Vegetarian Discussion: Fuckwit David Harrison And His Irrational Obsession With "pre-existent" Livestock

Fuckwit David Harrison And His Irrational Obsession With "pre-existent" Livestock
Posts: 12

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)

Rudy Canoza
2007-07-27 16:37:50 EST
Here are some of the statements that PROVE, beyond doubt, that Fuckwit
David Harrison is absolutely *obsessed* with "pre-existent"
livestock. *ONLY* Fuckwit is obsessed with them; all rational
participants have tried unsuccessfully to get him to drop his stupid,
irrational obsession:

The animals that will be raised for us to eat
are more than just "nothing", because they
*will* be born unless something stops their
lives from happening. Since that is the case,
if something stops their lives from happening,
whatever it is that stops it is truly "denying"
them of the life they otherwise would have had.
Fuckwit - 12/09/1999

What gives you the right to want to deprive
them [unborn animals] of having what life they
could have?
Fuckwit - 10/12/2001

What I'm saying is unfair for the animals that
*could* get to live, is for people not to
consider the fact that they are only keeping
these animals from being killed, by keeping
them from getting to live at all.
Fuckwit - 10/19/1999

Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
born if nothing prevents that from happening,
that would experience the loss if their lives
are prevented.
Fuckwit - 08/01/2000

Each and every one of those statements reflect Fuckwit's
obsession, and not one of them was a "mistake"
in terminology, or any other form of mistake. They are
Fuckwit's thoughts on the topicand they conclusively
prove that he is and always was talking about UNBORN
or "pre-existent" farm animals, not existing farm animals.

Fuckwit is obsessed with "pre-existent" livestock animals, and has
some irrational fear that "vegans" and "aras" want to do something
wrong to "them": "pre-existent" animals. It's completely fuckwitted,
but that's Fuckwit David Harrison for you.


JimH
2007-07-27 16:46:50 EST

Hey Rudy, A song just for you:

http://www.dumbppl.com/sounds/Jimmy%20Buffet%20-%20The%20Asshole%20Song.mp3



Tim
2007-07-27 21:12:21 EST
On Jul 27, 3:46 pm, "JimH" <ask m...@me.com> wrote:
> Hey Rudy, A song just for you:
>
> http://www.dumbppl.com/sounds/Jimmy%20Buffet%20-%20The%20Asshole%20So...

LOL! I haven't heard that in years!


D*@.
2007-07-30 09:20:41 EST
27 Jul 2007 the Goober amusingly lied as he cried:

>all rational participants have tried unsuccessfully to get him
>to drop his stupid, irrational obsession:
. . .
>12/09/1999
. . .
>10/12/2001
. . .
>10/19/1999
. . .
>08/01/2000

You sure are a stupid one, Goob.

Rudy Canoza
2007-07-30 10:43:49 EST
Fuckwit David Harrison, hopelessly overmatched and a
lifelong loser, lied:
> 27 Jul 2007 Rudy Canoza wrote:
>
>> all rational participants have tried unsuccessfully to get him
>> to drop his stupid, irrational obsession:
> . . .
>> 12/09/1999
> . . .
>> 10/12/2001
> . . .
>> 10/19/1999
> . . .
>> 08/01/2000
>
> You sure are a stupid one

No, Fuckwit - *YOU* are the stupid one for not
understanding that this collection of quotes means you
lost, years ago.


Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
born if nothing prevents that from happening,
that would experience the loss if their lives
are prevented.
Fuckwit - 08/01/2000

The animals that will be raised for us to eat
are more than just "nothing", because they
*will* be born unless something stops their
lives from happening. Since that is the case,
if something stops their lives from happening,
whatever it is that stops it is truly "denying"
them of the life they otherwise would have had.
Fuckwit - 12/09/1999

What gives you the right to want to deprive
them [unborn animals] of having what life they
could have?
Fuckwit - 10/12/2001


You lost, Fuckwit. And you're too stupid to see it.

Kickin' Goober's Faggot Ass
2007-07-30 16:44:22 EST
On Jul 30, 8:43 am, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.com> wrote:
> Fuckwit David Harrison, hopelessly overmatched and a
> lifelong loser, lied:
>
> > 27 Jul 2007 Rudy Canoza wrote:
>
> >> all rational participants have tried unsuccessfully to get him
> >> to drop his stupid, irrational obsession:
> > . . .
> >> 12/09/1999
> > . . .
> >> 10/12/2001
> > . . .
> >> 10/19/1999
> > . . .
> >> 08/01/2000
>
> > You sure are a stupid one
>
> No, Fuckwit - *YOU* are the stupid one for not
> understanding that this collection of quotes means you
> lost, years ago.
>
> Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
> born if nothing prevents that from happening,
> that would experience the loss if their lives
> are prevented.
> Fuckwit - 08/01/2000
>
> The animals that will be raised for us to eat
> are more than just "nothing", because they
> *will* be born unless something stops their
> lives from happening. Since that is the case,
> if something stops their lives from happening,
> whatever it is that stops it is truly "denying"
> them of the life they otherwise would have had.
> Fuckwit - 12/09/1999
>
> What gives you the right to want to deprive
> them [unborn animals] of having what life they
> could have?
> Fuckwit - 10/12/2001
>
> You lost, Fuckwit. And you're too stupid to see it.




Ready to EXPLAIN these Goober?


Goo sputtered:

*No* contrived "challenge" you may issue is beyond Dutch's or my
ability



Dave replied:

Goober some of the things I repeatedly challenged
you to do which are beyond your ability, are to try:

1. explaining exactly which emotions animals can and
can not experience.


2. explaining how anything could have inherent rights.


3. providing any opposition at all to "AR".


4. explaining why nothing has ever benefitted from living.


5. explaining why we should only consider killing but not life.


6. explaining what or whom--other than those who are
disturbed by the fact that humans eat meat--would benefit
from their elimination objective.


7. describing any emotion(s) through language.


8. explaining any way(s) in which people could contribute to
better lives for food animals.


9. explaining why one emotion is more difficult to experience
than another.


10. explaining how any difference between the ability of humans and
other animals to experience emotions, is a moral issue.


11. explaining the qualitative differences between anger and
disappointment, if there are any.


12. demonstrating an ethically equivalent or superior alternative
to the elimination of domestic animals.


13. explaining what it is that makes animals appear to be
experiencing
certain emotions, under conditions which could easily trigger
those
particular emotions, if it is not those particular emotions.


14. explaining how any emotions could be dependant on language.


15. explaining the kind of stimulus-response "anticipation" you can
get
from a dog.


16. explaining what--if anything at all--he has learned from
experience
with animals.


17. explaining what could be more important to animals raised for
food
than the experiencing of their lives.


18. describing any tests which have been done to test for self-
awareness
in dogs.


19. explaining why dogs jump up above tall grass so they can see, if
"They are not aware that they can see. "



