'Dicky, you coming to the hog
roast later?' and you were previously actively trying to lose weight,
you might say, sorry, 'I'm on a diet' (and that would be understood as
being little to do with the event but the fattening quality of the
foodstuffs, eg a 'Salad buffet' would probably be ok ... compared
with me where I would say, 'I'm a vegan so no thanks', I wouldn't say
'I'm on a vegan diet'.

Nice faceplating though!

Did Richard really deserve all that? All he did was point out your
change in your definition of diet, where you fail to accept that Richard
was correct all along.

Your response is precisely that of a fanatic who is oblivious that
taking an authoritarian and dictatorial stance is wholly unproductive,
even if your long aims are unimpeachable.

There are a lot of people called Tim, indeed the talking clock on the
telephone used to be known as TIM.
Brian

--
--
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"T i m" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 12:30:02 +0100 (GMT+01:00), Jimk
wrote:

"Jim GM4 DHJ ..." Wrote in message:
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...rkets-19012844


Who TF wants to find h i m anyway?

You for one as you seem besotted with me? ;-(

Cheers, T i m

In message , "Brian Gaff (Sofa)"
writes
There are a lot of people called Tim, indeed the talking clock on the
telephone used to be known as TIM.

I don't think that was running when my parents were considering the
matter back in 1943:-)

--
Tim Lamb

In article ,
Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , "Brian Gaff (Sofa)"
writes
There are a lot of people called Tim, indeed the talking clock on the
telephone used to be known as TIM.

I don't think that was running when my parents were considering the
matter back in 1943:-)

It was only TIMe in London. ISTR 192 where we lived. Wiki says it started
in 1936.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 02/10/2020 13:24, Fredxx wrote:
On 02/10/2020 12:23:18, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 06:39:48 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip

T r o l lÂ* hasn't grasped that I'm not on a diet, therefore what
any "Dietetic
Association" may have to say is neither here nor there.

Feck, just when I thought the Squeaker Goblin couldn't faceplant any
harder, he goes and surprises us all again!

Everone who eats is 'on a diet', it's the range of things that they
eat.

" Diet

Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* 1.
Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* the kinds of food that a person, animal, or community habitually
eats."

Oh dear. When I posted that very definition in response to your dross a
while ago, you got very upset and insisted that you were not on a diet.

And still aren't, and why you (and the Squeaker Goblin) are talking
BS.

See, left brainers really can't differentiate between the use of the
phrase 'on a diet' (implying a diet to address some specific need or
issue, like weight loss or less commonly, some food intolerance) and
'a vegan diet' where the emphasis is on the range of foods that you
don't eat for *ethical reasons*. So, a 'Kosher diet' is very different
(in spirit) to a 'Weight watchers diet'.

If you don't drink milk because you are intolerant to the milk (that
was never designed for you and you react badly to), you wouldn't tell
someone you 'were on a diet' but that 'your diet excludes the
consumption of baby cows milk'

The first one is about the quantity or type of food for nutritional /
allergy reasons and the second is neither.

If your friends under the bridge said 'Dicky, you coming to the hog
roast later?' and you were previously actively trying to lose weight,
you might say, sorry, 'I'm on a diet' (and that would be understood as
being little to do with the event but the fattening quality of the
foodstuffs, eg a 'Salad buffet' would probably be ok ...Â* compared
with me where I would say, 'I'm a vegan so no thanks', I wouldn't say
'I'm on a vegan diet'.

Nice faceplating though!

Did Richard really deserve all that?

Like I give a toss what T i m thinks about me

All he did was point out your
change in your definition of diet, where you fail to accept that Richard
was correct all along.

He does that with *anyone* who has presented facts which he doesn't like.


Your response is precisely that of a fanatic who is oblivious that
taking an authoritarian and dictatorial stance is wholly unproductive,
even if your long aims are unimpeachable.

On 01/10/2020 11:30, T i m wrote:
)

Any *processed* foods, vegan or otherwise is likely to be worse for us
than non processed foods and given we (humans) have lived longer
eating just fruit / nuts / veg that than we have also been eating
meat.

And one day there may be a another sentence constructed as badly as the
one above.

On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 19:33:33 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 01/10/2020 11:30, T i m wrote:
)

Any *processed* foods, vegan or otherwise is likely to be worse for us
than non processed foods and given we (humans) have lived longer
eating just fruit / nuts / veg that than we have also been eating
meat.

And one day there may be a another sentence constructed as badly as the
one above.

What is *actually* interesting is how desperate you are to find any
fault, rather than face the real issues. Left brainer missing the
spirit of a message again?

At least (and unlike the Fredxx creep) you accept that some of the
practices that go on behind the scenes that result in the death of
animals for peoples taste pleasure are truly horrific. [1]

I'm guessing that if they weren't, everyone (including children) would
be happy to visit abattoirs?

Cheers, T i m

[1] Like, you bolt gun an innocent cow, hang it up by one leg and slit
it's throat. As it moves onto the next stage where it's cut open a
live calf falls out. And 'of course', you put a bolt gun to it's head
as well and cut it's throat. All RSPCA approved ...

On 02/10/2020 02:38, Fredxx wrote:
On 02/10/2020 00:43:00, Radio Man wrote:
GB wrote:
On 30/09/2020 21:39, ARW wrote:

Roasting joints, smoked bacon, scallops, Italian salamis etc ?


Why not just put ordinary goods on the shelf for Coeliacs? Much
fun to
be had as you imagine them undergoing emergency treatment.

Shurely coeliacs should be able to read by now?

And vegans are so stupid they cannot read the label.


Even if so, they wouldn't put a chunk of meat in their basket. On the
other hand, coeliacs are so easy to poison ...

It does seem to me very odd that people here are so outspokenly
anti-vegan. Is it just to taunt Tim? It seems to me that cats make
terrible pets compared to dogs, but out of politeness I wouldn't dream
of saying so to a cat lover. (Oops!)

The problem isnt vegans it is bigoted vegans it isnt unusual for us to
have vegetarian meals because we like them not because some bigot
tells us
we cant have meat.

+ 1


-1

We are back to square one.

A vegetarian meal is not always a vegan meal. Imagine drinking a can of
Fosters to go with the vegan meal.

These people are as thick as pig ****.



--
Adam

On 02/10/2020 21:03:18, ARW wrote:
On 02/10/2020 02:38, Fredxx wrote:
On 02/10/2020 00:43:00, Radio Man wrote:
GB wrote:
On 30/09/2020 21:39, ARW wrote:

Roasting joints, smoked bacon, scallops, Italian salamis etc ?


Why not just put ordinary goods on the shelf for Coeliacs? Much
fun to
be had as you imagine them undergoing emergency treatment.

Shurely coeliacs should be able to read by now?

And vegans are so stupid they cannot read the label.


Even if so, they wouldn't put a chunk of meat in their basket. On the
other hand, coeliacs are so easy to poison ...

It does seem to me very odd that people here are so outspokenly
anti-vegan. Is it just to taunt Tim? It seems to me that cats make
terrible pets compared to dogs, but out of politeness I wouldn't dream
of saying so to a cat lover. (Oops!)

The problem isnt vegans it is bigoted vegans it isnt unusual for us to
have vegetarian meals because we like them not because some bigot
tells us
we cant have meat.

+ 1


-1

We are back to square one.

A vegetarian meal is not always a vegan meal. Imagine drinking a can of
Fosters to go with the vegan meal.

I think Tim would call that "cognitive dissonance". Perhaps he's stopped
drinking too, most ales and alcoholic drinks are not vegan.

Radio Man's post was that he chose meals he liked them rather than some
bigot telling him so.

On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 19:21:39 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip

He does that with *anyone* who has presented facts which he doesn't like.

Bwhahaha ... aww, you think the BS you (or any of the trolls /
*******) come out with are facts?

Most don't even know the difference between 'diet' and 'a diet'!!

Bwhahahahaha!!!

Cheers, T i m

"Jim GM4 DHJ ..." Wrote in message:
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...rkets-19012844


Who TF wants to find h i m anyway?
--
Jimk


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

"Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" Wrote in message:
There are a lot of people called Tim, indeed the talking clock on the
telephone used to be known as TIM.
Brian


Made infinitely better use of resources too :,-)
--
Jimk


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 1/10/20 2:06 am, Jim GM4 DHJ ... wrote:
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...rkets-19012844

Wish they would do that here along with "gluten free" no MSG etc.or any
other catchy crap their psychologists think up that they think will sell
to idiot sheeple so that I never have to see such stuff.

