Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old November 30th 05, 03:55 AM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
John Barnard
 
Posts: n/a
Default BEARS and WHALES



clifto wrote:

http://www.lookaboutusa.com/ wrote:
Also thanks to Greenpeace who have alreadysunk nine whalinf ships


Goddamned ****ing terrorists.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.


If terrorism is required to make sure that another species doesn't get
delegated to the heap on non-existence then so be it!

JB

  #2   Report Post  
Old November 30th 05, 04:41 AM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
Michael Lawson
 
Posts: n/a
Default BEARS and WHALES


"John Barnard" wrote in message
...


clifto wrote:

http://www.lookaboutusa.com/ wrote:
Also thanks to Greenpeace who have alreadysunk nine whalinf

ships

Goddamned ****ing terrorists.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential

nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang

Zemin.

If terrorism is required to make sure that another species doesn't

get
delegated to the heap on non-existence then so be it!


Does Greenpeace attack Inuits who go whale hunting?
Just curious.

--Mike L.


  #3   Report Post  
Old November 30th 05, 02:50 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
bpnjensen
 
Posts: n/a
Default BEARS and WHALES

Does Greenpeace attack Inuits who go whale hunting?
Just curious.

--Mike L

Greenpeace, AFAIK, harasses the big factory whaling operations that
massacre hundreds at a time. While I am certain that many of them
sympathize directly with the whales (I know I do), their fundamental
goal is species and oceanic preservation. The same is essentially true
of Sea Shepherd, although I think their people may even more strongly
identify with the plight of the whale being hunted.

I don't think they bother the Inuits or others who hunt on a
subsistence basis, although if the target species is truly endangered
they work to find other options.

Bruce Jensen

  #4   Report Post  
Old December 12th 05, 02:34 AM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
John Barnard
 
Posts: n/a
Default BEARS and WHALES



bpnjensen wrote:

Does Greenpeace attack Inuits who go whale hunting?

Just curious.

--Mike L

Greenpeace, AFAIK, harasses the big factory whaling operations that
massacre hundreds at a time. While I am certain that many of them
sympathize directly with the whales (I know I do), their fundamental
goal is species and oceanic preservation. The same is essentially true
of Sea Shepherd, although I think their people may even more strongly
identify with the plight of the whale being hunted.

I don't think they bother the Inuits or others who hunt on a
subsistence basis, although if the target species is truly endangered
they work to find other options.

Bruce Jensen


Bruce,

All the above that you state is right on the money. No one should ever
begrudge an indigenous people their chance to eke out a living on extremely
limited resources (such as with the Inuit). It's the commercial whalers or
thugs that slaughter rhinos and elephants for horns and tusks that p*sses
me off to no end. Humanity has killed off enough species on this planet and
sooner or later such extinctions will come back to haunt us.

JB

  #5   Report Post  
Old November 30th 05, 04:27 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
MnMikew
 
Posts: n/a
Default BEARS and WHALES


"John Barnard" wrote in message
...


clifto wrote:

http://www.lookaboutusa.com/ wrote:
Also thanks to Greenpeace who have alreadysunk nine whalinf ships


Goddamned ****ing terrorists.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.


If terrorism is required to make sure that another species doesn't get
delegated to the heap on non-existence then so be it!

I bet you're a PETAphile too.




  #6   Report Post  
Old November 30th 05, 05:33 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
bpnjensen
 
Posts: n/a
Default BEARS and WHALES

I bet you're a PETAphile too.

Don't know about JB, but I am. If it's opposed to cruelty to, or
exploitation of, children or critters, I'm for it.

Bruce Jensen

  #7   Report Post  
Old November 30th 05, 09:13 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
MnMikew
 
Posts: n/a
Default BEARS and WHALES


"bpnjensen" wrote in message
oups.com...
I bet you're a PETAphile too.


Don't know about JB, but I am. If it's opposed to cruelty to, or
exploitation of, children or critters, I'm for it.

You DO realize PETA is a major contributor to known domestic terrorist
organizations like ALF and ELF. So you're all for firebombing car
dealerships as well then.


  #8   Report Post  
Old November 30th 05, 10:24 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
bpnjensen
 
Posts: n/a
Default BEARS and WHALES

MnMikew wrote:

"bpnjensen" wrote in message

oups.com...

I bet you're a PETAphile too.


Don't know about JB, but I am. If it's opposed to cruelty to, or
exploitation of, children or critters, I'm for it.


You DO realize PETA is a major contributor to known domestic terrorist

organizations like ALF and ELF. So you're all for firebombing car
dealerships as well then.

I do not know this for certain; if you can provide some proof, either
rmaterial, an eyewitness account or a conviction in a court of law, I
will accept it. Having said that -

Unless a human being is harmed by one of these groups, I do not
consider an organization "terrorist." Civilly disobedient, certainly.
Guilty of property destruction, yes, sometimes. Terrorist? *No,* as
long as no humans are physically. As far as property destruction goes,
I am not in favor of bombing car dealerships or people's homes.

If, however, you consider it a terrorist organization despite lack of
human injury or death, then count me among the terrorists. Animals are
terrorized, abused, vivisected, cruelly beaten and murdered every day
in thousands of ways and circumstances, at the hands of humans who have
no special claim to any right to do so. I feel little sympathy for a
person whose pertinent property is destroyed when he or she shamelessly
abuses and tortures pain-feeling creatures on a business-as-usual
basis. This is fascism, true blue unadulterated fascism by definition
at its terrifying worst, and the animals have no voice, no vote, no
recourse whatsoever - except by those who stick up for them.

I am solidly in favor of working to educate and legislate compassion
and rights for animals. When this fails, as it so often does in the
ethically corrupt human political world, then it is fair to fight fire
with fire - so long as no human is physically harmed. Yes, I believe
that, and make no apology whatsoever. I know in my heart that the
sanctity of material possessions cannot compare with the sanctity of a
living creature's freedom from abuse.

There are various related issues, and I will be happy to discuss them
in private, not on this messy forum.

Bruce Jensen

  #9   Report Post  
Old November 30th 05, 10:27 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
dxAce
 
Posts: n/a
Default BEARS and WHALES



bpnjensen wrote:

MnMikew wrote:

"bpnjensen" wrote in message

oups.com...

I bet you're a PETAphile too.


Don't know about JB, but I am. If it's opposed to cruelty to, or
exploitation of, children or critters, I'm for it.


You DO realize PETA is a major contributor to known domestic terrorist

organizations like ALF and ELF. So you're all for firebombing car
dealerships as well then.

I do not know this for certain; if you can provide some proof, either
rmaterial, an eyewitness account or a conviction in a court of law, I
will accept it. Having said that -

Unless a human being is harmed by one of these groups, I do not
consider an organization "terrorist." Civilly disobedient, certainly.
Guilty of property destruction, yes, sometimes. Terrorist? *No,* as
long as no humans are physically. As far as property destruction goes,
I am not in favor of bombing car dealerships or people's homes.

If, however, you consider it a terrorist organization despite lack of
human injury or death, then count me among the terrorists. Animals are
terrorized, abused, vivisected, cruelly beaten and murdered every day
in thousands of ways and circumstances, at the hands of humans who have
no special claim to any right to do so. I feel little sympathy for a
person whose pertinent property is destroyed when he or she shamelessly
abuses and tortures pain-feeling creatures on a business-as-usual
basis. This is fascism, true blue unadulterated fascism by definition
at its terrifying worst, and the animals have no voice, no vote, no
recourse whatsoever - except by those who stick up for them.

I am solidly in favor of working to educate and legislate compassion
and rights for animals. When this fails, as it so often does in the
ethically corrupt human political world, then it is fair to fight fire
with fire - so long as no human is physically harmed. Yes, I believe
that, and make no apology whatsoever. I know in my heart that the
sanctity of material possessions cannot compare with the sanctity of a
living creature's freedom from abuse.

There are various related issues, and I will be happy to discuss them
in private, not on this messy forum.


Damn, I'm sure hungry for a steak!

Meat: It's what real DX'ers have for dinner.

dxAce
Michigan
USA


  #10   Report Post  
Old November 30th 05, 10:41 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
bpnjensen
 
Posts: n/a
Default BEARS and WHALES

Meat: It's what real DX'ers have for dinner.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

It's what fools use to clog their arteries.

BJ



Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:45 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017