Rudy Canoza
2007-07-30 17:34:21 EST
Kickin' Goober's Faggot Ass wrote:
> On Jul 30, 8:43 am, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.com> wrote:
>> Fuckwit David Harrison, hopelessly overmatched and a
>> lifelong loser, lied:
>>
>>> 27 Jul 2007 Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>> all rational participants have tried unsuccessfully to get him
>>>> to drop his stupid, irrational obsession:
>>> . . .
>>>> 12/09/1999
>>> . . .
>>>> 10/12/2001
>>> . . .
>>>> 10/19/1999
>>> . . .
>>>> 08/01/2000
>>> You sure are a stupid one
>> No, Fuckwit - *YOU* are the stupid one for not
>> understanding that this collection of quotes means you
>> lost, years ago.
>>
>> Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
>> born if nothing prevents that from happening,
>> that would experience the loss if their lives
>> are prevented.
>> Fuckwit - 08/01/2000
>>
>> The animals that will be raised for us to eat
>> are more than just "nothing", because they
>> *will* be born unless something stops their
>> lives from happening. Since that is the case,
>> if something stops their lives from happening,
>> whatever it is that stops it is truly "denying"
>> them of the life they otherwise would have had.
>> Fuckwit - 12/09/1999
>>
>> What gives you the right to want to deprive
>> them [unborn animals] of having what life they
>> could have?
>> Fuckwit - 10/12/2001
>>
>> You lost, Fuckwit. And you're too stupid to see it.
>
>
>
>
> Ready to EXPLAIN these Rudy?
>
>
> Rudy wrote:
>
> *No* contrived "challenge" you may issue is beyond Dutch's or my
> ability

A true statement.

Ricky's Babysitter
2007-07-30 21:42:30 EST
On Jul 30, 3:34 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
> Kickin' Goober's Faggot Ass wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 30, 8:43 am, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.com> wrote:
> >> Fuckwit David Harrison, hopelessly overmatched and a
> >> lifelong loser, lied:
>
> >>> 27 Jul 2007 Rudy Canoza wrote:
> >>>> all rational participants have tried unsuccessfully to get him
> >>>> to drop his stupid, irrational obsession:
> >>> . . .
> >>>> 12/09/1999
> >>> . . .
> >>>> 10/12/2001
> >>> . . .
> >>>> 10/19/1999
> >>> . . .
> >>>> 08/01/2000
> >>> You sure are a stupid one
> >> No, Fuckwit - *YOU* are the stupid one for not
> >> understanding that this collection of quotes means you
> >> lost, years ago.
>
> >> Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
> >> born if nothing prevents that from happening,
> >> that would experience the loss if their lives
> >> are prevented.
> >> Fuckwit - 08/01/2000
>
> >> The animals that will be raised for us to eat
> >> are more than just "nothing", because they
> >> *will* be born unless something stops their
> >> lives from happening. Since that is the case,
> >> if something stops their lives from happening,
> >> whatever it is that stops it is truly "denying"
> >> them of the life they otherwise would have had.
> >> Fuckwit - 12/09/1999
>
> >> What gives you the right to want to deprive
> >> them [unborn animals] of having what life they
> >> could have?
> >> Fuckwit - 10/12/2001
>
> >> You lost, Fuckwit. And you're too stupid to see it.
>
> > Ready to EXPLAIN these Rudy?
>
> > Rudy wrote:
>
> > *No* contrived "challenge" you may issue is beyond Dutch's or my
> > ability
>
> A true statement.



and yet neither Goo nor Baby Goo can begin to meet the 19 challenges.

The rubber never meets the road with those two bozos.





D*@.
2007-08-02 16:34:03 EST
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 18:42:30 -0700, ricky's babysitter <rudy-canoza@excite.com> wrote:

