TheQuiltedLlama

Originally posted by: Snowloch Originally posted by: TheQuiltedLlama In fact, if the whole world went vegetarian there would be much more food for everyone, and with modern food stuffs like Quorn you can easily get the food stuffs you would otherwise get from meat.quote> Do you also know how much forest around the world would be eliminated, and how much wildlife would be extinct, just to clear land for cultivation?quote> Actually, there would be more land available everywhere to allow animal's natural habitats to expand. We use massive amounts of farm spaces to grow food to feed to animals, and then eat the animals. If we used the area to grow food for us to consume directly then we would actually use far less space and more natural animal habitat can be preserved. Now, I am not saying that everyone should be forced to be vegetarian, that wouldn't make sense. But I do think that people need to understand it is not necessary for us to eat animals, although certain animals are very tasty.

Originally posted by: farmer-alex Corrr what a Ramble. With all of the Human Rights problems in the World at the moment and we are instead all talking about animal rights and cultures.quote> Yes, fair point, but considering this is merely a forum about some random computer game it hardly matters a jiffy what we choose to discuss. Without Farmers you wont have half the wildlife you have in our wonderful countryside. People forget that "The Countryside" is the biggest Industrial Estate the World has.quote> I'm not saying that the countryside, with farms and all, is a bad thing, but it's hardly an endangered enviroment, unlike the woodlands and other habitats that it consumes. The countryside is a working enviroment, a human sytem that hasnt changed for 1000s of years. (apart from the paper work our thoughtful Government has placed upon us)quote> What about the advent of pesticides, herbicides, factory farming, computer controlled climate greenhouses? And without government subsidies most farms would be out of buisness by now. You may not agree with Fox Hunting, but it happens. Allways has, allways will. quote> It has not always happened and it certainly should not continue to happen. The countryside is complex, we do not need to be told by townies what to do. quote> Unfortunatly we live in a democracy, and there aren't seprate rules for 'townies' and farmers. The decision to ban the hunting of foxes for sport was decision taken by the elected government. If you choose to continue to hunt you are breaking the lawm, just like any other criminal.

So it is part of the food chain to kill foxes for fun? It is part of the food chain to raise animals in cages where they have no room to move? It is natural for us to force feed animals to satisfy the fat profits of supermarkets? As for it protecting the countryside, Without farming our countryside would be wonderful. I live on the edge of the peak district to luckily I'm near to an area that is protected from farming. But frankly all you see in the British countryside is field after identical field, hardly the most enjoyable of views. I'm not saying that farming isn't necessary, of course it is, but that doesn't mean farms can get away with killing animals for fun. I realize I'm rather contradicting my earlier post, but I feel that although the killing of seals for fashion is wrong it's hardly the biggest problem the world currently faces. It's disturbing enough even if maybe necessary to slaughter such animals industrially for foodquote> In fact, if the whole world went vegetarian there would be much more food for everyone, and with modern food stuffs like Quorn you can easily get the food stuffs you would otherwise get from meat.

On a side note: are you, nihonkaranws, a vegetarian?

It depends. I'm no expert on the matter, if these seals are an endangered species then it is wrong. If not, it is no different to hunting and killing any other animal. In many ways these seals have a better life than most animals that are kept for meat, where they will be kept in tiny cages and force-fed. Why not focus on, for example, pig farming. This is surely far more inhumane than seal-hunting, yet is accepted as common practice so no one really cares. I see on this website the slogan is 'Get angry for the right reasons'. Perhaps the right reasons to get angry is about the human rights abuses going on around the world rather than the minor, in proportion, issues of animals rights.

I'm having some rendering problems with this station, when I do a preview render it looks like this: But in game it looks like this: However I change the settings on the lights it always ends up extremely bright when I begin to render.

I'm having some rendering problems with the station, when I do a preview render it looks like this: But in game it looks like this:

neongamer: You got us there, the sneaky old Piccadilly bypass tactic. I do wish you would stop pedalling this stupid 'no rules' rumour though, if there weren't any rules how could it ever work? I propose a new game using great Shearman '96 opening... Camden Town.

Considering there's an 'r' in the month, Turnham Green would be valid move under amendment 57 at the March '86 convention. It does, however, Leave the District line vulnerable and allows me to move to Liverpool Street.

Originally posted by: tyhz being the country with the most population in the world could make it difficult for any government to prevent poverty and even if one do reduce poverty in the mojority of the population it would take time.quote> I don't see why this means Free Media is restricted, why it needs to block Internet Access? Perhaps china now have a quite sizeable middle-class, but that doesn't magically cancel out the millions who live under poverty and oppression.

Originally posted by: GingerBlokeyI will admit the stupid protesters wanting to stop the flame or put it out is wrong. The flame is not what needs to be stopped. The torch is the symbol of the Olympics.quote> I disagree. China is using the Torch Relay as a propaganda exercise and by allowing the torch to come to London we are supporting this. People who say that Politics shouldn't come into this are just being stupid, it's not about politics it's about Human rights. What is more important, a sport event or the lives of Chinese and Tibetan people? Because of the way China is using the Torch, it currently isn't the symbol for the Olympics, but a simple of oppression. China plans to take the torch through Tibet, to show its power over the area, it has become a political symbol.

