PETA kills Animals

[beowulf]

---

naa pod storya nga anak daw ko ni Jose Rizal ug ni Cleopatra...

-RODION

so that explains nganong far out ka nga pagka-tawo kay sa akong katapusang nahibaw-an
dili man pareho og año ang pag-exist ni jose rizal ug cleopatra. sa ato pa si jose rizal
nga imong papa nalambigit sa kalag ni cleopatra nga imong mama dayon gianak ka ato lang mga 70's

[cottonmouth]

PETA in my opinion goes the same highway where the GREENPEACE movement did. They need to make their causes relevant with the changing time. The problem is that at some point their causes have becoming more irrelevant that is why many they make ridiculous claims and charges. The Greenpeace movement now have become more radical and anti-establishment contrary to its founding objectives. PETA is also heading that way. We can hear news of chicken or pig abuse but if you come to think of it is really a non-sense idea. After all, however which way you kill the fowl it still ends-up a fried chicken. They supercharge the idea that killing a dog for food is an abuse to the animal. The dog lovers will certainly nod their head in approval ad infinitum. But to Koreans or Filipinos who love the canine meat, it is a fair deal. Bottom line, they can only be relevant to where they are relevant.

[rodsky]

Funny that whenever you post about something that attacks a method of analysis rather than the sides of an argument, certain people think you're actually "siding' with one of the "factions". It's almost like a toilet repair man getting lambasted by an irritating wife while he's fixing the toilet because the repairman is a man, and since her husband is a man, and that she concludes men defecate more, thus rendering the toilet broken, she then blames men for the problem. *shakes head*

-RODION

[Dorothea]

I love PETA for their hilarious antics! Apparently, some French PETA members threw a flour-bomb at Lindsay Lohan in Paris. LOL

Ask lang ko, are all PETA members vegetarians like Pam Anderson?

[james_chaw]

whoopsie doodle! there goes another one of 'em hypocrites!

[beowulf]

Funny that whenever you post about something that attacks a method of analysis rather than the sides of an argument, certain people think you're actually "siding' with one of the "factions". It's almost like a toilet repair man getting lambasted by an irritating wife while he's fixing the toilet because the repairman is a man, and since her husband is a man, and that she concludes men defecate more, thus rendering the toilet broken, she then blames men for the problem. *shakes head*

-RODION

sa ato pa ni rodsky wa ka mo-take sides. kinahanglan man gud sa mga lantugi nga ingon ani you have to take one side it's either you're for or against aron dili ka mogawas nga mediocre.

[rodsky]

sa ato pa ni rodsky wa ka mo-take sides. kinahanglan man gud sa mga lantugi nga ingon ani you have to take one side it's either you're for or against...

LOL what if I decide that the issue itself is not worth the effort of taking sides? Mo reklamo ka? LOL

I do take sides in discussions here. But only those issues that interest me. Now, even if an issue does not really interest me, yet I see that one or both of the proponents of the sides somehow have certain flaws in their methods or manner of analysis or in proof-finding, then I shall participate but only in the capacity of pointing out such flaws. In turn, the participants of the thread are totally free to see if my pointing out of the flaws are valid or not. If valid, I always am ready to be corrected, but if they can't support their reasoning, then I'll continue to point out more flaws.

aron dili ka mogawas nga mediocre.

Let's say there are over 400 topics at any given time in iStorya. Additionally, let us assume that as of the moment, I'm involved in only 30 of them. Does that imply that I'm mediocre in the 370 other topics? I don't follow your logic.

-RODION

[beowulf]

mediocre gyud diay ka pagka-tawo. wa ko nagpasabot nga sa tanang topic kondili sa topic diin lang ka involved (to borrow your words) kinahanglan naa ka'y labanan para lami ang storya ba.

OT: wa ko'y reklamo boss, anak gud ka ni rizal

wa na'y laing logic diha.

[rodsky]

mediocre gyud diay ka pagka-tawo. wa ko nagpasabot nga sa tanang topic kondili sa topic diin lang ka involved (to borrow your words) kinahanglan naa ka'y labanan para lami ang storya ba.

OT: wa ko'y reklamo boss, anak gud ka ni rizal

wa na'y laing logic diha.

For a person who takes sarcasm literally, I do wonder who's more mediocre.

Kana man gud ang problema sa uban ninyo. You see issues posted in these boards as a form of entertainment, as indicated by your phrase "para lami and storya ba". Mao gani wala na'y sense and purpose ang news reporting nowadays because people don't really act or discuss it intellectually--they simply see news as part of their daily dose of entertainment.

BTW, people who enjoy insulting other people when the argument gets to a certain point of friction are pikon. Thanks for showing you're pikon, beowulf. It tells a lot about you.

-RODION