Pugwash

They ate the Menagerie. They served the giraffes and other exotics with the finest wines and cognac that were, perhaps unsurprisingly with this being bourgeois Paris, still in plentiful supply.

Neds? Burberry? You may have mistaken Neds for Chavs.

Did you follow the instructions[1] first posted when RepGeek announced it was moving? If so, you need to undo it. If you did nothing, then ignore it. [1] http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showtopic=69090

Did you remember to unedit your HOSTS file?

There's a lot of controversy surrounding that review, to be honest. It's not as cut and dried as it would at first seem.

If you don't want to misplace your posts, put them in the right place.

See my GST bracelet howto: http://pugwash.cat5.org/articles/gst/ Same principle.

I'll have to disagree there. Shaka Zulu: 2 Million with a higher figure attributed to people dying trying to getting out of the way. [1] Hitler: 16 Million (10M+Slavs, 5M+ Jews) with war crimes courts putting it at 26 Million. [2] On top of that, the fact that Hitler did it on our doorstep (or in the case of Americans, they were involved) makes it more reported by History lessons. [1] "His 10-year-long kingship had resulted in more than 2 million deaths by warfare alone, not counting the deaths during mass tribal migrations to escape his armies." http://www.historynet.com/wars_conflicts/1...?page=4&c=y [2] "The Holocaust was the worst genocide in history." http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761559508/Holocaust.html

We actually have the right teeth to eat fish, like bears. Our intestines are far too long to be pure carnivores, though. So, biologically we should live off veg and fish, with the occasional meat when we can't get anything else. ps. But not Lutefisk.

Eh? That's a backronym if ever I've seen one. Ned is most likely derived from skinhead.

That stuff scares the bejesus out of me. I don't want to live in a country where that sort of thing is thought of as normal.

If you separate a brain from the CNS, death is instant. Are you seriously disputing this? You cannot seriously expect people to believe that removing a brain completely is a slower method of killing than starving it of blood. I'll give you your proof: set theory. basic mathematical principles here. Starving the brain of blood is in the set of removing the brain. One of the effects of removing the brain is cutting off the blood supply. QED, etc. Come on, it is a basic principle of biology that separating the brain from the CNS causes death. It's what you're trying to achieve with the jugular stuff. And yes, I know there are many cases of people doing it wrong, much like the documented cases of Halal butchers using blunt knives (search the BBC news site) and the like. Don't argue perfect Halal against incompetent regular butchery as I'm not arguing perfect regular butchery against incompetent halal.

The interior 60-minute bezel and timezone bezel are turned by the two hands.

Not all plastic-lensed sunglasses block UV as efficiently. CR-39 and Polycarbonate have better UV-blocking capability than Acylic and Glass.

It'll not happen in France or the UK either. Impossible, in spite of the farming lobby and animal welfare lobby. Ironically, it'll only ever be outlawed in countries that don't do much of it.

Um, whuh? How do you interpret what I said to disagree with that? It's precisely what I'm saying. US Law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humane_Slaughter_Act "The act contains a broad exemption for all animals slaughtered in accordance with religious law. This generally applies to animals killed for the kosher and Halal meat market. Strict interpretation of kashrut generally requires that the animal be fully sensible when its carotid artery is cut." Under both US and European law, an exception is made to the cruelty laws with religious butchery. That's the point I'm making.

Refused? I just ignored it as it was silly. I never stated that we should be buying hunted food. All I said is that it's the most humane method of killing. Where did you get the impression that I bought headshot venison from my local Spar? Is Halal more cruel than regular slaughter? The governments of the western world seem to think so. Under religious freedom, Halal gets special dispensation in spite of its cruelty. Pretty much, yes. Something this important, if it really had been studied, would be publicly available. I'll ask one more time, just in case you missed it the other two times: If it weren't religiously prescribed, would anyone insist on Halal-style killing?

The song is basically the rantings of a wee Ned. For instance, he mentions that he would like to copulate with one's mother and that he likes Buckfast Tonic Wine. You Nugget. His accent is pure weegie Ned, as is his dress-sense and subject matter. "Haw, big man. Geis a swally o yer buckie, nat. Av goat a chib."

That's not how it works. I never had you down as a fundamentalist.

Prove? If you remove the central nervous system of a living being through trauma, it dies pretty much instantly. I can't believe you're arguing against this as it's established biology. It's the benchmark against which tests are made. The fact that Halal meat is an exemption from the Humane Slaughter Act should concern you. The fact that the Farm Animal Welfare Council has advised the UK government (that's their job - they are government advisors) that Halal should be banned due to the severe suffering caused. The only reason Halal (and Kosher - let's not make this just about Islam) is allowed is because it's a religious freedom granted by the governments. If I were to open a slaughterhouse and use Halal methods without the religion, I'd be closed down and put in prison. Am I wrong? It's not. There is no record on the Hannover University website or on the google scholarly research website of either a Schultz or a Hazim ever having published a paper on anything. You don't find that strange? Not even a little?

Uh-oh, researcher's alarm bells are going off. Apart from consistently misspelling the name of the University, the only pages that this shows up are religious pages. I can't take this at face value. Please show me the paper.

psst. Ken, fix mine too.

Er, you mention the reason to kill Halal style is precisely because it's in the Qu'ran. That's "God says so" in anyone's book. If it weren't religiously prescribed, would anyone insist on Halal-style killing?

Yeah, and that's a strawman. No-one here is saying you should strangle animals instead. Both methods are barbaric yet one is slightly less so. Both methods cause the adrenal glands of the animals to fire up and slightly taint the taste. That hint of metalic taste in your kebab? That's animal adenaline and it's not good for you. Organic happy meat is by far the tastiest meat I've had. Even though abattoir laws make any unstressed killings almost impossible, anything that's nervous system is taken out in one hit (bolt through brain, decapitation) suffers less pain/stress than less humane methods. In fact, the most humane (or adrenaline-free) method is surprisingly game hunting. Venison from wild deer shot through the skull at 200M by a skilled hunter will get you the cleanest meat you'll ever taste.

Nice going. Comparing old barbaric ways of killing with other old barbaric ways and saying one isn't as bad as the others. You're not going to win any brownie points with those tactics. Bleeding an animal to death is not humane. Live with it. Oh, and don't use "God says it's ok" as an excuse. The crusades were based on that argument and that's another path you don't want to go down.