From BBC News Scuffles mar Olympic torch relay Ex-Blue Peter presenter Konnie Huq surrounded by security. Torch grabbed Fifteen arrests have been made as clashes between pro-Tibet protesters and police marred the London Olympic torch parade on its 31-mile route. Protests started soon after rower Sir Steve Redgrave began the parade. Demonstrators tried to snatch the torch from ex-Blue Peter presenter Konnie Huq and a fire extinguisher was let off. And in a late change to the route, the Chinese ambassador carried the torch through Chinatown, after fears her presence could be a flashpoint. 'Wholly inappropriate' Gordon Brown has lifted the torch in Downing Street despite coming under pressure to boycott the parade and the Beijing Olympics opening ceremony. I do hope people recognise that this is actually a celebration of sport and Olympic values Lord Coe In pictures: Olympic Torch relay Ahead of the procession, Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg branded the prime minister's participati

ditto.

Dollis Hill.

I love them. I especially love the 1p coin, never again shall I leave my 1 penny change behind.

Indeed, perhaps Callbat has the '97 edition of the rules where I seem to remember the paragraph regarding Dorris Hill movement structure was mysteriously excluded. So now we must move to... Dollis Hill.

I can't wait to see this documentary, what with it entirely not being an April fools joke and all.

Oh my! this sure puts all your other updates to shame.

Angela Merkel, has announced she will not be attending the opening ceremony of the Olympics. From guardian.co.uk Merkel to boycott Olympic ceremony - German leader's decision at odds with Brown's view - Pressure grows for united EU stance on Tibet crisis The German chancellor, Angela Merkel, yesterday became the first world leader to decide not to attend the Olympics in Beijing. As pressure built for concerted western protests to China over the crackdown in Tibet, EU leaders prepared to discuss the crisis for the first time today, amid a rift over whether to boycott the Olympics. The disclosure that Germany is to stay away from the games' opening ceremonies in August could encourage President Nicolas Sarkozy of France to join in a gesture of defiance and complicate Gordon Brown's determination to attend the Olympics. Donald Tusk, Poland's prime minister, became the first EU head of government to announce a boycott on Thursday and he was promptly joined by President Václav Klaus of the Czech Republic, who had previously promised to travel to Beijing. "The presence of politicians at the inauguration of the Olympics seems inappropriate," Tusk said. "I do not intend to take part." Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Germany's foreign minister, confirmed that Merkel was staying away. He added that neither he nor Wolfgang Schäuble, the interior minister responsible for sport, would attend the opening ceremony. Hans-Gert Pöttering, the politician from Merkel's Christian Democratic party who chairs the European parliament, encouraged talk of an Olympic boycott this week and invited the Dalai Lama to address the chamber in Strasbourg, while another senior German Christian Democrat, Ruprecht Polenz, said a boycott should remain on the table. "I cannot imagine German politicians attending the opening or closing ceremonies [if the Tibetan crackdown continued]," he said. Merkel enraged the Chinese leadership a few months ago by receiving the Dalai Lama in Berlin for private talks. Brown is to meet the Tibetan spiritual leader when he visits Britain in May, but is determined to be in Beijing. "We are fully engaged in supporting the Olympics," said David Miliband, the foreign secretary. "We want to see it as a success, and I think it's right that the prime minister represents us." While announcing that German leaders were staying away from Beijing, Steinmeier denied they were boycotting or staging a political protest against the Chinese military and police campaign in Tibet and surrounding areas. While expressing scepticism about a complete boycott, he did not rule one out. "This is not the right moment to talk about a boycott ... We should watch how the Chinese government deals with the situation in the next weeks and months." If Merkel and others do not attend the opening ceremony, it is likely to reinforce a growing sense in China that the Olympics is being used to vilify the host. China had hoped to use the games to highlight its economic development and growing openness. But it is increasingly proving an opportunity for critics to bash China's one-party political system, human rights abuses, treatment of minorities and tightly controlled media. The Tibet crisis has been pushed on to the agenda of a meeting of European foreign ministers in Slovenia, with the French, who will be presiding over the EU during the Olympics, calling for a team of European officials to be dispatc

Originally posted by: Simfan34 Why don't we just BAN smoking? quote> I fully support any measures to make cigarettes less easily available. However to ban them completely would the worst possible move to take. By banning the sale of cigarettes it would be pushed them into the hands on criminals, which would bring along the other problems such was crime that come along with illegal drugs. It would also make them more dangerous as there would cigarettes would no longer be regulated.quote>

Originally posted by: Frankie_Grove Wow...well figures a sensitive issue such as this explodes into 2 pages in so little of time. Everyone knows Iraq and Saddam had WMD's, no informed person would deny that. The false pretenses were that there were WMD's that needed to be dismantled. However, nothing has been found. But then again, Saddam knew the US would invade, so who's to say he didn't just have them sent away or hidden? quote> Is this some new military tactic? "They're invading, lets quickly destroy all our weapons!"

Originally posted by: belfastuniguy Though I would support a total ban on the sale of cigarettes, but that is a good many years ago I believe. quote> I fully support any measures to make cigarettes less easily available. However to ban them completely would the worst possible move to take. By banning the sale of cigarettes it would be pushed them into the hands on criminals, which would bring along the other problems such was crime that come along with illegal drugs. It would also make them more dangerous as there would cigarettes would no longer be regulated. Why not make a ban on tobacco and alcohol advertisments that are targeted at kids and teenagers? Now that would greatly decrease the amount of people wanting to smoke.quote> I'm pretty sure all taboacco advertisments have been banned outright already.

Hendrix, of course.