CharlieKo

I suggest that you are no better. Unless you eat only fruit which has fallen from the tree and therefore already dead. Otherwise you are a murderer of vegetable's which have feelings also. 

1 hour ago, proton said:

 

There is no difference at all between domestic and livestock, unless you believe all animals are equal but some are more equal than others! It's just an artificial distinction by humans, this is an old nonsense argument- if we were not eating them they would not exist, if they only exist for you to eat better not to exist at all and bypass all that suffering. Sure, livestock has been artificially bred, but no animal has been cross bred more than dogs and no animal has any more right to live without suffering and not being eaten by us than any others. 

15 minutes ago, john donson said:

mentally ill running a restaurant... might get extra's in your plate you did not ordered

Kao Soi Dog, anyone?

45 minutes ago, proton said:

 

Not eaten any since 1972, or fish. People can eat what they like but don't pretend they are animal lovers if eating them

There's a big difference in eating and animal that most people keep as a pet, compared to an animal that is raised for eating. If People did not eat them then there is no point in these animals existing. 

5 hours ago, hotchilli said:

I think not....

Think again. In many villages, in/up country, dogs get eaten by most of the villagers. Especially when money is tight.

1 hour ago, paul1804 said:

Anutin has a substantial invested interest in the industry so his comments to be expected!

It seems there are substantial interests in re-criminalising the industry, as in tobacco and and alcohol companies. So this government is working for the elites, not the people. You can expect this all to be exposed if they do re-criminalise marijuana. The fight isn't over yet.  

1 hour ago, 2baht said:

Great choice America, you really ****ed that up, didn't you!

I'll go further, They ****ed that up, but if the Dems win in November They will F**** the world up too

26 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Why would a minority or non minority for that matter be offended by a statue of Anne Frank ?

Why don't you ask @georgegeorgiaHe's the one who thinks it offends minorities!

17 minutes ago, georgegeorgia said:

These ancient monuments have no place in modern times 

Look at all these Invasion and slave monuments,they have no place nowadays 

They could and do offend minorities 

 

They are the history of a nation. It's heritage also. If minorities feel offended tough. Get over it. 

3 hours ago, nobodysfriend said:

He is young enough , sharp and clear , has an intelligent wife , somebody should ask him ...?

Trump would lose .

 

 

When will Americans pick a real politician as president, not some idiot personality. Or a Senile old man!

If the government had achieved anything, Then why didn't he say what they were. In short they haven't done anything. All empty words.

OH oh, sorry they did achieve one thing They kept Thaksin out of prison! 

15 minutes ago, susanlea said:

The opposite is true. A self assured person doesn't need material items to feel good about themselves. This is the essence of buddhism.

Are you a buddhist?

3 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

The USSR no longer exists. Ukraine became a sovereign nation in 1991. Her resources are her own.

 Actually Blackrock has bought a lot of Ukrainian land!

1 hour ago, Purdey said:

I think his NATO speech could prove important in rallying member countries. Most people look at Russia having to cross Europe before attacking the USA. However, Russia, at its closest, is just 53 miles from the USA (see any map) and there are risks to the USA when Canada, a NATO member, has refused to increase military spending. If the USA withdraws from NATO later, it could face a Russian invasion on its northern flank.

Then again, maybe overthinking this.

Russia won't be invading the US from any flank. LOL

If it really came to an attack on the US which is highly unlikely. It would be with missiles.  

2 minutes ago, candide said:

If they want that, why haven't they done it yet? And is the location so important.

Just the small matter of Ukraine can't defeat Russia, and is not yet a member of Nato. 

21 minutes ago, candide said:

More B.S. Russian propaganda from you!

I am not saying the US has placed nukes along the Russian border. I am saying that is what they want to do!  

1 hour ago, susanlea said:

They want Ukraine resources out of Russian control. They belong to the former ussr.

No, they want Russian resources, But to get them they need to beat Russia. For some reason the US thought Ukraine was strong enough to do that. 

On 7/4/2024 at 8:17 AM, shdmn said:

Ms Ransome testified that her unnamed friend

Surely, this is just hearsay? Unless the victim comes forward and is willing to testify in a court of law! Easy to make accusations when the person is unnamed. But for those that Trump is living in their minds rent free. Any accusation regardless of proof is another reason to rail against Trump. The polarisation of people for or against either Trump or Biden is just what the politicians want. It's called divide and rule.