digg

Join DiggAbout

Call for questions
Submit and vote up questions you'd like to see answered by Kevin & Jay at the next Digg Townhall on 11/18.

"Noah's Ark" of 5,000 Rare Animals Found off Chinese Coast

guardian.co.uk — Another story to encourage vegetarianism: great ship filled with endangered animals, whose fate was to have been being eaten by the Chinese (the only nation on the earth more inclined than the French to kill and eat any creature that creeps, crawls or flies). Abused and then abandoned by an inhumane group of humans.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Fallout911, on 10/11/2007, -97/+39***** heartless backwards pieces of *****.
    And we still deal with these ***** people.
    • penchant, on 10/11/2007, -67/+32To be fair, it is a cultural thing...(they honestly believe the pangolin scales are beneficial to mothers breastfeeding)... and they're also a communist country, with hundreds of people below the poverty line. The last thing they are thinking about are endangered species... they're thinking about eating, and making some money so they can feed their kids (said restaurant owners/smugglers).

      As china's economy rises, they'll be able to spend more money on species preservation- it's ridiculous to think they can spare that money now.
    • blogger1947, on 10/11/2007, -82/+29Yeah, it's a "cultural thing." They are BARBARIANS.
    • blogger1947, on 10/11/2007, -109/+8@penchant: There is no cost to doing "species preservation" by not eating endangered critters. Where is the outcry from PETA and the other effete US tree huggers?

      This is a great example why Bush was right not to sign the Kyoto accords.
    • blogger1947, on 10/11/2007, -79/+13@alphabet: YES, it's quite related to the Kyoto accords. The notion being that we should not agree to a treaty that holds us to different standards than the other parties. My point being that these third-world toilets are quite willing to ask us to make sacrifices they are not willing to make. And that we are foolish if we agree to it.

      BTW, my guess is that if PETA showed up in Beijing, they'd be arrested.

      And what does the World Wresltling Federation care?
    • vertinox, on 10/11/2007, -10/+65Look.

      Given the option to make a profit, I'm sure there are plenty of scumbag Americans who would do the same thing.

      I'm sure Kenneth Lay would have used his employees pensions to eat a few of these animals himself if he were still alive. The fact of the matter is that there are evil assholes world wide.

      Its not just a Chinese thing.
    • vertinox, on 10/11/2007, -5/+27@blogger1947 "And what does the World Wresltling Federation care?"

      Eh... Well the World Wrestling Federation is just hurting for their logo back...

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Fund_for_Nature#Abbreviation_dispute
    • 0zzy, on 10/11/2007, -24/+5Only in America would someone be this f'd up!

      erm... China.
    • Scheissen, on 10/11/2007, -16/+58Stop using the ***** "it's their culture" excuse. That is no excuse for cruelty.
    • Prosequi, on 10/11/2007, -2/+34@penchant

      The cause is decidedly not poverty in China if the people doing the harvesting are outside of China and the Chinese are paying "the price of 1kg of pangolin served in Guangdong or Yunnan is between 600 and 800 yuan per kilogram (between £43 and £50)."


    • spargett, on 10/11/2007, -36/+7Everyone hates the the Chinese. Its true, they're complete bastards.
    • rarson, on 10/11/2007, -3/+30Wow, blogger1947, you really have no clue of what you're talking about, do you?
    • krebcycle, on 10/11/2007, -0/+24My favorite part of the article:
      Usually the customers take the blood home with them afterwards.

      Mmm raw armadillo blood I can use at home at any point to make my own medicines and soups!
    • M0nkeyBoy, on 10/11/2007, -15/+14You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. I sincerely hope you're a tree-hugging, nature-boy, vegan.

      Whilst you go around condemning other people on their eating habits, take a look at the "civilised" Western world and criticise the way they keep chickens for consumption, battery farms for eggs, milk cows - for example.

      You people, with your double-standards, are the people I despise the most.

      Think before you write stupid, hypocritical generalisations.


    • krebcycle, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5There I was happy thinking I was a mixed metaphor, turns out I'm a hypocritical generalisation. Life can be so confusing.

      Well, guess I'll go back to my job smuggling 5000 animals of endangered species on cargo ships so some Chinese people can eat exotic meat. Little different than buying a steak at the grocery store, wouldn't you say? Try this on for size. STFU.
    • themastersb, on 10/11/2007, -8/+2Pics or it didn't happen.
    • edz0nk, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7@blogger1947

      Congratulations, it is usually pretty hard to convey that you are completely ignorant and stupid in just a few lines of text
      (without trying to that is).
      You did a great job however!

      Going to check out your blog now (http://blogger1947.blog-city.com/)
      please let it be as funny as I imagine.
    • datagod, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1"The accidental discovery highlights the negative impact that the growing power of Chinese consumption is having on global conservation efforts."

      Chinese consumption takes on new meaning...especially if you are a monitor lizard.
    • OGTL, on 10/11/2007, -23/+8I hate the ***** chinese.. ME POP OUT BABY!! ME NO HOW STOP!
    • rarson, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10And the award for "Most Racist Comment" goes to... OGTL! Congratulations!
    • mike17032, on 10/11/2007, -8/+1"There are many, many groups such as PETA, WWF, Greenpeace, etc. who are trying to lobby for the protection of animals in China."

      To bad all of those groups are terrorist organization that no one in their right mind takes seriously. They should be tossed in jail like the criminals that they are.
    • elsJake, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10@Achalemoipas:

      [quote]
      Oh it's a cultural thing, you mean like racism and sexism? Definitely acceptable if it's a culture thing. In my culture, we eat live babies. But it's ok, it's a culture thing.
      [/quote]

      In Islamic parts of the world it's unacceptable to drink alcohol but it's acceptable to beat up your wife. So according to them you're doing something horrible . Acording to you they're doing something horrible.Neither of you is "right" yet both of you are. That's a "cultural thing".
      But WAIT , beating someone up is NOT the same as DRINKING you might say. Well you seam to compare eating babies with eating animals ... that ain't exactly the same thing either.

      so...
      If I'm right...I'm right!
      But if I'm wrong ... you're wrong too and I'm right again!

