ReikiAnge Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/c...icle5728143.ece Reading this didn't do much for my blood pressure but the comment from Mark Davis, South Bend, USA cheered me up Oh wow. Somebody needs a puppy hug! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacobean Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 What an absolute ignoramous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantan Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 Yeah I've just read this as I get The Times on a Saturday and came on here to vent my spleen but found Ange had beaten me to it. I used to quite like Coren but not any more. Twonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greyhoundgirl Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 I'm afraid I've let his comments ruin my day Never before have I read such an awful, damning condemnation and hatred of dogs. I cannot believe The Times have printed such nasty rubbish. Amazing amount of comments in support of him too He should be arrested for incitement to kill dogs I am now going to have to drink loads tonight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumpole Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 tw*t indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanrossscot Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 Have emailed the online editor in chief - don't suppose it will do any good but..... :mad: :mad: :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoebejo Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 *dons tin hat* Nearly everything Giles writes is with his tongue wedged in his cheek. He has gone a bit over the top today but this bit is true: And government is no better, to be honest. It is astonishing to think that when a fox is torn apart by dogs in a cold field on a foggy morning, Parliament devotes 700 hours of debate to stamping it out. But when a human child is torn apart by dogs in his or her nan's front room (it's always the grandmother - usually not much more than 30 herself), Parliament does nothing. Nothing. Obviously banning dogs isn't the answer but neither is doing nothing and that's what seems to have happened in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruby1Nic Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 Plank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heva Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 im just sat here in shock!!!!!! i just cant believe it!!!!! why would they print that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReikiAnge Posted February 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 *dons tin hat* Nearly everything Giles writes is with his tongue wedged in his cheek. He has gone a bit over the top today but this bit is true: Obviously banning dogs isn't the answer but neither is doing nothing and that's what seems to have happened in this case. Sorry Cheryl, we will have to agree to disagree. I just can't see that this particular article is tongue-in-cheek. Surely anyone that had an ounce of compassion for dogs would not write with such hatred for them? It seems rather more than a bit over the top to me Unfortunately the government introduced the DDA and BSL as an answer to dog attacks and we all sadly know how cr@p that is and how so many innocent owners and their dogs have suffered. But Giles isn't content with just killing some breeds, he'd just like them all dead. I stand by my original thoughts. He's a bl**dy tw*t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
celeste Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 I used to like him too...............not any more I can't get over the people that think dogs should only be allowed to live if they serve a purpose to humans, I really really want to smack them in the mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyBloggs Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 Total Tw*t the worse thing is just how many comments were agreeing with him!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 what a muppet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mop Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 Every one of these cases has been caused by human negligence but they get away and the dogs pay with their lives. There is more of an outcry about dogs attacking and killing babies and children that there is when their parents kill them. These parents arn't pts which is a pity. Most normal humans know not to put a 4.5 month old baby on a table, they roll off. Most normal humans wouldn't go to sleep with a baby on the table. It is time these people were charged with negligence and the dogs were not blamed for being dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reds Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 I love the comment from Michelle from Perth I can't believe the Times published that as a piece of 'journalism' to be honest. He has some serious screws loose and I completely agree with Ange's title!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts