# Liam Neeson Vs PETA



## ballen0351 (Jan 30, 2012)

But Neeson isnt giving ground. He infuriated pro-wolf forces by eating real  wolf meat on the movie set as a way of getting into character. 
And he liked it. 
Wolf jerky was quite nice, he told reporters in New York this month.
I went up for seconds of the wolf stew, he boasted to the Chicago  Sun-Times. While some cast members upchucked at the great wolf barbecue  organized by director Joe Carnahan, all I can say is it was very gamy. But Im  Irish, so Im used to odd stews. I can take it. 


Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/pc_wood_wolf_at_liam_door_WoSQXPVqTEhUdhhAXWCqtL#ixzz1kyd5b4eE


----------



## Omar B (Jan 30, 2012)

It actually sounds good.  I hate these Peta nuts, they would like all to be vegans.


----------



## Steve (Jan 30, 2012)

Liam Neeson is a stud.


----------



## Omar B (Jan 30, 2012)

I like him because he says what he means and doesn't back down or get all mealy mouthed about it like other celebs.  He doesn't seem to say things perfectly crafted not to piss anyone off or offend any single group.  I think he and I could get along well because I know everything we both say is pretty much borderline offensive, racist and sexist, but really means well.  lol


----------



## Empty Hands (Jan 30, 2012)

Who gives a **** about PeTA?  Gray wolves are an endangered species in most of the country, there are only 5000 of them in the lower 48 and 200,000 worldwide.  Eating them is irresponsible, unless perhaps they came from captive breeding.  I'm not sure why anyone would celebrate the fact, either.  So you ate a wild dog?  Congratulations, I guess that makes you a man now.  As long as it pisses off the libs, amirite?


----------



## granfire (Jan 30, 2012)

Empty Hands said:


> Who gives a **** about PeTA?  Gray wolves are an endangered species in most of the country, there are only 5000 of them in the lower 48 and 200,000 worldwide.  Eating them is irresponsible, unless perhaps they came from captive breeding.  I'm not sure why anyone would celebrate the fact, either.  So you ate a wild dog?  Congratulations, I guess that makes you a man now.  As long as it pisses off the libs, amirite?



Eh, I am sure there are that many in various fur farms all over the world.

Not to mention there are  a lot of people who do (legally - more or less) kill wolves. 

That one canine, or 2 probably didn't make a dent in the population. 

2 points: PETA sucks. If they were a vacuum cleaner, a Dyson could not keep up!
Feeding strange foods to people on a job site because you can....not so much my thing. But hey, I am guessing all were adults, they can say no.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jan 30, 2012)

PETA, the traitors that fund admitted terrorists and terrorist organizations?
PETA, the hypocrites that maintain their own kill shelter and kill an estimated 85% of the animals it takes in?
PETA, the sorry sonsofbitches who applauded when Steve Irwin died?
PETA, the worthless pieces of dog feces whose leader personally is all for breaking of laws?


I've heard of them.  Seem like nice people. Actually, I wouldn't cry if they all got eaten by a bear.

But I do like their "rather go naked" campaign.


----------



## granfire (Jan 30, 2012)

Bob Hubbard said:


> PETA, the traitors that fund admitted terrorists and terrorist organizations?
> PETA, the hypocrites that maintain their own kill shelter and kill an estimated 85% of the animals it takes in?
> PETA, the sorry sonsofbitches who applauded when Steve Irwin died?
> PETA, the worthless pieces of dog feces whose leader personally is all for breaking of laws?
> ...



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

but as far as I have heard their kill rate is much higher, not to mention the animals they acquired under false pretense, only to kill and dispose of in unlawful ways.


----------



## VictorV (Jan 30, 2012)

You guys are lucky. I live in Norfolk, VA where they have their HQ. PETA kills about 90% of the animals they take in. They do know death. When my dog had to be put down (long story), PETA put her down for free and allowed us to store her body there until we could get the money to have her cremated. The emergency vets wanted to charge us $350 to do it. That was AFTER the $1000 we were charged to try to save her. I have lots of issues with PETA, but once in awhile, they serve a purpose.