      Do i win the internets now ? (or at least some tubes ?)
    • shuck, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@mike
      I'm guessing one of those groups stopped you from drilling for oil in a national park or hunting bald eagles. I can see how that is terrorism!!
    • 883XL, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17 I really can't help but feel a bit uneasy at how readily some people jump on this "F*** China F*** the Chinese" bandwagon. It seems that almost every week there is an article on digg exposing the barbarianism of China and its people.
      Being Chinese myself, I'm disgusted at the people who so quickly point their fingers at china as a brutish country, yet overlook actions of other countries such as Japanese whaling. NOT every Asian person eats these things nor condones the eating of them.
      Is justifiable to hate an entire population based on what the people eat? With the amount of beef we consume, I wonder what India thinks of us?
    • kmckanna, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3So let's go Liberate these animals and get em to safety!
    • zachlutz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4If this article weren't so important, I'd be inclined to bury the posting for the blatant racism in the article description. Yes, whoever is responsible for this are heartless, senseless assholes. It's important that this incident be known, but is no excuse for blaming an entire race of people. Anyway...dugg up.
    • blogger1947, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2@Achelowhatchamacallit: Yes, I understand perfectly what the Kyoto accords are about. And do you understand that when I wrote, "My point being that these third-world toilets are quite willing to ask us to make sacrifices they are not willing to make," that was a deliberately broad statement.

      If you can't make the connection, I don't know what to say that would clarify it.

      Apparently I am the only person here who is past middle school...
    • Reedan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0"I really can't help but feel a bit uneasy at how readily some people jump on this "F*** China F*** the Chinese" bandwagon."

      Heh, try being an American. Replace China with "America" and Chinese with "Americans" and you have your daily digg headlines. You get used to it after a while.

      "It seems that almost every week there is an article on digg exposing the barbarianism of China and its people."

      Again, there are daily articles dealing with how much people hate America and Bush on here. You learn to deal with it. Not everyone likes you or your country.
    • nemobushido, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3"Heh, try being an American. Replace China with "America" and Chinese with "Americans" and you have your daily digg headlines. You get used to it after a while."

      Getting used to it solves nothing. Desensitization is the whole reason we're okay with the continuation of race related hate.

      "Again, there are daily articles dealing with how much people hate America and Bush on here. You learn to deal with it. Not everyone likes you or your country."

      The Anti-American articles are different. They're not anti-race, they're anti-country.
    • grazny, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1those manipulative humans..
  • spideyman, on 10/11/2007, -16/+24I understand that this is a 'cultural thing' but it is disturbing. So many US manufacturing jobs are lost to a county that supports this kind of thing just plain sucks. Plus, the fact that this sleeping giant will more than likely someday come kick our asses....just wish that people would open their eyes and see it!!!
    • carpespasm, on 10/11/2007, -14/+19well, china has a much much higher amount of the world population than the US, they could probably kick our asses anyway if they needed to, right now they're just happy trying to outdo our asses.
    • knomevol, on 10/11/2007, -15/+8we should send bush to china. he'd fit right in.

      he's got the heart for inhumanity. he's got a passion for communistic style dictatorships.
    • ynggrsshppr, on 10/11/2007, -2/+36I think it is a cultural thing for some parts of the population, but realize Chinese culture is extremely diverse. Just look at how many dialects we have. Yes I'm Chinese, and no I don't eat sea turtles for longevity/health. I think it is a needless waste of these creatures, but for the people crying cruelty just look at what American mega farms do to their animals. What is the difference, one is endangered? Or maybe because Americans aren't used to thinking about these animals as food because they're the kind of animals in American zoos? It isn't as bad as some people make it out to be, especially the Guardian, I noticed they like to print up anti-Chinese propaganda pieces for some reason.
    • widman, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5@ynggrsshppr

      The Guardian is one of the most respectable publications in the world. They don't hide their position like the Murdoch owned right wing bunch so you know where it's coming from. The Guardian doesn't do it on an agenda like the other publications and you can see that because they would never change course on a subject (compare with the same kind of articles from The Times or Fox News.)

      China has a lot of problems to fix. In fact it's government is left barely criticized for things like the Tianmen Square massacre just out of scare or business interests. And it's not just from the Murdochs, but most media is addicted to advertisement money and that is controlled by groups that manufacture a lot of things in China.

      But sure, they should report more about human rights before animal rights. Unless you are a PETA freak terrorist wako.
    • mike17032, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3"well, china has a much much higher amount of the world population than the US, they could probably kick our asses anyway if they needed to, right now they're just happy trying to outdo our asses."

      No, they couldnt. Dont belive the fear mongering. We spend a gizillion times more than they do on our military, and ours is in fact slighlty larger last I checked. Ours is vastly better equiped, and we have a ton more resources to put into it. And unlike our population, most of theirs is unarmed and have never fired a gun.

      Invading and taking over mainland china would be a massive bitch, but they are definalty no major threat to us. Any offensive action against us would be crushed.
    • 5555, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10@mike

      You sincerely think the US could 'take over' China? Are you dillusional or just stupid? Your military can't handle a country with a few pockets of insurgents, yet you're going to take on the country with the world's largest army? Not to mention the fact that the second you tried anything with China you would have Russia and North Korea on your ass (laugh at North Korea all you want, but they've got a million soldiers at the ready and have been waiting for you to come to their doorstep for over 40 years). But it's not like the US has the balls to attack any nation that can defend itself anyway so the argument is moot.
    • judgesuds, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@ynggrsshppr
      I totally agree with you. Mass farming methods in the western world are disgusting, and people show moral outrage at the exploitation of endangered species. Mistreating a cow or a pig doesn't hurt it less because there are more of them, I really think people should gain perspective. The extinction of animals through hunting for food should cause no more or less *moral* outrage than the killing of farmed cattle. The over hunting of animals leading to extinction or decline of species should only affect us more than farming, in terms of scientific or aesthetic value, any moral priority given to animals from rare species is entirely misplaced and sentimental,.
    • ZenMasterJG, on 10/11/2007, -1/+25555:
      "Your military can't handle a country with a few pockets of insurgents, yet you're going to take on the country with the world's largest army?"
      I don't know exactly why we're discussing this, but there's a huge difference between occupation and conquest. In Iraq, we have no distinct enemy, as it could be anyone. You basically can't win against guerrilla tactics in this kind of conflict. Big difference from an actual war, fighting an actual army, where you can bomb the crap out of industrial centers, shoot anything that moves, etc, etc. Thats the only kind of war you can "win".

      'course, if the entire world could stop acting like cavemen for 15 goddamn minutes, and agree to go back to their caves and leave each other alone...
    • thefaithful, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1China won't have to defeat the US militarily. China will simply own the US outright.
  • mishabear, on 10/11/2007, -22/+7And who started it? The Republicans. All our manufacturing has been outsourced to China now so corporations can make more profits. And those jobs you USED to have are over there now. Stop whining about the immigrants taking your jobs. Your jobs LEFT THE COUNTRY thanks to the right wing.
    • EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14I think both parties have been to blame. But it's fair to say Nixon paved the way for economic ties, without requiring China to improve it's brutal policies first. That's not to say they're alone in state-supported brutality. But this isn't a left/right thing.
    • shad0w, on 10/11/2007, -3/+18That's right, blame the republicans for outsourcing. Globalization and outsourcing is inevitable. There is nothing here to blame but capitalism and technology, and there is little that can be done to "stop" outsourcing. We're entering an age of a highly competitive global market, and the fact is that americans can't expect to have everything handed to them. Americans will actually have to start working hard again. What a scary thought.
  • sronbheatha, on 10/11/2007, -3/+75@blogger1947
    "They are BARBARIANS."
    No they're not. They built a wall to keep those eople out.
    • blogger1947, on 10/11/2007, -14/+7ROFL
    • knelto, on 10/11/2007, -9/+33Gahdamn Mongorians! That's the last time you gonna break down my schitty wall!
    • EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -9/+12I'd read the wall was more to keep the Chinese peasants _in_. I don't have the time to find a link right now. But it always seemed that a determined enemy could pretty easily scale that wall.

      It's kind of like DRM. It doesn't deter the real pirates, just the ordinary citizens.
    • Comatose51, on 10/11/2007, -0/+19No. The wall was originally built not to stop all nomadic invasions but to make it impossible for them to cross over into China with their horses. People can scale walls, horses can't. The Chinese military always had a problem dealing with against good nomadic cavalry. China had a ton of soldiers with good equipment, etc. but they weren't very good at riding. Early in the Hans dynasty they started breeding more horses but since the Chinese don't ride nearly as much as the more nomadic people, they were generally at a disadvantage when it came to cavalry battles. The nomads can strike at any time even though the Chinese army was stronger, they lack the initiative. The wall was there to slow them down and prevent them from roaming the country with their horses. In addition to soldiers they also employed a system of smoke signals that was extremely fast (think LoTR: Return of the King type deal). Once you take that into account, you realize what their strategy was: slow down the nomadic invaders, signal to the army where they are, and wait for reinforcement.
    • agimat, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3[ "They are BARBARIANS."
      No they're not. They built a wall to keep those eople out. ]

      Apparently they managed only to lock them in.

  • sofaKing812, on 10/11/2007, -12/+4I got excited when I read the title because I thought they found Noah's Ark (assuming it really existed). Oh well, enjoy your debate over the Chinese.
    • knomevol, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2we found dinosaur bones too. but we all know satan planted them into the ground to try and fool us into thinking the bible isn't real. (AHAHAHA!)

      president bush! president bush! you've taken more of our liberty away than al quaeda could ever have!
  • swavalier711, on 10/11/2007, -8/+17China is above criticism. If we say one word against them they drop everything from us and walk away.

    They have us on a ***** leash, guys. They can yank and tear the hell out of our system but they are untouchable.
    • knomevol, on 10/11/2007, -11/+1they have a soft spot, and it will become soon enough apparent.

      then we'll spear that inhumane beast and free the repressed.
    • krebcycle, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6That's completely untrue, everyone on Digg keeps saying we owe China money, they control our economy, etc. We do not owe them any money. They have invested in us mortgage hedge funds as well as lots of dollar based securities. If they sell those, yes, our currency will fall, is it is falling right now because they're buying Euros instead (although their holding onto the hedge funds). They need us as much as we need them, if not more. We're their biggest customer; if our economy crashes they have nobody to buy their goods.
    • mike17032, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2What a stupid statement. China cant walk away from us in a million years. Their entire economy is based off selling things to us. The rest of the 3rd world would line up to replace them as a huge supplier of our goods if we stopped bying from them. It might not be super smooth for a few months, but we would be fine.

      There is no other country in the world that can replace the US as the buyer for Chinas goods. They need us, we dont need them.
  • 3uster, on 10/11/2007, -22/+29You call it inhumane, I call it delicious.
    • rald84, on 10/11/2007, -11/+13mmm ... endangered species ... ::drools::

      /homer
    • ragsmaloy, on 10/11/2007, -10/+19They wouldn't be endangered if they weren't so darned tasty
    • Akronos, on 10/11/2007, -6/+6Yeah... I love it when I can taste the agony the animals must have felt. It certainly kicks up the flavor another notch. And blood.... mmmm... I'm salivating at the thought of it. Those slit throats and hammered brains... truly delicious. Especially if you can see the markings of the hammer on the animal... now that really gives me a gustatory orgasm.

      [/sarcasm for those of you who didn't get it]
    • Drukas, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3@Akronos

      Because I'm curious how would you have them killed then? Arrow to the heart? Bullet to the head? Lethal injection? Sedated them then have the blood drained? Poison Gas? Electrocution? Death by fire? Dehydration? Starvation? Man made disease? Beheading? Drowning? Genetically engineer them to die when exposed to a certain compound? I mean please tell me what is the most appropriate way for me, a omnivore, to kill a animal so I may intake meat which is a natural part of my diet?
    • Anthem26, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"Yeah... I love it when I can taste the agony the animals must have felt. It certainly kicks up the flavor another notch. And blood.... mmmm... I'm salivating at the thought of it. Those slit throats and hammered brains... truly delicious. Especially if you can see the markings of the hammer on the animal... now that really gives me a gustatory orgasm."

      ...then you must like eating Kentucky Fried Chicken

      [/sarcasm for those of you who didn't get it]
  • kurtwinter, on 10/11/2007, -5/+32Cultural Relativism is total *****. There is an area where ethics and morals intersect and at this place, cultural relativism has no meaning. Honor killings, genital mutilation, slavery, and ***** like this. Destruction of an entire species because backwards superstitions rule a society is unacceptable.
    • penchant, on 10/11/2007, -4/+12It's very easy to call the chinese superstitions backwards from an educated western point of view. And try explaining ethics and morals about "conserving species" to starving people below the poverty line who want to make money to educate their kids with fine western values.

      Here's the flip side of evolution (I'm going to play devil's advocate because this seems to be a completely one sided discussion!); don't be mad about the chinese, we should be mad at ourselves as a species. It's what we do as a natural predator. Plenty of animals have evolved to live with us....and those that we drove to extinction because of our cunning, greed, or hunger perished because they couldn't survive, they couldn't adapt. When we set up conservation parks, we are working against evolution.

      Instead of trying to save species from ourselves, we should be more concerned with changing the way we impact the planet, or else our efforts are just wasted.
    • penchant, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Edit:
      Er, make that eastern*
      I'm European and tend to refer to America as western*
    • staffrocket, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6genital mutilation = circumcision
    • BGFeltenink, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Dugg you down for being a rabid idiot Mike. Evolution is as much a fact as it can scientifically be and if you can't accept that then you're not worthy of being in any debate. People like you believe in fairy tales and superstitions which means that ANYTHING you say absolutely worthless.

      Bye now.
    • Akronos, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2I don't think the effects of industrialization were taken into account by evolution. Honestly, in the society we live in, most people do not ever see the original source of their food. It just ends up in their plates. When you kill an animal with your bare hands, you have every right to eat it. But to say that the mass slaughter of animals and the extinction of species is justified because it shows natural selection is completely ridiculous.
  • RyanChappell, on 10/11/2007, -12/+4Kind of ironic that Al Gore gave them missile technology, when they are so detrimental to his environment.
    • rald84, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7nukes don't nuke environments, crazy governments nuke environments.
    • RyanChappell, on 10/11/2007, -7/+3Kind of ironic that Al Gore gave them missile technology, when the CHINESE are so detrimental to his environment.
    • blackjack75, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Missiles kill men, who would have hurt the environment. So increasing the probability of men getting killed actually is helping the planet, which in turn would make it easier for men to live. My point is... totally pointless.
    • BGFeltenink, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3His environment eh? You don't ***** live here? It's everyone's god damned planet and you're the biggest ***** idiot on it if you think we shouldn't do something about keeping natural habitats alive.
  • gojeda, on 10/11/2007, -6/+24Sad story, but buried for your meaningless remark about vegetarianism.
    • seangp, on 10/11/2007, -1/+20I don't think it's meaningless - I grew up in Hong Kong and what I saw in the live food markets there turned me vegetarian.
    • widman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11I'm vegetarian and I hate this terrible propaganda. If I were to convert people to vegetarianism I'd talk about forcing to kill and prepare at least a tenth of the animals they eat. What I hate is the hypocrisy of wanting to feel in a cotton cocoon of ignorance of what happens before you get your meal. Or another angle would be to make people visit the places where the livestock is handled and killed, even the ones who don't care about that would think twice eating next time due to the unhealthy conditions that are accepted (thanks to that denial.)

      Please, don't become a vegetarian because of what people say. But please, choose what you want and don't be a hypocrite wimp.
    • mike17032, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I have seen all the PETA propagnada meat packing movies. All they did was make me really, really hungry.
    • gojeda, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"I'm vegetarian and I hate this terrible propaganda. If I were to convert people to vegetarianism I'd talk about forcing to kill and prepare at least a tenth of the animals they eat."

      Again, meaningless....

      The only reason why we do not kill what we eat these days is because, in a mass production economy like ours, that would be highly impractical and inefficient. If we were around in the 1700s, we would kill what we eat.

      "What I hate is the hypocrisy of wanting to feel in a cotton cocoon of ignorance of what happens before you get your meal. Or another angle would be to make people visit the places where the livestock is handled and killed, even the ones who don't care about that would think twice eating next time due to the unhealthy conditions that are accepted (thanks to that denial.)"

      Unhealthy food production techniques are not just limited to animal meat production. Do I have to remind you about the recent E.coli issues in lettuce lately?
  • Urusai, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2I'm not sure how a country of superstitious peasants has managed to become an industrial power. You'd think they would be too busy adjusting the feng shui, sacrificing chickens, and eating tiger penis to be able to do any work.
    • iamawesome, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7You've obviously never been to China. It isn't just "superstitious peasants". There's a lot of businessmen and people that work in offices. Actually, I think the number of professionals greatly outnumbers the number of peasants.

      Also, on a side note, why is eating things like chicken, fish, and cows considered fine but things like turtles and lizards isn't. It's not like murdering one animal and devouring its flesh is morally better than doing the same to another because the second one is "cuter". They are all animals and enjoying one is the same as enjoying another.
  • Eryin, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9How does one feed 1,321,851,888 people
  • Prod1gy, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5Just because another country of sick people abused some animals, that means i shouldn't eat meat? I'm wrong for not being a vegeterian?
    Becoming a vegeterian doesn't do *****. *cough* PETA *cough*

    Regardless of the amount of people who don't eat meat, animals will still be continued to be eaten all over the world, and abused.
    • xspinkickx, on 10/11/2007, -4/+12Actually it does make a difference....I am a veg(etari)an for my own personal reasons, I think its wrong for *ME* to eat meat, they way I look at it, me not eating meat saves probably 100 or so animals that I would of eaten in a year, I am sure that number is higher, considering I ate a lot of meat way back when. Thats good enough for me, for everyone else, I could care less but I am not gonna lie if the rest of the world was vegetarian I would be happier, its not gonna happen any time soon, but please do not lump all of us veg(etari)ans in the same category.
    • seangp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9I guess there's no point in voting then either if my 1 vote won't make a difference.
    • blackjack75, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7"they way I look at it, me not eating meat saves probably 100 or so animals that I would of eaten in a year"

      Unless you are eating animals you hunt from the nearby forest, you're not saving anything.