On Sat, 3 Oct 2020 16:09:43 +1000, F Murtz
wrote:

On 1/10/20 2:06 am, Jim GM4 DHJ ... wrote:
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...rkets-19012844

Wish they would do that here along with "gluten free" no MSG etc.or any
other catchy crap their psychologists think up that they think will sell
to idiot sheeple so that I never have to see such stuff.

You know you can eat that 'stuff' as well, it's not *just* for people
who have issues eating some other foods or don't want animals tortured
and killed in their name?

Some people are strange ...

Cheers, T i m

T i m wrote:
On Sat, 3 Oct 2020 16:09:43 +1000, F Murtz
wrote:

On 1/10/20 2:06 am, Jim GM4 DHJ ... wrote:
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...rkets-19012844


Wish they would do that here along with "gluten free" no MSG etc.or any
other catchy crap their psychologists think up that they think will sell
to idiot sheeple so that I never have to see such stuff.

You know you can eat that 'stuff' as well, it's not *just* for people
who have issues eating some other foods or don't want animals tortured
and killed in their name?

Some people are strange ...

Cheers, T i m


You do realise that your approach makes people less likely to eat more
vegetarian food even if they dont give up meat fully. Could you really be
a meat eating advocate trying to turn people against vegetarians. It would
fit with your lack of knowledge of mushrooms.

On 02/10/2020 20:12, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 19:33:33 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 01/10/2020 11:30, T i m wrote:
)

Any *processed* foods, vegan or otherwise is likely to be worse for us
than non processed foods and given we (humans) have lived longer
eating just fruit / nuts / veg that than we have also been eating
meat.

And one day there may be a another sentence constructed as badly as the
one above.

What is *actually* interesting is how desperate you are to find any
fault, rather than face the real issues. Left brainer missing the
spirit of a message again?

What is even more interesting is that it was not hard to find fault with
that sentence and that you immediately apportion blame to the reader.
Finding sense in that sentence is the hard part.
Impressed by the way you don't miss the opportunity to chuck in a brain
handedness remark.

On Sat, 3 Oct 2020 10:07:00 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 02/10/2020 20:12, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 19:33:33 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 01/10/2020 11:30, T i m wrote:
)

Any *processed* foods, vegan or otherwise is likely to be worse for us
than non processed foods and given we (humans) have lived longer
eating just fruit / nuts / veg that than we have also been eating
meat.

And one day there may be a another sentence constructed as badly as the
one above.

What is *actually* interesting is how desperate you are to find any
fault, rather than face the real issues. Left brainer missing the
spirit of a message again?

What is even more interesting is that it was not hard to find fault with
that sentence and that you immediately apportion blame to the reader.

I am not responsible for your lack of comprehension.

Finding sense in that sentence is the hard part.

Like you were actually interested in doing so.

Impressed by the way you don't miss the opportunity to chuck in a brain
handedness remark.

Because it's pertinent.

Instead of trying to pick holes and assuming you do actually GAF about
animals, why don't you support me, given all I'm trying to do is end
as much animal suffering and exploitation as possible?

Not supporting that cause confirms all I suspect.

Cheers, T i m

On Sat, 3 Oct 2020 09:04:34 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip

You know you can eat that 'stuff' as well, it's not *just* for people
who have issues eating some other foods or don't want animals tortured
and killed in their name?

Some people are strange ...


You do realise that your approach makes people less likely to eat more
vegetarian food even if they don’t give up meat fully.

https://ibb.co/GtpKYLk

snip trolling bs

Just to let you know you are one of the winners of my 'I'm bored with
the pointless troll now so time to ignore them' prizes, just saying
....

Cheers, T i m

On 03/10/2020 10:38, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 3 Oct 2020 10:07:00 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 02/10/2020 20:12, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 19:33:33 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 01/10/2020 11:30, T i m wrote:
)

Any *processed* foods, vegan or otherwise is likely to be worse for us
than non processed foods and given we (humans) have lived longer
eating just fruit / nuts / veg that than we have also been eating
meat.

And one day there may be a another sentence constructed as badly as the
one above.

