Forget Hitler's Holocaust - Evil Britain's pet Holocaust is just as horrible !

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 11:59 AM
link   

JohnPhoenix
So you thought Hitler was the only sick bastard on the block huh? Guess again.. looks like those British are just as evil.


During the run-up to WWII, the British government formed the National Air Raid Precautions Animals Committee in 1939 to decide what to do with all their animals once war broke out. The committee's primary concern was food shortages made worse due to people feeding their pets, so to curtail this potential problem, they sent out a pamphlet called "Advice to Animal Owners" ... which came with an advertisement for a specific type of gun. You can see where this is going.


I'd love to post the picture of the pamphlet but I cant get my uploads to show for some reason. The picture and story is found here: www.cracked.com...


The pamphlet advised the population that if they could not send their pets into the countryside, "it really is kindest to have them destroyed".

How did the British population take this order? With protests across the Isles, surely? Not exactly. Within the course of a week, 750,000 family pets were "destroyed."


This is not even one big bad Hitler type dude going around killing all the puppies and kitties this is the British people themselves murdering in cold blood by shooting the pets ( Pets, mind you, animals people are supposed to Love) in the head with guns sold for this very purpose !!

Now, I don't wanna hear another word vilifying Hitler. To me, any human who would kill their pet in such manner is equal to Hitler !

The point is not to downplay Hitler. The point is to show just as Hitler was human and did evil things he wasn't special in that. Let's say there was one pet for every person. This means there were 750,000 sick in the head British people who were willing to murder their pet in cold blood. In contrast, How can we really say Hitler was any worse then these people? People don't like to think that way because it shows Hitler in a better light - but the point is to show these people were as bad as crazy, as evil as Hitler himself. No reason to single out Hitler as a monster when all the "normal" people have to do is look in the mirror and find the monster in themselves. I wonder how many who shot their pets are hypocrites, justifying their actions and not those of Hitler? Interesting.
edit on 1-1-2014 by JohnPhoenix because: sp


This has to be the dumbest thread I have ever seen

I hunt, and I have a couple of pets I share my home with, I love animals and hate to see them suffer so I have had to put a good few out of their missery over the years, when I had to have my dog put down about 5 years ago it broke my heart but it was better than seeing him suffer, you cant compare an animals life to a humans life its just not the same thing

If you wanted to just have a pop at us Brits for bad things we did in WWII then there where plenty of other subjects you could have picked, how about the bombing of Dresden







I doubt the women and children in these images where evil nazis, a holocaust that rarley gets a mention
No star no flag just people rolling on the floor laughing at your prioritys




posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by dam00
 


Are you sure about that? Most of the population embraced Nazism there were no German resistance movement throughout the war (apart from White Rose a handful of students and a small bunch of aristocrats the Kreisau Circle) There was no major opposition let alone armed resistance as there was in Nazi Vichy France



posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 12:41 PM
link   
WOW! Someone hates us British. Maybe someone needs to have a speak with the USA. Just a quick google search, millions of unwanted pets are put down in the states every year and that's in recent times

During was times (1939+) the country had to look at rationing, a home with a dog or cat would need food to keep them alive. Also let's not forget animals can spread diseases, during war times where people had no houses no running water or decent food you wouldn't want stray animals walking around which could potentially carrying diseases.

Take a chill pill dude it's not just is Brits that have done things it happens around the whole world. Maybe you should pop over to
Korean and ask about dogs and cats and see what uses they have for them

Calling us Brits evil based on a story that happened over 60 years ago I find quite offensive. Come to my house and a friends who combined have 2 dogs 6 cats (including 2 kitten), two nature loving gardens. The see who is evil

Your post is pathetic

Edit: I'd like to know where the OP comes from id happily spend 30 mins digging up dirt on their country and then calling every person of that nation evil. All because I found an article about something that happened half a century ago.

edit on 6-1-2014 by ThePeaceMaker because: Added text
edit on 6-1-2014 by ThePeaceMaker because: Spelling



posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by dashdespatch
 



Touche

But I do wonder why



posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by dam00
 


I have a theory but I don`t want to de rail this guys post (what forum would I put it in?)



posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   

JohnPhoenix
So you thought Hitler was the only sick bastard on the block huh? Guess again.. looks like those British are just as evil.


During the run-up to WWII, the British government formed the National Air Raid Precautions Animals Committee in 1939 to decide what to do with all their animals once war broke out. The committee's primary concern was food shortages made worse due to people feeding their pets, so to curtail this potential problem, they sent out a pamphlet called "Advice to Animal Owners" ... which came with an advertisement for a specific type of gun. You can see where this is going.