      If there was no demand, those animals would not exist in the first place. You don't "save" them. You just avoid them the unpleasantness of being created then eaten.
    • Akronos, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3But Blackjack, he (and I, and other vegetarians) is (are) reducing the demand for those animals. One person may not have much of an impact. But together, many will. I have stopped eating meat for 10 years, since when I saw an animal being killed right in front of me. Now my family still buys meat, but it is not even close to how much we used to eat before. My family used to eat meat daily. Now it is weekly. I don't think I need to explain supply and demand to you, since you probably understand it. So you should be able to see, how over time, being vegetarian will reduce demand.
    • Prod1gy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Exactly blackjack75. Just because you don't eat meat, doesn't mean a butcher isn't going to slaughter an animal. There is a high demand for meat, there always has been, and there always will be.
    • Tzetzes, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1"animals will still be continued to be eaten all over the world, and abused"

      Not by me, they won't.
  • TheGreatZarquon, on 10/11/2007, -23/+24Why should we try and ram our viewpoint down other people's throats? What if China told you that eating plants was a bad thing, and then started a zillion lobby-groups to stop vegetarians from eating vegetables? We shouldn't force a country to stop doing things they've been doing for thousands of years because a few hippies have a problem with it.

    I absolutely HATE those organizations like Greenpeace and PETA. They're a bunch of self-righteous asshats who think that everyone who eats a steak should go to hell. Well, I'm going to go grill a steak in their honor.
    • rald84, on 10/11/2007, -13/+9+1 for PETA bash
    • dementedd, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2I logged on to vote you up. Please enjoy your delicious, delicious steak.
    • Ricapar, on 10/11/2007, -8/+6I'm a strong supporter of PETA. That is, People for the Eating of Tasty Animals.
    • widman, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9STFU vegetarians are not PETA. That's a sick group of people from a place full of those kind of groups.
    • KitchenRaider, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8Plants aren't ENDANGERED.
    • enderu, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1If they want to raise local populations of these creatures, fine. The problem is that if this keeps up they won't have any more delicacies to eat, so clearly this isn't being thought through.

      What if it's some nation's culture to eat bald eagles. By your logic we wouldn't even have a right to complain about it were they to sneak into our country and start illegally exporting them for tasty, tasty soup. After all, who are we to infringe upon their destructive culture?
    • Tzetzes, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I (who submitted the story) have a problem with this (and with cultural relativism).
      To see that I'm not some hippie, click on my name and see what else I digg.
  • cceuser, on 10/11/2007, -4/+0I don´t know what to say... :) ...
  • deadordying, on 10/11/2007, -12/+13For every animal you don't eat, I'm going to eat three.
    • Akronos, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5You're cool now. Way to stick it to the man... I mean to all the vegetarians. Those damn vegetarians being too good. Lets eat meat to cancel it out. YEAH MAN!
    • davori, on 10/11/2007, -0/+599% of all species to have ever existed are believed to be extinct. Its a natural process, much the same as evolution. Animals that have unusual niches, i.e Pandas, will become extinct however much we try to protect them. Really if Pandas weren't cute, nobody would give a ***** if they became extinct. In reality they serve no purpose in the bigger picture, and have absolutely no affect on the ecosystem in their habitat. If you take emotion and sympathy out of the picture, its completely logical that an animal that sits on its arse all day eating bamboo has no role in the ecosystem and will die. Its niche is so ridiculous that any disease or lack of bamboo will lead to them becoming extinct. Its just the way it is.

      No I don't agree with the trade of animals, but its all about money at the end of the day. The smugglers aren't bad people, they do what they have to do to survive. They may have three children at home that need to be fed (probably not three seeing as it is china, but you know what i mean). Humans will do anything that can do to earn money to survive. Its how the world works, like it or not. I honestly believe that if the smugglers had another way of earning good money with such ease that they would drop their trade immediately. I hear that factories don't pay too well though... Its all too easy to judge and forget about the bigger picture. It is an innate psychological need to provide for your family as best possible, even if the best isn't necessarily acceptable to others.

      sorry about the rant, University exams hurt my brain...

      oh and was I the only one expecting a positive article? i.e remains of Noah's ark with 5000 unusual animal remains found?

  • 46reasons, on 10/11/2007, -9/+5Wow, this one's really going to piss off the hippies.
  • gordonp, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6"We keep them alive in cages until the customer makes an order. Then we hammer them unconscious, cut their throats and drain the blood. It is a slow death. We then boil them to remove the scales. We cut the meat into small pieces and use it to make a number of dishes, including braised meat and soup. Usually the customers take the blood home with them afterwards."

    Yikes!
    • blackjack75, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4"We keep them alive in cages until the customer makes an order"

      Oh my God! I hope they don't do this with the chicken I eat in Europe. Oh, they do? Well, at least huh... they're not chinese ?
    • m1ndstorm, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Errr, we must be talking about different Europes.
  • handler, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Sickening
  • CosmicBratt, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I'm guessing 'pics or it didn't happen' doesn't apply to animal cruelty.
  • 666dorado, on 10/11/2007, -8/+1what a stupid platform to promote vegetarianism. encouraging vegetarianism to a billion chinese to save some animals, good luck! if these animals weren't endandered, would it be such an issue? and stop ragging on china. how about the united states, we just invaded iraq for no reason and are responsible for 650,000+ civilian deaths. i think we have worse problems of our own in this country than to be dwelling on petty issues like vegetarianism.
    • ZenMasterJG, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You're off by an order of magnitude. The number is more like 65,000. Thats still way too many, but next time don't just pull a number out of your ass to try and make your point sound important.
  • orbit1979, on 10/11/2007, -14/+6I always find argument to go vegetarian to save the animals ironic. Lets say hypothetically, we all go vegetarian, then much more soil must be opened for cultivation, which in turn requires the mass destruction of the habitats of very animals we are trying to save.
    • VeganG, on 10/11/2007, -2/+16You should be a politician. Your logic is flawed, but makes sense at first glance.

      What do you think we feed the animals that are being raised? Acres upon acres of vegetation. If we got rid of the animals, we would not need more land for cultivation, as you say. If anything, we would need less, since currently it takes a lot of land (devoted to grains) to sustain an animal that only takes up a few square feet of space.
    • Asystole, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17Hahaha if only it were that simple. How much soil do you think is needed to grow what's fed the animals? It takes 10 kg of feed to produce 1 kg of beef.

      (VeganG beat me, cheers)
    • Dawnrazor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10Actually it would require less farmland. It takes 13 kilos of grain to produce one kilo of beef for example

      http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/78/3/660S/T3

      Now imagine if all the farmland used to produce cattle feed was producing human food.

      OOPs, not fast enough
    • orbit1979, on 10/11/2007, -11/+1"Your logic is flawed, but makes sense at first glance."

      Your logic is flawed, but makes sense at first glance. If we stop eating animals, their populations will explode. Some types such as the cow, require vast grazing fields. Their natural predators are almost non-existent in the US now, so they will continue to grow in population. We would a.) have to destroy forests for new grazing lands, upsetting/destroying other animal's habitats which will likely result in their deaths, the opposite which we are trying to achieve, or b.) use "population control", which means kill some off, which defeats the whole purpose.
    • xrod, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4"use "population control", which means kill some off"

      Does it really? Try not putting the female cow in the same room with the male cow. Sounds like population control to me and nothing's getting killed. Businesses devoted to providing us with meat would cease to exist and the animal populations would drop (the domesticated, non-endangered ones) opening more land for farming for human consumption. You seem to think these animal populations would not drop significantly if they were not being butchered. You're wrong. Your logic IS flawed.
    • fontgoddess, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1What about rangeland? It's completely useless for cultivation. But cows can eat the grass that grows there and I can eat the cows. I'm very bad at digesting grass.
    • Simcom, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@ fontgoddess

      If grass can grow there, so can a genetically modified crop.

      Signed,

      A Geneticist
  • thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -7/+3So, be honest....

    Am I the only one who thought... "Where's the charcoal, lighter fluid and matches?
    • UCFmethod, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6I enjoy cooking chicken, beef, and pork as much as the next guy, but eating lizards and snakes and turtles just isn't for me.
    • thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Go to the Big Texan.... they do rattlesnake up right!
  • xIXReMiXIx, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17I hate it when people start making assumptions like all Chinese people eat these animals and how everyone of them are bad. Yeah there are weird people in China but so does every other country. So remember that not everyone in the country is heartless as the ones in the article.
    • frigoa, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0xlXReMiXlx... Agreed. Illegal 'game' hunting of endangered animals was and is still practiced by many Westerners. Global policy has to step in when consumers don't know the repercussions of their actions. In this case, when fine dining leads to extinction, global leaders need to step in and enforce the international good of biodiversity. For the long term interests of ecological stability we all have as humans, species extinction and environmental destruction must trump short term economic interests, all religious practices, and even poverty/hunger.
  • Comatose51, on 10/11/2007, -3/+29OK for those of you trying to excuse this BS with "cultural", let me, as a native born Chinese, tell you, it is not cultural! Confucius, Buddha, etc never told us to go ***** eat all the animals and kill them all. In fact, it is very much against Chinese culture to destroy nature and not live in harmony with it. Here's what it is: a group of wealthy, egotistical, ignorant Chinese want to try expensive, exotic things that most other people can't afford. It's the same in other countries too. Who else go on hunting safaris? Do you? Most Americans don't. So let's not say it's an American cultural thing either. Or what about that island in the US that are stocked with wild animal so rich people can go hunt them at will? Do you guys see how ***** up some overly wealthy, ignorant people can be? When you combine wealth, power, and ignorance, there's no end to the kinds of absurdities you'll get.

    For many Chinese, beef is luxury enough.
    • viviwanu, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3comatose51, I agree with you as another person from native china. However, I am gravely concerned that as China gets increasingly wealthier, more and more people are going to eat exotic animals and there's not enough animals in the world to satisfy that demand! I am sick to my heart that the Chinese is destroying everything in its path to a better life at the expense of the environment, animals, and the world. Their polluted air is drifting across the Pacific Ocean to California and their poisoned food are killing our animals and humans alike.
  • javabeta, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5well,I assume that you all know the price of these so-called delicious animals and the average income of Chinese.So,do you think the number of these ***** people is a big one?
    Just take the right people down,dont think all the Chinese are like them.
  • remek, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4there used to be a video on youtube called "killing fields of dogs and cats in china" but it was so ***** gross that I suppose the admins removed it.
    • KitchenRaider, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4This looks close: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjiNMZxqd9I
      I hate watching these.
    • Tzetzes, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Thank you for posting that, Kitchen Raider. (I hope you're not raiding the kitchen to eat pigs & cows!)
      That's a really disturbing video; it's difficult to watch. It focuses on fur (a sensible thing to wear in the 14th century, outdated and ridiculous in the 21st) but much can be said for the way people treat "meat" before it's been killed. At any rate it hurts to see such callousness by the workers in this video. If they treat defenseless animals this way, how must they treat far-more-valuable humans? The Chinese have an august and venerable culture and some of the anti-Chinese stuff here is indeed stupid, though taking such practices as these into consideration when doing business with China is only sensible.

      It's true that things are better in the West and (with the exception of dirty "halal" slaughters in our midst) animals are /generally/ treated better before they're killed. But they're still being killed. If you eat meat, you're eating a fellow creature. You're destroying a life unnecessarily. Please, just /consider/ what you're doing.
  • tetsuwan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Two things:
    Wild and rare animals cannot feed 1.3 billion people. These animals were meant to be served as expensive specials for the very rich.

    If this was in the US or Europe, the salvaged animals would probably have been shot for safety reasons (quarantine).
  • donkeybat64, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3haters...
  • lodhesn, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12I find it disturbing that most people who are commenting on this article seem to have some inherent hatred of all things Chinese. It is sad to see this discussion turn into a forum for hatred against China.

    Granted, I'm not one for eating endangered animals and I find the tradition quite repulsive but the racist rants don't seem to be the solution. The problem stems from the lack of education of environmental protection and animal welfare that resulted from the ultra-leftist doctrine of the 60's and 70's and the economic boom of the 80's and 90's. Another main source of the problem is the emergence of the 'nouveau-riche' class in Chinese society that Comatose51 was referring to. This combination, as he pointed out, lends itself to trouble. The solution is education on environmentally sustainable practices and animal welfare protection (in general) to root out the problem of the illegal importation and consumption of endangered animals.

    As to the concept of the Chinese 'communist-dictatorship' that so many people have condemned, the Chinese enjoy many of the same freedoms that Americans and indeed, citizens of other countries enjoy. It is undeniable that the Chinese government have some questionable practices in terms of human rights and global trade, but again, with education comes the ability for change.

    Americans should not be so hypocritical in their accusations against others. While your freedoms are being infringed on and taken away on a daily basis by a president with dictatorial powers, you stand idly and accuse other countries of their wrongs. China shouldn't be viewed as an enemy, but as a partner for positive change in both countries. American investors should invest in China ethically, and attempt to curb and ultimately stop the often inhumane conditions that Chinese workers are made to work in.
    • dhakbar, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Are you nuts? It isn't inherent hatred... China is a real, valid threat to all of humanity. They are less interested in environmentalism than the US at the height of its industrial revolution, they have no freedom of religion, no freedom of speech, and no freedom of reproduction.

      China is ***** horrible, and if you defend that nation by accusing its detractors as racist or xenophobic, you're as bad as they are. Don't be an apologist for abusive regimes. You wouldn't defend the Bush administration, would you?
  • widman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Tzetzes, you abuse the cause of vegetarianism. The article is good and valid but you twist it to some PETA-like retarded agenda. Go f*** yourself somewhere else.

    Disclaimer: I am vegetarian but I don't care if other people change or not, only hate the pathetic loser hypocrisy of not wanting to kow how "it happens."
    • Tzetzes, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1You don't care about people's behavior but you do care about their attitude (which you call hypocrisy)?

      I won't force anybody to become vegetarian, will only try gentle persuasion.
      That has nothing to do with PETA, just as I have nothing to do with PETA.
  • 15charmaxwtf, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3"Endangered, hunted, smuggled and now abandoned, 5,000 of the world's rarest animals have been found drifting in a deserted boat near the coast of China."

    Just from the first sentence you can work out who created the conditions for this to happen: government. If these animals were allowed to be kept as private property they wouldn't be rare. If they are useful in some way they could be kept like sheep or cows, they are not likely to become extinct. The fact is that humans are humans and they act in self interest and some of them find these animals valuable, so there _will be_ a black market in them, and situations like this will occur. I am not trying to take away the blame from the smugglers, but merely pointing out that you can't change reality with legislation, often, if not always, there will be negative consequences.
  • johnburk, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3If you think the US is bad for the world, just wait a few years till China has its full power!
  • unibonger, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3For all those vegetarians that are "saving" animals...you realize beef tallow goes into a lot of common items?
    Roads are the perfect example...are you going to stop driving now? Boycott the road? I'm sure it'll listen.
  • ChromaticDragon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@penchant

    Evolution has spawned any number of terribly awful social philosophies. The logical linkage between the science of evolution and these social and political views has often been enormously weak and flawed.

    Evolution does not mandate that we must seek to enforce "survival of the fittest" as if it is some sort of guiding mandate. And we are omnivores, remember? not strictly predators.

    I would recommend "Guns, Germs and Steel" to get an idea how several societies robustly shot themselves in the foot by eating all their larger animals into extinction rather than figuring out how to manage the collection of what they likely had at their disposal.

    In that light, I really don't see any reason to conclude conservation parks are "working against evolution", especially if they're large enough to foster sufficient genetic diversity. Indeed, what better example could you find to "limit our impact" as a species?

    And on that note, educating any group of people that will drive species into extinction based on several facets of ignorance seems key to changing our impact as a species on the rest of the planet. The ignorance of the species' plight is horrible management at best. And the complete and utter ignorance of the superstitions that create the demand of the products at all should indeed be addressed.
    • penchant, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Good point (especially about higher standards of education), ...and ah, I have been meaning to read that book! Sounds like my cup of tea ; ) -
      I was trying to highlight the idea that we as people forget we are animals too, and we tend to do what other animals do when our population gets out of control- we as people tend to forget this because our wonderful complex brain-

      There was too much Chinese bashing going on, I was trying to get the digg user base to view the problem on a broader perspective, by offering a different side of said issue- we as people have all been guilty of this (driving species to extinction) and it's unfair to lash out at just the Chinese.
  • compucomp2, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Key word in the article: "ILLEGAL".

    We don't permit this ***** any more than the American government permits people to smoke weed, dip acid, shoot heroin, or snort coke. Yet there are many druggies in America anyway. This means that the American government is responsible for a number of its people being on drugs?

    Digg hates China and it shows in silly articles like this. It can't resist any attempt at China bashing, whether or not the bashing is on factual ground or not.
  • Trat, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1Damn, those China men really are a retarded people.
    • jarjarjanksmom, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0You're retarded. Just like your mom, your dad, your grandfather, and your grandmother.
    • Trat, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0... Said the snake eating retard...
  • lysdexia, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Cultural differences aside - you may know that Hindu's wont harm cattle as they are considered sacred.

    But, killing them doesn't seem to bother anyone in the west at all. So why the ***** are all you hypocritical bastards up in arms about animals you don't ordinarily eat? Is you animal kill somehow of a higher moral standard than others animal kill?
    • Tzetzes, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I don't eat any animals. (And I'm not sure why the very idea of vegetarianism makes some people so angry and defensive.)
    • blogger1947, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Tzetze: it isn't "the very idea of vegetarianism" that angers people. It's the silly self-righteousness of some vegetarians. Eat or don't eat whatever you please--it's all the same to me. Lecture me about what's on MY plate, and you're asking for a fight.
    • Trat, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0Because these animals are almost extinct, you retard.
  • isnthatheway, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0ugh.. deeply disturbing
  • badapplestudio, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2The Chinese are a despicable people.

    They have no respect for the environment.
    They'll eat anything that wiggles.
    They have no respect for intellectual property, trademark or artist ownership.
    They have no respect for trade laws and regulations.
    They will lie and cheat by selling you contaminated products.

    Lets not forget how many animals they have killed world wide by putting Melamine in wheat powder. Using it as a cutting agent. Then the wheat sold to pet food companies and livestock feed companies.

    They are *****. Japan should have wiped them out a long time ago.
    • davori, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Yeah and stereotyping isn't despicable? Bit of hindsight may be useful for you in future.

      Is it just me, or is there a sudden inrease in the number of primitive people on Digg?
    • jarjarjanksmom, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2If they are *****, then don't use products.
    • Switchfoot, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5The Americans are a despicable people.

      They have no respect for the environment.
      They'll eat anything that comes in a Ziploc bag.
      They have no respect for intellectual property, trademark or artist ownership.
      They have no respect for trade laws and regulations.
      They will lie and cheat by selling you contaminated products.

      Let's not forget how many people have been brutality murdered and tortured, countries destroyed, and intolerable dictatorships installed because the United States thought it was more important fighting proxy wars with the Soviet Union than actually comply with its supposed humanitarian ideals.

      They are *****. Canada should have wiped them out a long time ago.
    • zBeasty, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1You're hateful comment is disgusting. What Japan did to them is worse than eating "anything that wiggles" and they eat a heck of a lot more vegetables than we do.
    • nemobushido, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1With that racist mentality, you're going nowhere in life. Go on and group people all you want- you yourself will end up very alone.
  • jarjarjanks, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2china sucks. period.
    • jarjarjanksmom, on 10/11/2007, -5/+0Your mom sucks! And I mean she sucks a lot of boners. Probably a lot of Chinese boners since you hate Chinese so much.
  • purpledoc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13Wow. The level of hate and racism on here is astounding. Almost feels like a board on Yahoo. To be sure, the smugglers are wrong, and the people that fuel the industry with their patronage of restaurants are at fault as well. Some of you seem to think every Chinese man, woman, and child is the devil incarnate himself.

    Awareness of environmental and biodiversity protection is lower not just in China, it's lower in every part of the developing world. Think about the South American cattle farmers slash-burning the Amazon to feed the American appetite for beef, and the South Asian countries drilling for water and depleting the water table to almost the very bottom.

    Stories like these are opportunities to learn and to press for environmental action, not to sit on your ass and mouth off racist diatribe.
    • Akronos, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Bravo. Thank you. Best post made for this story. But you'll probably end up dugg down anyway.
    • SultanTravi, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2akronos: Are you just someone who picked up the name, or are you THE Achronos from Bungie?
    • Akronos, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Nope, I'm not the moderator from Bungie. He spells it differently from me, anyway. Even though I play Halo and go to the Bungie forums, it was a coincidence I picked this name.
  • FastZ, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2"Another story to encourage vegetarianism"???? WTF? Vegetarians are hippies and the reason animals on are this planet is so they can provide food to other animals. It's called "THE FOOD CHAIN".
    • Tzetzes, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1I submitted this story and I'm hardly a hippie! I'm a free-trade, small-government, anti-entitlement guy and if you click on my name you can see I'm also for a large military and not opposed to foreign intervention. It's a bit knee-jerk of you to assume that someone who would encourage others to stop eating animals must be a hippie. Down with such stereotypes! Vegetarian Neocons of the World, Unite!
    • Tzetzes, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1P.S. Mitt '08!
  • blogger1947, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Well, the flock here is outdoing itself today (lots of beer on a hot Saturday?) I've collected several hundred negatives, had someone plug my blog site, and not one of you has addressed me with the Digger term "*****."

    Y'know it's the times people agree with me here on Digg that I worry about myself. Thanks for the ego boost, y'all.
    • nemobushido, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Stop living in denial.
    • blogger1947, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Denial. Well that's interesting. So you are suggesting that after sixty years of making a pretty good living and being well regarded by my friends, neighbors, co-workers and family, that ALL these people are (a) wrong or (b) lying to me, and YOU, the Good Samaritan of the Worldwide Web, are finally setting me straight?

      Please let me know, I've got the muzzle of the gun in my mouth, even as I write this. If you vote me off the island, well, gosh, I just may...well, I simply can't CONTINUE without your approval.

      Arse-breath.

  • drjekelmrhyde, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Ok I'm all for people protecting rare animals but when you try to explain that to a person in provety not to kill this animal but have no solution to how that poor person will feed his/her family you get shyt like this
  • turgiddahlia, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This is horrible, but it's no different from Australian sheep, cattle and pig exports, where the animals are trapped in airless, lightless, stinking hot conditions aboard massive cargo ships. Then, arrival at some barbaric Muslim country where they are treated even worse than they are already treated here before execution.
  • frikk, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1About Pangolins:
    "We keep them alive in cages until the customer makes an order. Then we hammer them unconscious, cut their throats and drain the blood. It is a slow death. We then boil them to remove the scales. We cut the meat into small pieces and use it to make a number of dishes, including braised meat and soup. Usually the customers take the blood home with them afterwards."

    Thats after acknowledging that even though pangolins are endangered, they serve 'em anwyay.
  • TheMadCow, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2It's good to see that Digg has grown up. It's now just like Slashdot. Every pissing wanker that has a keyboard is here banging away under their village bridge like some damned troll.... and trolls you are.

    • nemobushido, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Slashdot is still a better community, simply because the IQ of average troll is considerably higher.
  • Turbosc, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1wow, I can't believe people on Digg are so ignorant. Try removing yourself from the "American Dream" and use your brain. Just because it's not a Big Mac with a Coke doesn't mean it's wrong. *sigh*
  • Maurice33, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0After briefly reading a few fairly ridiculous comments in this thread, I encourage anyone that actually has true concern for issues around the industrialization of meat to read up on the issue.

    I highly recommend the book "The Way We Eat" by Peter Singer.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.