What is *actually* interesting is how desperate you are to find any
fault, rather than face the real issues. Left brainer missing the
spirit of a message again?

What is even more interesting is that it was not hard to find fault with
that sentence and that you immediately apportion blame to the reader.

I am not responsible for your lack of comprehension.

I do hold you responsible for posting a poorly structured sentence. I am
able to understand what you meant as I have had dealings with people
whose first language is not English.


Finding sense in that sentence is the hard part.

Like you were actually interested in doing so.

That thinking of yours is somewhat flawed. Had I not had an interest in
parsing the sentence, I'd not have commented on the really poor structure.


Impressed by the way you don't miss the opportunity to chuck in a brain
handedness remark.

Because it's pertinent.

No, it is not.


Instead of trying to pick holes and assuming you do actually GAF about
animals, why don't you support me, given all I'm trying to do is end
as much animal suffering and exploitation as possible?

How about this then:
https://preview.tinyurl.com/TrussForTim

https://www.cornish-times.co.uk/arti...earchyear=2020


Not supporting that cause confirms all I suspect.

On Wednesday, 30 September 2020 22:30:34 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
And the bizarre thing of course is that *everyone* can eat vegan /
vegetarian food (assuming you have a normal digestive system) so it
*will* become bigger as more people ask / buy it. [1]


Well, I tried an Asda Plant Based Vegan Curry with Jackfruit (mostly because it was half price).

It was palatable enough at the time but (a) I was hungry again a few hours later (b) my toilet output this morning was less solid than usual.

I think I'll have a black pudding tonight to compensate.

Owain

On Sat, 3 Oct 2020 11:51:03 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 03/10/2020 10:38, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 3 Oct 2020 10:07:00 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 02/10/2020 20:12, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 19:33:33 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 01/10/2020 11:30, T i m wrote:
)

Any *processed* foods, vegan or otherwise is likely to be worse for us
than non processed foods and given we (humans) have lived longer
eating just fruit / nuts / veg that than we have also been eating
meat.

And one day there may be a another sentence constructed as badly as the
one above.

What is *actually* interesting is how desperate you are to find any
fault, rather than face the real issues. Left brainer missing the
spirit of a message again?

What is even more interesting is that it was not hard to find fault with
that sentence and that you immediately apportion blame to the reader.

I am not responsible for your lack of comprehension.

I do hold you responsible for posting a poorly structured sentence.

IYHO I'm guessing, given this is a d-i-y group and not your English
language class?

I am
able to understand what you meant as I have had dealings with people
whose first language is not English.

Good for you. So, what was all the fuss about then?


Finding sense in that sentence is the hard part.

Like you were actually interested in doing so.

That thinking of yours is somewhat flawed.

We will see ...

Had I not had an interest in
parsing the sentence, I'd not have commented on the really poor structure.

Bwhahaha. Poor left brainer troll. Once again the point whooshes him.

Your only 'interest' was to poke holes and is all it ever has been.


Impressed by the way you don't miss the opportunity to chuck in a brain
handedness remark.

Because it's pertinent.

No, it is not.

'Of course' you wouldn't see that because you are the one suffering
the problem.


Instead of trying to pick holes and assuming you do actually GAF about
animals, why don't you support me, given all I'm trying to do is end
as much animal suffering and exploitation as possible?

How about this then:

https://preview.tinyurl.com/TrussForTim

https://www.cornish-times.co.uk/arti...earchyear=2020


Oh, I didn't realise you worked for the RSPCA or the government, why
didn't you say you were so influential?

So, you are trying to ensure we still have a say in a system that we
did have a say in before we left it for no (as yet) genuine reason?
Brilliant.

Not supporting that cause confirms all I suspect.

.... or do you think posting that link means you are doing something
practical?

See, it really doesn't matter where the animals are coming from or how
good any 'so called' welfare is, what would really make a difference
(irrespective of where the dead animal flesh comes from), is if there
is no demand. Simples.

So all that happens is the meat eaters and animal exploiters will be
causing even more pain and suffering when they could so easily
*actually* reduce such so very easily, if they *actually* cared about
the welfare of 'animals'.

Of course the truth is the majority would rather just cover their eyes
to the blood, their ears to the screams of pain and their minds to the
psychological suffering because they simply 'like' the taste.

Many of the same claim to love and look after pets and 'protect'
wildlife but are happy to kill and exploit other animals? What is it
we are doing when we protect 'wild life'? We are protecting the
*LIVES* of these animals, either directly (from poachers etc) or their
habitats (often after we have ****ed them up in the first place).

So we can protect 'wild -life' but not all 'all-life' and take life,
based on a whim, simply for our pleasure?

One *sure* way to stop the whole disgusting process is to not be a
part of it ... unless you consider yourself a doG or are above all
other animals (for some arbitrary set of standards, set by yourself)
of course.

Cheers, T i m

On Sat, 3 Oct 2020 04:42:46 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Wednesday, 30 September 2020 22:30:34 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
And the bizarre thing of course is that *everyone* can eat vegan /
vegetarian food (assuming you have a normal digestive system) so it
*will* become bigger as more people ask / buy it. [1]


Well, I tried an Asda Plant Based Vegan Curry with Jackfruit (mostly because it was half price).

Well, 'well done' (genuinely) for giving it a go (irrespective of the
reason) and reporting back here. At least it shows 'some' level of
open-mindedness, even towards saving money. ;-)

It was palatable enough at the time

Ok, so that was a start (I'd never even heard of a 'jackfruit' till I
had a vegan Pizza and looked into them).

but (a) I was hungry again a few hours later

Sure, see, 'vegan food' isn't *supposed* to be a panacea of all things
to all people all times, it's *primarily* to remove the pain and
suffering of innocent animals and given it's quite new from a
commercial POV, 'not surprising that it's not settled down yet? And
it's not 'a thing' either, it all foods that just don't contain or
exploit animals, leaving the choice of everything else (given we only
actually kill / exploit a few specific species of animal in the UK).

e.d. Vegans know that our taste buds can be very different and so even
amongst the vegans there will be foods (meals and ingredients) that
one person loves and another doesn't, just as with animal based foods.

There are also areas that are definitely lacking, like cheese,
however, yesterday we had burger, onion, sheese, tomato, tomato sauce
in a home made (as it happens) whole grain roll and it was perfectly
fine, very filling and 'satisfied' like any meat based burger ever
has. Today (because I had cooled the rolls) we had a facon, onion,
mushroom and brown sauce roll (with a nice mug of tea with oat milk)
and again, two empty plates and we will be happy till later tonight.

(b) my toilet output this morning was less solid than usual.

As can be the case when we try anything different?

I think I'll have a black pudding tonight to compensate.

So what you are saying is that by having some animals blood, flesh (
causing animal pain and suffering) and cereal, that somehow
'compensates' for not causing that?

Isn't that like being on a weight reducing diet and compensating for
the lack of food by eating more food?

If you have no real interest in losing weight then It would make sense
of course.

'Our' focus is simply that we love and respect the lives of all
animals (not just some arbitrary list of species) and so don't want to
cause any of them any pain and suffering wherever practical and
possible. What happens after that will be what it will be. ;-)


Cheers, T i m

Wrote in message:
On Wednesday, 30 September 2020 22:30:34 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
And the bizarre thing of course is that *everyone* can eat vegan /
vegetarian food (assuming you have a normal digestive system) so it
*will* become bigger as more people ask / buy it. [1]


Well, I tried an Asda Plant Based Vegan Curry with Jackfruit (mostly because it was half price).

It was palatable enough at the time but (a) I was hungry again a few hours later (b) my toilet output this morning was less solid than usual.

I think I'll have a black pudding tonight to compensate.

Owain


You fixed any punctures lately?
--
Jimk


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On Saturday, 3 October 2020 13:58:44 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
I think I'll have a black pudding tonight to compensate.
So what you are saying is that by having some animals blood, flesh (
causing animal pain and suffering) and cereal, that somehow
'compensates' for not causing that?

It's my tummy telling me it wants something nice and meaty fairly soon.

Isn't that like being on a weight reducing diet and compensating for
the lack of food by eating more food?

But the aim of a weight reducing diet is to reduce weight. The aim of a vegetarian diet isn't to lose weight.

Anyway, I haven't had a meaty main meal since Tuesday, so it's not like I'm slaughtering six chickens a week.

Owain