I'd love to post the picture of the pamphlet but I cant get my uploads to show for some reason. The picture and story is found here: www.cracked.com...


The pamphlet advised the population that if they could not send their pets into the countryside, "it really is kindest to have them destroyed".

How did the British population take this order? With protests across the Isles, surely? Not exactly. Within the course of a week, 750,000 family pets were "destroyed."


This is not even one big bad Hitler type dude going around killing all the puppies and kitties this is the British people themselves murdering in cold blood by shooting the pets ( Pets, mind you, animals people are supposed to Love) in the head with guns sold for this very purpose !!

Now, I don't wanna hear another word vilifying Hitler. To me, any human who would kill their pet in such manner is equal to Hitler !

The point is not to downplay Hitler. The point is to show just as Hitler was human and did evil things he wasn't special in that. Let's say there was one pet for every person. This means there were 750,000 sick in the head British people who were willing to murder their pet in cold blood. In contrast, How can we really say Hitler was any worse then these people? People don't like to think that way because it shows Hitler in a better light - but the point is to show these people were as bad as crazy, as evil as Hitler himself. No reason to single out Hitler as a monster when all the "normal" people have to do is look in the mirror and find the monster in themselves. I wonder how many who shot their pets are hypocrites, justifying their actions and not those of Hitler? Interesting.
edit on 1-1-2014 by JohnPhoenix because: sp
Better to have those pets starve to death during food shortages eh?

Or turned loose to become feral and rabid maybe?

Or perhaps better still, feed the animals and starve the children?



posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Maybe if mother America had come to the aid of the Free West a bit earlier we wouldn't have needed to humanely put down pets we were worried we could not feed (on account of the fact that young Jimmy also needed feeding, assuming the bombs didn't get him first)



But seriously, it was a logical thing to do under the extreme circumstances, though personally I wouldn't have and I think the majority of Britons likewise desisted.



posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 02:50 PM
link   
Just reading the first page of this thread, cost me valuable brain cells which I will never get back.

Thanks



posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 02:50 PM
link   

dashdespatch
reply to post by dam00
 


I have a theory but I don`t want to de rail this guys post (what forum would I put it in?)



I suppose it would depend on your theory, Ill be sure to keep a look out for it though



posted on Jan, 7 2014 @ 11:26 AM
link   
hang on a minute, you think us brits treat animals bad, why don't have a look at how the japanese and chinese treat animals.



posted on Jan, 7 2014 @ 12:04 PM
link   
Herewith list of British wartime rations,per week, vegetables are not on this as people grew a lot of there own those days (hence the 'dig for victory' posters) this amount was for one adult.
bacon and ham 4oz.
meat to the value of 1 shilling and six pence. (roughly half pound of decent meat)
butter 2oz.
cheese 2oz.
margarine 4oz.
cooking fat 4oz.
milk 3 pints.
sugar 8oz.
preserves one pound every three months.
tea 2oz.
eggs one fresh egg per week.
sweets (candies) 12oz per month.
Any meat produced illegally (such as an unregistered pig) was confiscated.
No ration card, no food.



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 12:35 AM
link   

ketsuko
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


The Brits in London were in the middle of a siege. It changes your perspectives. When it comes down to a time where you are facing an unknown amount of time with very limited resources, including and especially food, you have to do whatever you can to pool and conserve what you have left. In this case it included putting down the pets. If you ever face a time where you are facing starvation, you might do the same.


I don't own a pet now but I have in the past. A cat and a dog at different times. I couldn't imagine putting either one down, especially a cat. A cat only needs about 130 calories a day and is capable of hunting the occasional bird (though I suppose letting it outside in such a scenario is risky). 180 calories, and realistically around 80 if it's supplementing it's meals isn't a whole lot to need to spare.

Dogs are useful in other ways such as security and earn their keep.

The only way I would consider killing my pet is if we were going to starve to death, then it's a quicker way out. If I'm in that situation I'm killing myself right after the pet.



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 01:43 AM
link   
1st.
I would have kept my pet, and killed it after I believed it was the right thing to do, and eat it.

2st
They should have implemented this idea with people. When THTF, prevent anyone to die a slow agonizing death, by a well directed head blow.
The most humane thing to do.

3st
When will people stop demonizing Hitler ? He was a product of a conflict that began long ago, and escalated in WW1 in 1914.
Not even mentioning any other dictator, with countless of death during their reign.






 
10
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join