>On Jul 30, 3:34 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
>> Kickin' Goober's Faggot Ass wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jul 30, 8:43 am, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.com> wrote:
>> >> Fuckwit David Harrison, hopelessly overmatched and a
>> >> lifelong loser, lied:
>>
>> >>> 27 Jul 2007 Rudy Canoza wrote:
>> >>>> all rational participants have tried unsuccessfully to get him
>> >>>> to drop his stupid, irrational obsession:
>> >>> . . .
>> >>>> 12/09/1999
>> >>> . . .
>> >>>> 10/12/2001
>> >>> . . .
>> >>>> 10/19/1999
>> >>> . . .
>> >>>> 08/01/2000
>> >>> You sure are a stupid one
>> >> No, Fuckwit - *YOU* are the stupid one for not
>> >> understanding that this collection of quotes means you
>> >> lost, years ago.
>>
>> >> Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
>> >> born if nothing prevents that from happening,
>> >> that would experience the loss if their lives
>> >> are prevented.
>> >> Fuckwit - 08/01/2000
>>
>> >> The animals that will be raised for us to eat
>> >> are more than just "nothing", because they
>> >> *will* be born unless something stops their
>> >> lives from happening. Since that is the case,
>> >> if something stops their lives from happening,
>> >> whatever it is that stops it is truly "denying"
>> >> them of the life they otherwise would have had.
>> >> Fuckwit - 12/09/1999
>>
>> >> What gives you the right to want to deprive
>> >> them [unborn animals] of having what life they
>> >> could have?
>> >> Fuckwit - 10/12/2001
>>
>> >> You lost, Fuckwit. And you're too stupid to see it.
>>
>> > Ready to EXPLAIN these Rudy?
>>
>> > Rudy wrote:
>>
>> > *No* contrived "challenge" you may issue is beyond Dutch's or my
>> > ability
>>
>> A true statement.
>
>
>
>and yet neither Goo nor Baby Goo can begin to meet the 19 challenges.

It must be one of the clearest examples of dishonesty and ineptitude
that anyone could ask for.

>The rubber never meets the road with those two bozos.

Pretty much nothing but hollow claims and outright lying.

Ronald 'More-More' Moshki
2007-08-03 22:43:37 EST
On Aug 2, 4:34 pm, dh@. wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 18:42:30 -0700, ricky's babysitter <rudy-can...@excite.com> wrote:
> >On Jul 30, 3:34 pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote:
> >> Kickin' Goober's Faggot Ass wrote:
>
> >> > On Jul 30, 8:43 am, Rudy Canoza <rudy-can...@excite.com> wrote:
> >> >> Fuckwit David Harrison, hopelessly overmatched and a
> >> >> lifelong loser, lied:
>
> >> >>> 27 Jul 2007 Rudy Canoza wrote:
> >> >>>> all rational participants have tried unsuccessfully to get him
> >> >>>> to drop his stupid, irrational obsession:
> >> >>> . . .
> >> >>>> 12/09/1999
> >> >>> . . .
> >> >>>> 10/12/2001
> >> >>> . . .
> >> >>>> 10/19/1999
> >> >>> . . .
> >> >>>> 08/01/2000
> >> >>> You sure are a stupid one
> >> >> No, Fuckwit - *YOU* are the stupid one for not
> >> >> understanding that this collection of quotes means you
> >> >> lost, years ago.
>
> >> >> Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
> >> >> born if nothing prevents that from happening,
> >> >> that would experience the loss if their lives
> >> >> are prevented.
> >> >> Fuckwit - 08/01/2000
>
> >> >> The animals that will be raised for us to eat
> >> >> are more than just "nothing", because they
> >> >> *will* be born unless something stops their
> >> >> lives from happening. Since that is the case,
> >> >> if something stops their lives from happening,
> >> >> whatever it is that stops it is truly "denying"
> >> >> them of the life they otherwise would have had.
> >> >> Fuckwit - 12/09/1999
>
> >> >> What gives you the right to want to deprive
> >> >> them [unborn animals] of having what life they
> >> >> could have?
> >> >> Fuckwit - 10/12/2001
>
> >> >> You lost, Fuckwit. And you're too stupid to see it.
>
> >> > Ready to EXPLAIN these Rudy?
>
> >> > Rudy wrote:
>
> >> > *No* contrived "challenge" you may issue is beyond Dutch's or my
> >> > ability
>
> >> A true statement.
>
> >and yet neither Goo nor Baby Goo can begin to meet the 19 challenges.
>
> It must be one of the clearest examples of dishonesty and ineptitude
> that anyone could ask for.
>
> >The rubber never meets the road with those two bozos.
>
> Pretty much nothing but hollow claims and outright lying.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


Leef/Grief Erikson (Rudi) and david 'boy' harrison are the
butt-doodie twins.

Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron