The government is purposefully trying to kill people.

Red meat is the healthiest thing you can eat, by a lot.

Beans are not healthy. No one should be eating beans. That is food for poor Mexicans who can’t afford meat.

AP:

Americans should eat more beans, peas and lentils and cut back on red and processed meats and starchy vegetables, all while continuing to limit added sugars, sodium and saturated fat.

That’s the advice released Tuesday by a panel of nutrition experts charged with counseling the U.S. government about the 2025 edition of the dietary guidelines that will form the cornerstone of federal food programs and policy.

But the 20-member panel didn’t weigh in on the growing role of ultraprocessed foods that have been linked to health problems, saying there’s not enough evidence to tell people to avoid them.

Hahahahahahahaha.

And the group steered clear of updating controversial guidance on alcohol consumption, leaving that analysis to two outside reports expected to be released soon.

…

The panel, which met for nearly two years, was the first to focus on the dietary needs of Americans through what they called a “health equity lens,” said Dr. Fatima Cody Stanford, a Massachusetts General Hospital obesity expert who was part of the group. That meant considering factors such as household income, race, ethnicity and culture when recommending healthy diets. It will help ensure that the guidance “reflects and includes various population groups,” she said in an email.

The panel didn’t come to conclusions on ultraprocessed foods or alcohol

Ultraprocessed foods include the snacks, sugary cereals and frozen meals that make up about 60% of the American diet.

The panel considered more than 40 studies, including several that showed links between ultraprocessed foods and becoming overweight or developing obesity. But the nutrition experts had concerns with the quality of the research, leaving them to conclude that the evidence was too limited to make recommendations.

Yeah, we just don’t have enough proof that ultraprocessed foods are unhealthy, you know?

But we know for a fact meat is very bad.

That decision is likely to bump up against the views of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the nominee to lead the U.S. Health and Human Services Department, who has questioned potential conflicts of interest among members of the dietary guidelines panel and vowed to crack down on ultraprocessed foods that contribute to chronic disease.

…

The scientific report informs the dietary guidelines, which are updated every five years. Tuesday’s recommendations now go to HHS and the Agriculture Department, where officials will draft the final guidance set for release next year.

Starting Wednesday, the public will have 60 days to comment on the guidance. HHS and USDA officials will hold a public meeting Jan. 16 to discuss the recommendations.

The government healthcare complex is just as corrupt as every other part of the sickening Jewish US government.

These people get money from the food companies.

The healthiest thing anyone can do is eat more meat and fewer carbs. I don’t agree with this “carnivore” thing as a longterm lifestyle, which is just a meme, but if you’re trying to lose weight, you might as well only eat meat until you get to your desired weight.

If you only eat meat, you can eat until you’re full while losing weight.

People should also consider incorporating fasting.

95% of the people that sit on the US dietary guidelines today and for 2025 all have financial ties to processed food companies.

False information gets presented for financial gain.

Never believe things at face value.

Learn to question everything and form your own opinions. pic.twitter.com/gBJJQ6RmrF

— Fredo (@FredosRippleEF) January 11, 2024

These people never bothered to provide any evidence global warming war real. Nothing has changed in this goofy movement since Al Gore won an Academy Award and a Nobel Peace Prize for telling people New York City would be under water by 2013.

Global warming is a complete hoax, and anyone who knows anything is aware of that. The hoax has been so thoroughly debunked that there is no reason to even talk about it at this point.

However, due to a stupid, vaginal, emotionalized campaign to tell people they are good people if they believe in this dumb hoax, many people apparently do believe in it, and they can just keep pushing it further and further. They’ve of course backed off of the “cities will be underwater” bullshit, because that was ruled too stupid. But now they say any change in weather is caused by this fake thing, and are recently arguing for an incoming “societal collapse.”

Their solutions are all related to social engineering. If they actually believed carbon dioxide was a threat, they could just build nuclear power plants to power Chinese EVs and be done with it. Of course, that would only take a decade or so, and then they wouldn’t have any reason to push for all of these social engineering agendas.

The Guardian:

Many of the Earth’s “vital signs” have hit record extremes, indicating that “the future of humanity hangs in the balance”, a group of the world’s most senior climate experts has said.

More and more scientists are now looking into the possibility of societal collapse, said the report, which assessed 35 vital signs in 2023 and found that 25 were worse than ever recorded, including carbon dioxide levels and human population. This indicates a “critical and unpredictable new phase of the climate crisis”, they said.

…

Global heating is driving increasingly deadly extreme weather across the world, they said, including hurricanes in the US and 50C heatwaves in India, with billions of people now exposed to extreme heat.

The scientists said their goal was “to provide clear, evidence-based insights that inspire informed and bold responses from citizens to researchers and world leaders – we just want to act truthfully and tell it like it is”. Decisive, fast action was imperative, they said, to limit human suffering, including slashing fossil fuel burning and methane emissions, cutting overconsumption and waste by the rich, and encouraging a switch towards plant-based foods.

…

The researchers said global heating was part of a wider crisis, which included pollution, the destruction of nature and rising economic inequality: “Climate change is a glaring symptom of a deeper systemic issue: ecological overshoot, [which] is an inherently unstable state that cannot persist indefinitely. As the risk of Earth’s climate system switching to a catastrophic state rises, more and more scientists have begun to research the possibility of societal collapse. Even in the absence of global collapse, climate change could cause many millions of additional deaths by 2050. We need bold, transformative change.”

Among the policies the scientists recommend for rapid adoption are gradually reducing the human population through empowering education and rights for girls and women, protecting restoring, or rewilding ecosystems, and integrating climate change education into global curriculums to boost awareness and action.

You see? They will admit that women’s rights destroys the birthrate when they are arguing for purposefully destroying the birthrate.

However, when countries like South Korea or Hungary are trying to increase the birthrate, all of the sudden it’s an economic issue, and the government just needs to throw free money at stupid whores to get them to reproduce.

Let that sink in: these people admit that women’s rights destroys birthrates.

It’s not a theory. Everyone knows this.

The climate change hoax was manufactured for the sole purpose of implementing UN Agenda 21 (which later became Agenda 2030), as explained by Glenn Beck back in 2012.#ClimateScam #ClimateCult #ClimateHoax #NetZero #Agenda21 #Agenda2030 #GreatReset pic.twitter.com/7tfxo6FgqU

— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) April 15, 2023

Factory farming is a moral crime against God’s creation & a disgusting practice pic.twitter.com/91AMebIOc5

— E (@ElijahSchaffer) August 19, 2024

There is a video on Twitter going viral, showing a Chinese slaughterhouse. The person who posted it calls it “factory farming” and then says it’s a “crime against God’s creation” and “a disgusting practice. It is actually none of those things.

It’s not a farm. It’s a slaughterhouse. And it is a very clean and efficient slaughterhouse. It couldn’t be any more “humane” to kill animals on an industrial scale. It would actually be difficult to make it more “humane” to kill animals on an individual scale.

Unlike most faggots on the internet, I’ve seen animals be slaughtered many times and slaughtered animals myself. It’s not very nice. You are killing an animal to eat it, and the animal wants to live. You are taking its life to sustain your own. The animal is not happy about this. He wants to live.

This is just reality. Those pigs in that video are slaughtered quickly, and more importantly, cleanly.

This is the American version:

It’s filthy.

Compare it to the Chinese one.

Which meat would you prefer to eat?

A communist named Upton Sinclair wrote a book called “The Jungle” in 1906 complaining about the plight of “the workers” in Chicago. No one really cared about the communism (the Nazis burned it, lol), but the book became famous for its portrayal of the meat industry as filthy. There was human flesh in the ground beef, people were falling in vats and getting boiled alive and then they would just fish them out and put them in a box. It actually led to laws being passed about safety and sanitation in the industry.

This has been an ongoing problem. Killing animals is not something anyone really likes, no one really wants to think about it, no one wants to go into slaughterhouses.

But it is what it is. You can’t kill an animal in a friendly way.

In terms of being “a crime against God’s creation” – what about animals killing other animals?

If you were a pig, would you rather be killed in the Chinese slaughterhouse, or be killed by a tiger.

Watch this:

That is God’s creation: two animals. No humans involved. There is no “crime.” It’s just the basic order of nature: you have to kill to live.

The issue here is: people are faggots. No one wants to deal with anything that is harsh and real, such as the fact that you have to kill a happy little pig to get your pork. Everyone is so soft and gay. No one wants to be made uncomfortable by anything. No one wants to think of the costs.

This particular video was also presumably posted and spread as part of an anti-Sino agenda. It’s a Chinese slaughterhouse, and the implication is that Chinese people are bad because of this. People don’t know the reality of where American meat comes from. The video should have been posted alongside a video from America. I posted one here. There are a bunch of them. Go look at them.

I would assume that the same people who are pushing veganism are also pushing an anti-Chinese agenda. So it overlaps.

Related: German Nutrition Society Reassesses Veganism, Now Recommends It for Vulnerable Populations

Save cows, shrink your penis, pollute the water supply with chemicals we don’t even know how to remove – it’s a win-win for the discerning “environmentalist.”

I know environmentalists are widely considered to be brainless stooges, who are just ultra-susceptible to government/media propaganda. I think that’s more or less entirely accurate. But if you were to try to look at them as rational actors, you would find that they are obsessed with destroying the environment by poisoning it in as many ways as they can.

The Guardian:

A wide range of No Cow protein bars are contaminated with lead and toxic “forever chemicals”, recent filings with the California department of justice charges.

The filings, made by the Environmental Research Center (ERC), a San Diego-based consumer protection non-profit, states that its testing found PFOA, a dangerous PFAS compound, and lead in eight flavors of No Cow bars.

…

The filings allege that No Cow is violating California’s Proposition 65 law, which, among other provisions, requires companies to alert consumers when toxic chemicals are used in goods.

No Cow has been in violation of the law since the company introduced the bars in 2021, the filing claims, and will remain so “until clear and reasonable warnings are provided to product purchasers and users or until this known toxic chemical is either removed from or reduced to allowable levels in the products”.

…

The filings do not provide lead and PFOA levels, but the Environmental Protection Agency states that virtually no level of exposure to either substance in drinking water is safe, while no level of exposure to lead through any route is safe.

This is the same thing with those sickening new paper straws containing much worse chemicals (PFAS) than the old polypropylene plastic straws.

Furthermore, how does not eating cows save cows?

If you stopped the beef industry, the cows would not even be born.

Would you rather be born and live a happy life on the range and then, as you age out, be killed and eaten to help a superior species survive? Or would you rather not be born at all?

We allege that this @NoCow protein bar is contaminated with #PFOA above the #Prop65 standard. We already know that it causes thyroid , kidney & testicular cancer. No wonder #Proposition65 includes it in the contaminants you deserve to know about before buying. #PFAS pic.twitter.com/V93QW9epyP

— Environmental Research Center (@ERC501c3) June 20, 2024

That just reminded me of that Twilight Zone episode where the aliens came, ostensibly to help humanity, and they had a book called “To Serve Man,” which everyone assumed was about helping mankind.

The dark twist at the end was…

It didn’t really make sense that “serve” would be a homonym in an alien language, but still – great stuff.

There was a lot of great stuff in the Twilight Zone, even it if was largely communist Jew propaganda.

The show’s creator, who contributed writing to many of the episodes, was a communist Jew, so you got a lot of “racism is evil” stuff alongside stuff that was just fun like “To Serve Man… It’s a Cookbook!”

At least he was masculine and creative.

Be sure to drop us a comment on whether you think the good episodes of the Twilight Zone outweigh the commie Jew ones. And remember to smash that subscribe button and ring my bells if you want more completely irrelevant commentary on 1950s television shows.

Elvis Dunderhoff contributed to this article. 

Vegans are a tiny part of the population, and most of them don’t even have kids because of cow farts, but somehow most baby starvation cases are vegan in nature

Could Germany get any gayer?

This is not safe. Veganism is proven unsafe. No one thinks it is safe.

Plant Based News:

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ernährung (DGE), the German Nutrition Society, just updated its position on plant-based diets to acknowledge their benefits for human health and the environment.

DGE says that in its reassessment of vegan nutrition, it considered “all four target dimensions” of a sustainable diet – health, the environment, social benefits, and animal welfare – with a particular focus on its benefits to human health and the environment.

Key takeaways from DGE’s reassessment include an endorsement of fully plant-based diets as “health-promoting” for the general population, providing they are “well-planned.”

Previously, DGE also said that plant-based diets were “not recommended” for vulnerable populations (infants, seniors, pregnant people, and so on), whereas now it neither recommends nor rejects a vegan diet for these demographics.

Finally, DGE celebrated the potential for vegan diets to minimize the environmental impact of food production, specifically when compared with traditional animal-derived foods.

You people are supposed to be nutritionists, not cow fart experts.

This shouldn’t even be taken into consideration even if the climate hoax weren’t a hoax at all.

“Compared to the mixed diet currently common in Germany, which includes a high proportion of animal foods, a vegan diet is to be considered more environmentally friendly,” writes DGE. “Especially due to the great potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

Germany’s dietary guidelines update places vegan foods ‘front-and-center’

Plant-based advocacy NGO ProVeg International welcomed the update, with International Nutrition and Health Lead Anna-Lena Klapp describing it as a “new era.”

“It takes vegan diets out of the shadows of the policy debate and places them front-and-center instead. We are delighted that this position has been published and we expect it to influence similar bodies around the world,” said Klapp.

Anna-Lena Klapp

Back in April, DGE published updated dietary guidelines that recommended eating at least 75 percent plant-based foods. That announcement was celebrated for its move away from high-impact animal foods like meat and dairy but criticized for not going further.

These vegans kill babies. They would kill as many babies as the Jews if they got their way.

It’s not good.

There are a lot of people who think animals should be treated fairly. I would say that is the overwhelming majority of people.

Most people would also prefer their food animals be better treated because better-treated animals are safer to eat.

However, the number one group defending so-called “animal rights” is a bunch of nagging women who make outrageous, unreasonable demands, and turn the whole thing into a joke.

New York Post:

PETA got on its high horse this week, calling on the country’s largest manufacturer of amusement rides to stop selling animal-themed carousels.

The animal rights organization sent a letter to Kansas-based Chance Rides on Tuesday arguing that using designs of horses and other animals for the merry-go-round “unintentionally celebrates the exploitation” of animals that are “thinking, feeling, affectionate, playful, and social beings.”

By eliminating animal-themed amusement rides, it would be a blow against industries that still use real animals for entertainment like camel rides or dolphin shows, PETA insisted. Those live animals can face abuse or horrid conditions, the group noted.

PETA suggested to Aaron Landrum, the CEO and president of Chance Rides, that his company only use objects like cars, unicycles, rockets or other designs like shooting stars, rainbows or brooms.

“All animals are thinking, feeling, affectionate, playful, and social beings who form strong bonds with their offspring if permitted to keep them (a rarity),” PETA’s president Ingrid Newkirk wrote in the letter. “They crave freedom from oppression.

“Animal-themed carousel sets reinforce the notion that these sentient beings are simply here for our entertainment, rather than individuals with the same capacity to experience fear, pain, joy, and love as any of us.”

…

“Children learn through play, and teaching them to have respect and compassion for all living, feeling beings can help create a more just and merciful world,” Newkirk said in a press statement.

This is retarded. It’s more “no fun allowed” bullshit from women, which is why women are themselves being replaced with amusement park style rides in the form of AI sex robots.

Of course, the same women trying to shut down children’s amusement park rides are trying to shut down robot sex.

Going back as far as 2017, women started talking about programming sex robots with nagging and harassment features.

Women ruin everything.

They should not be in charge of anything, ever, because they only make bad decisions.

Greta is in the top 1% now, for sure.

She’s made tens or possibly hundreds of millions off of her global scam.

Although I guess she already eats bugs.

The Guardian:

The richest 1% of humanity is responsible for more carbon emissions than the poorest 66%, with dire consequences for vulnerable communities and global efforts to tackle the climate emergency, a report says.

The most comprehensive study of global climate inequality ever undertaken shows that this elite group, made up of 77 million people including billionaires, millionaires and those paid more than US$140,000 (£112,500) a year, accounted for 16% of all CO2 emissions in 2019 – enough to cause more than a million excess deaths due to heat, according to the report.

For the past six months, the Guardian has worked with Oxfam, the Stockholm Environment Institute and other experts on an exclusive basis to produce a special investigation, The Great Carbon Divide. It explores the causes and consequences of carbon inequality and the disproportionate impact of super-rich individuals, who have been termed “the polluter elite”. Climate justice will be high on the agenda of this month’s UN Cop28 climate summit in the United Arab Emirates.

The Oxfam report shows that while the wealthiest 1% tend to live climate-insulated, air-conditioned lives, their emissions – 5.9bn tonnes of CO2 in 2019 – are responsible for immense suffering.

Using a “mortality cost” formula – used by the US Environmental Protection Agency, among others – of 226 excess deaths worldwide for every million tonnes of carbon, the report calculates that the emissions from the 1% alone would be enough to cause the heat-related deaths of 1.3 million people over the coming decades.

Over the period from 1990 to 2019, the accumulated emissions of the 1% were equivalent to wiping out last year’s harvests of EU corn, US wheat, Bangladeshi rice and Chinese soya beans.

The suffering falls disproportionately upon people living in poverty, marginalised ethnic communities, migrants and women and girls, who live and work outside or in homes vulnerable to extreme weather, according to the research. These groups are less likely to have savings, insurance or social protection, which leaves them more economically, as well as physically, at risk from floods, drought, heatwaves and forest fires. The UN says developing countries account for 91% of deaths related to extreme weather.

The report finds that it would take about 1,500 years for someone in the bottom 99% to produce as much carbon as the richest billionaires do in a year.

“The super-rich are plundering and polluting the planet to the point of destruction and it is those who can least afford it who are paying the highest price,” said Chiara Liguori, Oxfam’s senior climate justice policy adviser. The twin crises of climate and inequality were “fuelling one another”, she said.

Yeah, well.

It’s not a real problem.

If leftists are going to protest, let them protest the Jews.

🚨 FOOTAGE: Climate activist Greta Thunberg is interrupted by a climate activist after expressing solidarity with Palestinians. pic.twitter.com/NTENTnVW0p

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) November 13, 2023

They had been suggesting this on the fringe for a long time.

It was only a matter of time before a big time Guardian article.

The Guardian:

If all the world’s dogs went vegan it would save more greenhouse gas emissions than those produced by the UK, according to research advocating the environmental benefits of plant-based pets.

The study estimated cats and dogs consume about 9% of all land animals killed for food – about 7 billion animals annually – as well as billions of fish and aquatic animals. Plant-based diets lower greenhouse gas emissions and require less land and water.

The research at the University of Winchester calculated that if all the world’s dogs went vegan, it would free up a larger land mass than Mexico and more freshwater than all the renewable freshwater in Denmark, and would feed about 450 million additional people – more than the entire EU population.

If all the world’s cats went vegan, it would save more emissions than those produced by New Zealand, land larger than Germany, freshwater exceeding all renewable freshwater in Jordan, and would feed about 70 million additional people – more than the entire UK population, according to the study published in the Plos One scientific journal.

Prof Andrew Knight, the veterinary academic who led the study, said that many pet owners were unaware of the “profound environmental impacts” caused by their animals’ food.

If you sit and watch animals these days, you can tell they don’t have nearly as much energy as they did a decade ago.

They don’t have anyone but us to take care of them.

Ayo, hol up – I thought we were doing insect protein?

Honestly, though I’m against the whole “eat the bugs” thing (it’s a boomer meme, but it was also real), eating bugs is a whole helluva lot better than being vegan.

A lot of people focus on the fact that eating bugs is gross and degrading. Maybe that’s a fair point. But I think people are not really focusing on the quality of the protein. The quality, honestly, is pretty low, in comparison to any animal or fish. But it’s not as low as “plant-based protein,” which is basically a myth.

Yes – nuts and legumes and some other plants technically contain protein, but look into “protein binding” and “bioaccessibility and bioavailability.” These plant proteins cannot sustain human life. These vegans keep dying. It’s simply not viable to force this on people, which I think is why they introduced insect protein.

But hey – maybe they just want to starve you to death with soy and salad.

Campus Reform:

More than 650 academics, public figures, industry professionals and grassroots campaigners endorsed a letter from Sept. 4 urging universities in the United Kingdom (U.K.) to adopt 100% plant-based foods to combat the ‘climate and ecological crisis.’

“We are calling on you to use your positions to speak up and begin the transition to 100% just and sustainable plant-based catering at your own institutions,” the letter posted by the “Plant-Based Universities” campaign states. “Our universities have, for centuries, been shining lights of intellectual, moral, and scientific progress. What we are asking for here is no different.”

Plant-Based Universities is run by Animal Rebellion, which “uses nonviolent civil disobedience to bring about a transition to a just and sustainable plant-based food system, to halt mass extinction, alleviate the worst effects of climate breakdown and ensure justice for animals.”

These are our moral betters

The letter states that animal farming and fishing are the leading drivers of the climate and ecological crises, and that universities and student unions must remove animal products from catering to reduce carbon emissions.

“Students and staff can still bring whatever food they like onto campus,” the letter notes. “What we are asking for is institutional divestment within procurement in the same way that universities are boycotting fossil fuel companies.”

Several U.K. universities, including Goldsmiths’ College, University of London, and Cambridge University, implemented bans on beef and lamb products in their meal plans last year.

Mo Metcalf-Fisher, a spokesperson from Countryside Alliance, a British organization dedicated to “promoting and protecting the rural way of life,” said in a press release that meat bans are an “attack on freedom of choice” and “illogical.”

“Stirling’s students’ union would be much better off sourcing sustainable local meat and dairy produce from Scottish farmers instead,” Metcalf-Fisher said in the press release. “How can an avocado flown in from South America have eco-superiority over a piece of grass fed beef from a local farm?”

…

Climate change activists seek to eliminate the consumption of red meat since its production (i.e., raising, feeding, butchering) emits the most carbon out of any activity, according to Our World in Data.

Lean red meat is also one of the healthiest and most nutritious sources of protein, according to the National Institute of Health.

I just can’t even talk about global warming anymore.

It’s too retarded.

Please, if you want to know my views, just go read the hundreds of thousands of words I’ve already written on the topic.

Things don’t really change, they just get dumber and gayer

“Big Cow is trying to do global warming” is a retarded conspiracy theory on its face.

They used to say “Big Oil is trying to do global warming,” then admitted all the oil companies actually were in on it, because they can drill less, charge more, and make the same amount of money. (Plus “oil companies” are now “energy companies,” and heavily invested in very profitable “green energy” hoaxes. The true part was that oil companies were comfortable destroying the environment, which is why they are willing to get on board with this insane, poisonous “green energy” scam – which by the way, is not even fit for purpose.)

I haven’t actually heard it yet, but I can pretty much just say as a matter of reality that McDonald’s and other big producers of beef would prefer to use “green alternatives” because they’re cheaper and they can charge the same price or even more.

I’m sure certain beef agro-businesses are unhappy about ending beef, but these people are powerless when compared to the distributors. McDonald’s is the most obvious example, and they ship their beef in from Brazil. Most of the cow ranchers in America are still smallish farms, many of them still family owned.

If there is one thing the government and media is good at, it is killing smallish family owned businesses. Claiming these people are powerful is just a way to demonize them. It’s on par with “white privilege” hoaxes.

The Guardian:

The “gigantic” power of the meat and dairy industries in the EU and US is blocking the development of the greener alternatives needed to tackle the climate crisis, a study has found.

The analysis of lobbying, subsidies and regulations showed that livestock farmers in the EU received 1,200 times more public funding than plant-based meat or cultivated meat groups. In the US, the animal farmers got 800 times more public funding.

The money spent on lobbying the US government by meat producers was 190 times more than for the alternatives and was three times higher in the EU. The researchers also found that almost all dietary guidelines avoided highlighting the environmental impact of meat production and bans on alternative products using terms such as “milk”.

Cutting meat consumption in rich nations is vital to tackling the climate crisis. Livestock production causes 15% of all global greenhouse emissions. Cutting meat and dairy consumption also slashes pollution, land and water use, and the destruction of forests, with scientists saying it is the single biggest way for people to reduce their impact on the planet.

The researchers said that tackling the problem would require government policies that ensured the price of meat reflected its environmental costs, potentially via taxation, increased research on alternatives, and better informed consumers.

A 2022 report from the Boston Consulting Group said plant-based meat was by far the most effective climate investment.

That’s bullshit, just like the windmill hoax.

I mean, it’s all bullshit, but destroying the meat industry and replacing it will all this chemical crap greatly increases pollution.

You can just go on down the line. Everything these people say is a lie.

They still haven’t explained how they are going to dispose of all these car-sized batteries, if everyone currently driving a car switches to an electric car. And no one even argues that these toxic, ugly windmills can charge all those cars. They say they will invent new “green technologies” in the future.

It’s all a bunch of never-ending nonsense from these Jews.

I can’t hardly even take it anymore.

Whatever, it’s Saturday night, and I’m tired. But I will do some more research write you up a long thing in the future about how “green alternatives” to beef are poisoning the environment, and then I will also find the proof (which I know exists, because it obviously exists, but to be clear I haven’t seen it) that McDonald’s and other large beef-food distributors are supporting this bullshit.

Elvis Dunderhoff contributed to this article.