----------



## The Last Legionary (Jan 30, 2012)

PETA? I love PETA.

Thats those People Eating Tasty Animals folks right?


----------



## Sukerkin (Jan 30, 2012)

Normally *EH* and I see eye to eye on things but in this case I have to say that there is a reason why wolves are endangered.  It's the same reason there are no bears in Britain any more.  Compete with us and you lose - sorry rest of the animal kingdom.  Better luck on the next evolutionary cycle.


----------



## Cryozombie (Jan 30, 2012)

Empty Hands said:


> Who gives a **** about PeTA?  Gray wolves are an endangered species in most of the country, there are only 5000 of them in the lower 48 and 200,000 worldwide.  Eating them is irresponsible



Did I miss where it specified he was eating Grey Wolf or are we extrapolating that fact because it's what he fought in the movie?


----------



## MA-Caver (Jan 30, 2012)

I'm not all up for eating wolf meat but if were in a survival situation (like the premise of the film itself) then yeah, eat and live or starve and freeze to death because your body doesn't have the necessary calories to burn to keep you warm. But eating it to just "get into character" uhh, I think I'll borrow Sir Lawrence Olivier's suggestion to Dustin Hoffman... "try acting."  
Gonna leave the PETA issue alone. Otherwise this will turn into a 12 page rant on their hypocritical idiocy. 


And ya'll know how much I hate hypocrites!!


----------



## Blindside (Jan 31, 2012)

Empty Hands said:


> Who gives a **** about PeTA?  Gray wolves are an endangered species in most of the country, there are only 5000 of them in the lower 48 and 200,000 worldwide.  Eating them is irresponsible, unless perhaps they came from captive breeding.  I'm not sure why anyone would celebrate the fact, either.  So you ate a wild dog?  Congratulations, I guess that makes you a man now.  As long as it pisses off the libs, amirite?



Only endangered in the lower 48, the populations in Alaska and Canada are healthy and able to sustain harvest.  I'd rather people eat the meat than just cape out the carcass for fur.


----------



## David43515 (Jan 31, 2012)

I have to admit that I like the results of his acting, but the idea that he`s a meathod actor really diminishes him in some way for me.

( I love and admire wolves, but I`m practical about us being at the top of the food chain too.)


----------



## Omar B (Jan 31, 2012)

Cryozombie said:


> Did I miss where it specified he was eating Grey Wolf or are we extrapolating that fact because *it's what he fought in the movie*?



The commercials sell this angle a whole lot more than it actually is in there.  It's a survival movie, yeah there are wolves but there's some tricky marketing going on there.


----------



## MPC1257 (Jan 31, 2012)

I don't see what the big deal is regarding this topic. Liam Neeson did not hunt the wolf, it was provided for him and the rest of the crew by the director.  I doubt the meat was obtained illegally and if you've ever been to a game dinner you would realize that there are often meats available that you might not have thought were actually very good.  He tried and he liked it.  Big deal.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 31, 2012)

MPC1257 said:


> I don't see what the big deal is regarding this topic. Liam Neeson did not hunt the wolf, it was provided for him and the rest of the crew by the director. I doubt the meat was obtained illegally and if you've ever been to a game dinner you would realize that there are often meats available that you might not have thought were actually very good. He tried and he liked it. Big deal.


Hey WOLVES are people too you know.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jan 31, 2012)

Cryozombie said:


> Did I miss where it specified he was eating Grey Wolf or are we extrapolating that fact because it's what he fought in the movie?



