RugbyRebels

OptimisticJock wrote:My Wi-Fi reaches the shitter.

Anyway, I personally see a big difference between eating other mammals and eating birds and fish. So I don't think we can say that's hypocrisy. But in a perfect world, yes, we wouldn't eat any other animals at all



Weak.

I think there is a bigger difference between eating mammals and eating birds and fish, in fact, than there is between eating dogs and cats and devouring farm mammals. So the degree of hypocrisy there is certainly less than Westerners who are all aghast at East Asian gastronomy while contentedly butchering millions of cows, sheep and pigs every day (often in the most barbaric manner).

dress it up however you want buddy.

rowan wrote: Trivia of the day: Beer and wine are not vegetarian as they are strained through fish fat. Sorry if that ruined anyone's day...

Anything presented as 'trivia' that is actually codswallop.
Isinglass finings is collagen based and derived from dried fish swim-bladders.Due to it's charged nature it promotes flocculation of yeast that then sediments more readilly allowing the clarified beverage to be processed - possibly with additional filtration, often involving earth sourced powders.
No fat based straining here..

rowan wrote: Trivia of the day: Beer and wine are not vegetarian as they are strained through fish fat. Sorry if that ruined anyone's day...

Doesn't bother me at all, since I'm a non-drinker as well

Coco wrote:

rowan wrote:

Coco wrote:
Some men like their woman to "wear the pants"... Get over it already.

You need to pull your head out of your vagina.

After you. Ladies first. Go on

HaHa! The sand in his might chafe his ears.

How about people who walk with those silly ' ski's ' ? One in each hand . They walk past you without making eye contact as they are far too busy ' walking ' . How did we ever get anywhere before someone came up with the idea of two walking sticks for able bodied people .

I'm assuming that these sticks eventually end up on garage shelves or as a support for runner beans .

Discreet Hooker wrote:How about people who walk with those silly ' ski's ' ? One in each hand . They walk past you without making eye contact as they are far too busy ' walking ' . How did we ever get anywhere before someone came up with the idea of two walking sticks for able bodied people .

I'm assuming that these sticks eventually end up on garage shelves or as a support for runner beans .

Nordic walking, I believe it's called. They sell you a full body suit, special shoes and a couple of sticks, all at exorbitant prices, I'm guessing, so that you can, er, walk . . .

My gym back in NZ use to have 'walking sessions' where they took everyone out walking through the evening rush hour traffic and distributed free T-shirts with te gym's name on them for the purpose. Talk about an obvious marketing ploy Personally I never saw the point as I walked home every night anyway...

People who actually have time between defecating and urinating!

Anyone who goes to take a dump and leaves the dunny with unfinished business is simply wasting time and effort that could be more usefully employed in slagging Rowan off. Its not like he doesn't need it.

rowan wrote: Anyway, I personally see a big difference between eating other mammals and eating birds and fish.

I agree. You have to pack birds with stuff to make them taste of anything and fish needs to be either deep fried in a good batter or dipped in a fiery pot of wasabi and soy sauce to stop it tasting of snot. Conversely, the flesh of mammals needs a real effort to make it taste anything but delicious.

Of course, eating loads of mammal meat means that you have to spend a lot of time defecating, which means less time slagging off Rowan.

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:People who actually have time between defecating and urinating!

Anyone who goes to take a dump and leaves the dunny with unfinished business is simply wasting time and effort that could be more usefully employed in slagging Rowan off. Its not like he doesn't need it.

Sure, talking about Nordic walking in my last post. Highly inflammatory topic...

Nothing to do with your own fragile egoes and inability to accept views which conflict with the indoctrination you've received...

Brilliant! We have views and they're the result of indoctrination, whereas your views are presumably the fruits of divine inspiration?

You remind me of the Westboro Baptists. Are you the risen Fred Phelps!?!?

But I'm not the one who is obsessed with taking potshots in response to perfectly harmless posts,between defecating and urinating, of course . . .

That kind of behaviour is based on narrow-mindedness and a fragile ego.

morepork wrote:

Coco wrote:

rowan wrote:
You need to pull your head out of your vagina.

After you. Ladies first. Go on

HaHa! The sand in his might chafe his ears.

Surely in this analogy Rowan would be the sand?

Toxic masochism !

Lots on here ~ apparently !

Expression of the day .

rowan wrote:But I'm not the one who is obsessed with taking potshots in response to perfectly harmless posts,between defecating and urinating, of course . . .

That kind of behaviour is based on narrow-mindedness and a fragile ego.

Just checked and the last 'potshot' I took at you was back on 26 September and it was more a factual comment on a point of inaccurate etymology. I hardly think that one potshot in 4 weeks constitutes obsessive behaviour on my part. Could it be a collective obsession that you refer to, based on the fact that you have been the target of several potshots in that time, albeit from several snipers?

Would such a misplaced belief not constitute a degree of paranoia which would tend to sit well with your maniacal and judgemental belief that, despite all evidence to the contrary, you alone among the posters on this board have a view of any worth.

No?

rowan wrote:Especially when applied to soldiers who have been on duty in imperialist wars. Nothing less heroic.

Well in that case, this soldier does not believe himself to be a hero of any shape or form but has served alongside many that he does consider to be heroic and many who have paid the ultimate price for putting themselves in harms way to protect others. This soldier is quite clear in his conviction that you are a pointless cunt.

I would dearly love to stand in front of you and tell you this to your face. I wonder if you would be as willing to make the comment you posted on this thread at 19:47 two days ago (September 19th) under similar conditions?

My ego is fine, you wank-stain.

I'll haud yer jaiket (and rifle the pockets).


On a serious note, I agree with having serving alongside a couple of heros it's just this constant fawning over the folk I've mentioned.

Rather proves my point, doesn't he

Having a dig at a belter on the internet doesn't prove your point at all. If you're going to act like a belter you'll be called out for it. You can play the victim all you want but it's nothing more than that.

OptimisticJock wrote:Having a dig at a belter on the internet doesn't prove your point at all. If you're going to act like a belter you'll be called out for it. You can play the victim all you want but it's nothing more than that.

I agree, Jock. Sarge really needs to sort himself out.

True story.

OptimisticJock wrote:Having a dig at a belter on the internet doesn't prove your point at all. If you're going to act like a belter you'll be called out for it. You can play the victim all you want but it's nothing more than that.

Point of order! Can I be clear that you are using 'Belter' in its Dundonian meaning and not its South African?

Not that I'm averse to having a dig at some Bokke totty's blurt.

Jesus christ just shoot it, put it out of it's misery.

rowan wrote:Ripped jeans. Seriously people !

You wouldn't catch me running about in a pair of those anyway...

rowan wrote:

rowan wrote:Ripped jeans. Seriously people !

You wouldn't catch me running about in a pair of those anyway...

No, but I am sure you will repost the picture every time you go back to it for a sneaky tug.

Coco wrote:

rowan wrote:

rowan wrote:Ripped jeans. Seriously people !

You wouldn't catch me running about in a pair of those anyway...

No, but I am sure you will repost the picture every time you go back to it for a sneaky tug.

This, picture, you mean?