Meat: A Benign Extravagance

[Alison Banville]

Richard wrote:

exactly. it's sickening to see ad-hominem attacks but this one is
plain embarrassing as it goes after the wrong man!

re the book: can i find it in a Glastonbury bookshop? as a pragmatic
non-meat-eater, rather than an ideological vegetarian, i want to read
it

Tony Wardle's article was posted by me on this list, not by him, and it was 
written as a direct response to George Monbiot's Guardian piece about Fairlie's 
book. The reason for posting was that it deals specifically, and in detail, with 
all of Fairlie's claims - point by point!  The mainstream media ignored it which 
is why I and others are posting it far and wide. 


But it's interesting how someone can read the piece and completely ignore that 
detail - fascinating. We truly see only what we want to see. And Richard is 
particluarly confused because the 'ad hominem' part I think he is referring to 
is actually Wardle summing up the criticism Monbiot has received from the media 
before he then goes on to praise George for his good works. Tony then goes on to 
dissect Fairlie's 'facts' one by one. Not interested in that Richard? Why not? 


Sickening' is a strong word isn't it? I find a lot of things in this world 
'sickening' I must say, but someone answering, quite legitimately, claims that 
are entirely questionable, as he is perfectly entitled to do while we still have 
a vestige of free speech, is not one of them. I would, however use that word 
without hesitation to describe the treatment of sentient animals in farming. I 
love Richard's description of himself as a 'pragmatic non-meat-eater rather than 
an ideological vegetarian'. Lol! Sounds like a fancy way of saying he doesn't 
give a toss about the suffering of farm animals. 


As US journalist Matthew Scully put it when answering the Los Angeles Times' 
food critic David Shaw, who was having a tantrum caused by animal activists' 
protests: 'it is not fanatical or ill mannered to point it (the cruelty) out, 
but a frank acknowledgment of the moral costs....Critics like Mr. Shaw want us 
to take a hard, unsentimental view of animals. They never seem to take a hard, 
unsentimental look at themselves and the demands they place upon the humble 
animals. Hence this sniveling -  as if his pleasure is everything and their 
suffering nothing.' 


If you want 'sickening' watch this undercover footage of British slaugherhouses 
- that's where organically raised animals still end up: 
http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/f/CAMPAIGNS/blog//4//?be_id=268