There are only two species of wolf in the United States, and the Red Wolf is far more endangered than even the Gray Wolf.  I suppose it's an assumption, but it seems like a safe one - I doubt they harvested a far more rare species or sent off for a Himalayan or an Indian Wolf.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jan 31, 2012)

Sukerkin said:


> Normally *EH* and I see eye to eye on things but in this case I have to say that there is a reason why wolves are endangered.  It's the same reason there are no bears in Britain any more.  Compete with us and you lose - sorry rest of the animal kingdom.  Better luck on the next evolutionary cycle.



Wolves don't compete with us.  Loss of a top predator also affects the rest of the ecosystem in sometimes catastrophic ways, and we've been dealing with that in the US for some time now.  We've had to take over the wolf's role, which is why we are trying to bring them back.  Populations with a top predator reach dynamic equilibrium.  Populations without a top predator results in catastrophic boom/bust cycles that can other loss of species or damage/destruction of the environment.  In engineering terms, you are removing the negative feedback loop.  It's stupid, short-sighted thinking.


----------



## granfire (Jan 31, 2012)

Empty Hands said:


> Wolves don't compete with us.  Loss of a top predator also affects the rest of the ecosystem in sometimes catastrophic ways, and we've been dealing with that in the US for some time now.  We've had to take over the wolf's role, which is why we are trying to bring them back.  Populations with a top predator reach dynamic equilibrium.  Populations without a top predator results in catastrophic boom/bust cycles that can other loss of species or damage/destruction of the environment.  In engineering terms, you are removing the negative feedback loop.  It's stupid, short-sighted thinking.



The History of Yellowstone Park illustrates that perfectly.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 31, 2012)

1) It is legal to hunt gray wolves in Alaska.




2) Not much on hunting for fur or trophies, so good that the wolf got eaten


3) Most predators taste like crap. Bear can be okay, depending on diet and time of year, but a lot of places have their bear season in the spring, when bears are waking from hibernation, and they tend to not taste so great. I've never hunted mountain lion, but someone who did cooked up some backstraps for me once-tasted like chicken.....:lol:...no, really.
I'd imagine wolf tastes a lot like dog, though, ,and, as most of you know, every time I've had dog, I had seconds.

I imagine wolf puppy is downright delicious.

4) Good on Liam Neeson-I like that guy.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 31, 2012)

Thats a big wolf


----------



## Sukerkin (Jan 31, 2012)

You're not wrong in what you say, *EH*, about the environmental effects of eliminating a 'tier' of the food chance balancing act.  But I would maintain that wolves, bears and other top predators *did* compete with us in the past and paid the price.  They either did it by predating the same species we were after or more directly by trying to eat us.  Britain did away with all of them centuries ago and I would argue we have one of the best managed environments in the world (tho the industrial revolution and recent too rapid population expansion have rather blotted our copy-book in that regard ).  We as a species don't tend to eliminate the predators and leave a vacuum; historically we become the top predator (tho we can be quite poor at maintaining the balance and so cause extinctions).

There's a reason why most animals are afraid of us, even the predators and I'd like to keep it that way.  I have said before, whenever a predator kills a human, that that is because we are no longer killing enough of *them *to keep them current on who is top dog.  I know that's horrid and simplistic and animal lovers who only like the 'pretty ones' hate me for it.  But in this case I am staunchly humano-centric - if it kills humans, then it dies (if at all possible).


----------



## Empty Hands (Jan 31, 2012)

Sukerkin said:


> You're not wrong in what you say, *EH*, about the environmental effects of eliminating a 'tier' of the food chance balancing act.  But I would maintain that wolves, bears and other top predators *did* compete with us in the past and paid the price.  They either did it by predating the same species we were after or more directly by trying to eat us.



I don't know about Britain, but the Grey Wolf was exterminated in the lower 48 states by the early 1900's to 1930 or so.  We were hardly in danger.



Sukerkin said:


> There's a reason why most animals are afraid of us, even the predators and I'd like to keep it that way.  I have said before, whenever a predator kills a human, that that is because we are no longer killing enough of *them *to keep them current on who is top dog.  I know that's horrid and simplistic and animal lovers who only like the 'pretty ones' hate me for it.  But in this case I am staunchly humano-centric - if it kills humans, then it dies (if at all possible).



According to one study I found, hornets/bees/wasps are the largest single cause of death at 27.4% of animal related fatalities, followed by dogs at 10.7%.  Snakes, insects and arthropods round out most of the list, with rats the first standalone wild mammal category at 0.15%.  Deaths due to large mammals are so miniscule they don't even have their own standalone categories, at most the "other mammal" category comprises 10% over a 10 year period, including *all *mammals, which might include domestic horses.

If you care about people dying, it's not mountain lions or wolves you should be worried about - it's stinging insects and domestic dogs.  Meanwhile wholesale destruction of predator species because they "look scary" is quite capable of causing environmental devastation that will result in human suffering on it's own.  As an engineer, I'm surprised you would support removing critical feedback loops from our "life support system" because they look scary, while rarely hurting people.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jan 31, 2012)

Interesting factoid about the 'hornety' danger, mate!  So I have good reason for my phobic reaction to wasps it would seem ("Suffer none to live!" I cry) :lol:.

I think you may have misread me a little; I should emphasise the 'long view' I take on this reaches back through the millennia.  

Nowadays of course, we have other ways of getting our food and direct competition from predators without opposable thumbs is not a factor.  

Beasties can look as scary as they like as long as they leave humans alone - when they don't, then it's a visit from high velocity lead that should be their fate. The hard part is retaining their fear of humans without having to kill them in job lots.  I don't know if it possible to keep one without the other - it'd be nice if it was.


----------



## billc (Jan 31, 2012)

Here is a nice article on Liam Neeson and why he beats out the current girly men at the box office...

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/c...ld-liam-neeson-is-actions-most-bankable-star/



> Compare the box office results for The Grey to the opening weekend haul of Taylor Lautners Abduction from late last year:
> The Grey  $20 million
> Abduction  $10.9 million
> Lautners got Neeson by 40-odd years, and you just know Neeson doesnt have six-pack abs like Mr. Twilight. Audiences didnt care. They responded to the way Neeson goes about his business on screen. Its never smooth or calculated, but Neesons characters settle scores and survive in a way that hearkens back to how male movie stars used to behave on screen.
> ...


----------



## MA-Caver (Jan 31, 2012)

ballen0351 said:


> Hey WOLVES are people too you know.



Only for fans of twilight.... beyond that they're just big, beautiful wild dogs.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jan 31, 2012)

Or readers of the "Wheel of Time" in which they really are 'people', with their very own Wolf Dreamscape.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jan 31, 2012)

Sukerkin said:


> Or readers of the "Wheel of Time" in which they really are 'people', with their very own Wolf Dreamscape.



Hopper, Dapple, Young Bull and Long Tooth will be paying Mr. Neeson a visit very soon.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 31, 2012)

Empty Hands;[URL="tel:1458032" said:
			
		

> 1458032[/URL]]Hopper, Dapple, Young Bull and Long Tooth will be paying Mr. Neeson a visit very soon.



Reckon he'll make them into jerky and stew as well.......


----------



## granfire (Jan 31, 2012)

Sukerkin said:


> Or readers of the "Wheel of Time" in which they really are 'people', with their very own Wolf Dreamscape.



Wolf Rain....


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jan 31, 2012)

Frankly, I think this was unnecessary, and wasteful.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## elder999 (Jan 31, 2012)

Josh Oakley;[URL="tel:1458066" said:
			
		

> 1458066[/URL]]Frankly, I think this was unnecessary, and wasteful.


e?

Wasteful? How, exactly? Maybe that meat-which, according to the story, had been in a freezer for six months-should have been fed to the "poor?" 

"Wasteful," like that, maybe?

I mean, them that's "meat"-gets "eat." 

Really.


----------



## Blade96 (Feb 9, 2012)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Actually, I wouldn't cry if they all got eaten by a bear.


----------

