Resumption Of Whaling

Japan does justify whaling for scientific purposes when in actual fact all they are doing is support the whale meat industry in Japan before we bother about what Iceland is doing on a very limited scale perhaps we should see the US apply preasure on Japan to stop this pratice but of course that will never happen and just maybe they will get away with putting Iceland down as there isn't really all that much to threaten the US from an econimic point of view unlike Japan.

Lets see an end to this pointless killing without reason and a return to some of the values that we used to have about preserving life of any kind and not just wasting it as we never actually know when some animal or plant may prove of use to our needs but once they are gone there is no way back for most of these species.

If they are doing it for food as the Eskom's do then thats fine (just like deer hunting - eat what you kill).

The Jap's do it for medician (like powered rinho horn), makeup, lipstick and fashions or just to support the whaling industry - then it should be stopped, but let the UN do it.

As everyone in "Bashing America" pumps out - we shouldn't tell the world what to do ... Now some one wants us to put pressure on the Japs to stop whaling Na - let the UN do it.

Hum - never heard anything out of that group saying that whaling was a bad thing - or should be stopped..

Let the UN do it - or the Greenies keep go out in their little boats and do it...

I'm sure you're all aware of the Indians who have the annual whale hunting ritual. This was banned in Canada but for some reason I spent hours watching these guys in a dugout canoe tryng to hunt a whale with TV crews and news helicopters everywhere. What do you think the whale thought of all that?!?

Now it's here again. The happy Icelandic nation of peace loving wolrd protectors are in the spotlight.

"Minke whales are the smallest and most abundant of the great whales....Minke whale meat was for a long time an everyday part of the Icelandic diet, it was much cheaper than other kinds of meat but quite tasty. It has been unavailable for many years and it is doubtful that it would regain it's popularity even though the hunt would resume."

Sorry, I hit enter and posted incomplete.

In summary, I think that if these people are respectful of the numbers and hunt in limited quantities, there should be no problem. How many deer did you shoot last year? Is deer meat available at AM/PM yet?

The Iclendic have always shown a great respect for the Earth and nature, I don't think they would be the gluttonous pigs that we have become due to 'unlimited' resources that we often find are limited...by us.

OM

This whole brouhaha about the "cruel" whale hunting sounds rather fishy to me. The reason for the hunt, on the other hand, sounds perfectly reasonable. Too many people appear to be blubbering over nothing. Let me explain.

Fish exports, primarily cod, account for about two-thirds of Iceland's total exports - a vital part of their economy indeed. Moreover, this does not take into account the additional supply of fish needed for the Icelanders themselves. The supply of cod has been falling for decades, and their economy has suffered accordingly. In fact, this world-wide cod shortage almost led to war with Great Britain (a cold-cod war) in the 70s because of a presumed 200 mile territorial boundary reserved for local, not international, fishing. (Great Britain was infringing on Iceland's 200 mile territorial water claim, and some nets were getting tangled in the dispute.)

The primary reason for killing the minke whales is to study the contents of the whale's stomach to determine if they are a significant contributor to the decline in the cod population. (Increased human consumption, of course, is the major cause for declining supplies, but short of killing humans in large numbers, there's not a lot that can be done about that.) After the whales are studied, the remains (the meat) of the whales will be sold to Iceland's restaurants and markets, and, I suppose, to some exporters. Whale steak, I gather, is considered quite the delicacy, although I have no first hand (or first mouth) knowledge of such.

The government of Iceland plans to hunt and kill 38 whales. (A reduced number, under pressure, from a planned 100.) At present, there are an estimated 43,000 minke whales in Iceland's territorial waters. If my math is correct, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that's less than one tenth of one percent (.001) of the area's total whale population. Not a very significant number by any measure.

My guess is that the Unites States "officially" condemned the hunt just to deflect even more unsubstantiated "anti-environment" attacks by the extreme environmentalists. Moreover, it appears that any protest of this hunt is merely for symbolism, not substance.

I only have one concern about this whole thing. How can I get a dozen whale steaks air-mailed to me?

I am definitely not a vegetarian. I love steak, yay Canadian beef! You guys think it'll kill you so it's overabundant and cheap as hell here now!
I just picked up a 4#%.00 roast for $8.65 and two $12.00 steaks for $5.80 a piece. Keep it up.

While you're at it, boycott French wine, without buying gallons of it this time so you can pour it out (that was a funny one worldwide, way to make a stand)I'm sure the French were laughing thier bags off at that one. Once the demand is screwed up by American's we can eat steak dinners and drink French wine for next to nothing. You may have screwed YOUR economy, but ours is great right now.

As for the need to eat meat and humans are Carn-I-Vors, no kidding? Top of the food chain? Lets see you go kill a deer with your hands big guy and I'll have respect for your clever hunting skill. We have guns to make it a little eaier to be at the top you know, take on a 'roo and get your ass kicked.

My point wasn't that we shouldn't eat meat. We have Save-On-Foods you have the Piggly Wiggly. Making statements that compare North Americans to Eskimos is the worst example I've ever seen.
They NEED to kill in oder to live. You NEED to drive to the store and buy a steak. Why then would you NEED to deer hunt? Don't even start on about how you LIKE deer meat, I LIKE human flesh but I can't eat people, well...wanna come for supper?

just to put the record straight

My mother is from Eire, father from USA (Texas)
I was born in Ontario, I currently reside in UK
I carry a Canadian passport.

I have already contacted 14 other members governments (since original). The excerpt of the pelly amendment i read mentions the USA specifically has the right to impose these embargoes if the Whaling commision is thought to be undermined.

Hi Jim

I think you'll find we humans are omnivores not carnivores - able to sustain ourselves on Meat or veg or both!

No-one needs to eat whale to survive, or use it as perfume, lipstick etc! except perhaps the Innuits where there may not be another sustainable food source.

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't it the US government that put in the pelly amendment giving them the right to impose sanctions?

In Australia we have two species of mammal -- one imported and one native -- which have to be seriously culled for very sound reasons. In the northern part of the currently, the introduced water buffalo does enormous damage to the environment, while our "national symbol" the kangaroo, being an indigenous creature, multiplies at an enormous rate and if not culled, would eat all the fodder on which sheep graze. While kangaroo meat has been a standard food for domestic animals for decades, it is not yet accepted as suitable for humans, although I think this may eventually come about. This would be an ecological breakthrough, as humans could have as their staple a diet a species which naturally regenerates.

Yep - you are 100% correct - we can live on a number of various food groups...

And Yes - Deer meet is good - it is also healther than Cow - buffalo is also healther than cow. US is starting (slowly) to bring these different meats to the stores - but at a very high prices... (Farm raised buffalo, deer, elk..etc)..

I said - Whaling is out dated unless you are doing it for food - the native americans in Alaska they have found, are healther if they eat whale meat.

Yes - The US past that ... but again there are so many in the world (reference Ozmedia) that complain that the US is always enforcing our beliefs on outsiders - All I am saying is that if you want to do something to Iceland or Japaneese or any other whaling nation... LET THE UN do it.

People cry out that we (USA) are imposing our will on the rest of the world... Then in the same breath - they cry - You (USA) need to do something about this - The World can't have it both ways .... We are either the enforcers or we sit back and let the UN do it...

I Say - Lets See the UN do it... And I'll bet you nothing is going to happen ....

I hope I missed the sarcasm alert!

It was really, really mean whale? I mean a bully that kept picking fights with those defensless fishing boats? I'm sure it was just asking for it. Dont worry though the enterprise will save us by traveling back in time to retrieve the last whales to thoart that pesky whale ufo thingy that would cause the end of us all as we know it.
This actually inspires me to wack a baby seal, here sealy, sealy, sealy, come to jeffrey now.
On a side a note not all whales are cute and cuddly. I saw a show once about killer whales and let me tell you they are apply named. In this show it showed a herd of killer whales actally herding a great blue whale from diving back under as they took turns eating the belly of the whale. It was very disturbing but it was even more disturbing to see them hunt seals. They would spit them into the air and bat them with their tails for fun. The oddest thing they did would that the last seal they catch, they would return it back onto the shore unharmed to remind them they are out there waiting for them. Talk about freaky.

Just what IS the best interest in this case? It becomes so very hard to tell when talking about international issues such as this.

The world in general has a stake in how we all treat it.

In some respects, we are citizens of a particular country, and in others we are citizens of this planet. [Maybe some day we'll grow beyond that, too.]

But when an action is taking place with the backing of a particular nation, which can affect the world in general, someone has to make a stand. This is why we have formed various international organizations, and given them [whether only on paper, or in gestures] authority to monitor and police us all, to some degree.

The thirst of one nation to use a rare non renewable resource can drive up the price of that resource for other nations. The other nations should have SOME say about it...

Was I speaking of oil? Whale? Plutonium?

Can anyone argue that it is not of interest to the USA that there be world peace?

Can you argue that it's not in the interest of the USA that there be life in the oceans?

Can you argue that the protection of one individual is more or less important than all other citizens?

These become very difficult questions in 'real world' arenas. But they shouldn't be.

Whaling convention that attempted to creat a no go zome in several of the Oceans for whaling but the rest of the member countries didn't like the idea all that much so it never got past the first vote stage seems that it ruffeled some feathers or something.

Actually I would like to see these member nations take some form of action but currently it just won't hapen because Japan keeps buying them off with vast amounts of money to vote Japan's way that is how it got through last time and I'm sure it is the way it will remain for the forseeable future.

If a country does not, first and foremost, behave in a manner that's conducive to protecting and advancing its own best interest, then the leaders of that country are doing its citizens a great disservice. What would you expect, a country (any country) acting in the best interest of another - only to the detriment of its own? The problems arise when the best interest of one country conflicts with the best interest of another. (But define and/or separate real and measurable best interests versus simply a desired outcome.)

Yes, I know, it's one world and we all have a stake in it. And yes, world peace would be nice to have, but not possible to have unless everyone in the world wants peace. (And not everyone does.) And one nation "might" be justified in questioning another's use of a finite world resource, but only if it's detrimental to their own best interest. (And not necessarily just their desired outcome.) But these whales are in Iceland's territorial waters, and even if all of them were killed, other than the fact you couldn't see them anymore on a whale watching trip, no one would be directly harmed. How would the Canadians feel, for example, if some American greenies tried to force them to cut down fewer trees - or more comparatively accurate, NO trees at all? How would the people of Australia feel if some other country tried to limit their movement just to protect the coral reef off Australia's coast? And how would Americans feel if Iceland, for example, tried to force them to shut down all the oil wells in Texas, or if Great Britain tried to force the folks in Alaska to stop fishing for salmon? MYOB, in some cases, is the best course of action.

In previous (war related) threads, comments such as, "you invade Iraq for some stated reasons, so why not invade China for the same reasons?" The answer lies in best-interest. It was (arguably) in the United State's best interest to invade Iraq, where as it's in our best interest to refrain from invading China. And France didn't oppose the Iraq action on principle; they opposed it because it was in their best interest to do so. Yes, like it or not, best interest trumps principle - every time. If it didn't, Mexico would have invaded the United States a long time ago and try to get Texas back. (And Arizona and New Mexico and...)

People are getting too bent out of shape over 38 whales - whales that are in someone else's back yard. 38 whales out of 43,000, less than one-tenth of one percent. This is too much ado about nothing. You know, if it were discovered that AIDS could be eradicated from the earth because of something found only in a whale - but ALL whales would become extinct in the process - there would be those extreme environmentalists that would rather see millions of people die than even one whale.

Well, you're hardly one of those 'mean spirited' republicans. But that's as far as I'm going with that topic...

You asked where did big business come into the picture...

From http://tinyurl.com/kmz5

"The government says the cull is needed to study the stomach contents of the minke whales and see if they feed too much on fish stocks such as cod, which are vital to the national economy."

and

"Whale meat not used by scientists in the research program will be sold commercially in Iceland, ending up on the tables of fancy restaurants."

There will be no use for the whale meat, they just want to cut open the bellies.

We know that Iceland used to have a large whaling industry, and it would thrive again if it were determined that there were some 'need' to thin the herds. My paranoid thinking on this is that we are witnessing a precursor to Iceland licensing whale hunts in their waters. What an easy way to boost the economy there...

Why be skeptical?

"Icelandic authorities have gone to great lengths to prevent pictures being taken of the hunt. Requests by Icelandic media to monitor the hunt were turned down and the captains of the whaling vessels are under strict orders not to fire their harpoons if other vessels are in the vicinity.

Iceland had initially proposed a bigger take -- 100 minkes, 100 fin whales and 50 sei whales for each of the next two years -- but cut back following opposition from some members of the International Whaling Commission."

The fishing/whaling industry would benefit greatly from all this science.

If the research shows that the whales are responsible for the depletion of local fishing stocks, would Iceland then be able to justify more whaling to preserve said stocks?

If Iceland is doing honest science, they will calculate how much fish the current whale population eats and compare it to historical records of how much fish has been harvested from the area and how many whales have inhabited the area. The resulting data would then be displayed in ways that are as unbiased as possible. (I wouldn't want to see any of the techniques mentioned in the classic book "How to Lie with Statistics".)

Ideally Iceland should have witnesses aboard any whalers to verify that the data collected is accurate and honest. If there is enough money at stake, organizations have been known to 'cook' the data to 'prove' the point that benefits them.

Was it a Canadian tarantula? Many people think we wait to get walked on, we're STILL waiting.

As for the Orca's here, it is really neat to see and never gets boring. It's interesting that ALL orca whales in captivity have a curled fin whereas the wild orca's have straight fins that point up out of the water, they really look different. Captive orcas are said to have nothing wrong with them and the trainers will say it's normal but not understood?!?

Perhapse it's from non use or simply swimming in circles all day. I enjoy wildlife enough to not want to kill it but then again think GP goes a little overboard andI'm not into the whole tree hugger thing, although the trees here are stunning.

I'm kinda up in arms and not really sure how I stand on this particular matter except that there APPEARS to be an abundant stock and the killings are limited and may even be justified if a scientific approach is taken. As for it condoning the hunting of whales in other countries or oceans, that depends on the situation. Japanese are known to devour just aout anything with a heart beat (while it's still beating)so I ma ynot feel positive about their intentions. In this case, based on my beliefs, I feel it justified but must be closely monitored.

Yep, I saw all those things - even mentioned some of them myself in previous posts.

As an interesting side note, that last quote (from the article) that you posted, read as follows:

"Nations opposed to whaling, including the United States, say there is no scientific basis for the tests".

This one little sentence reads as though, and implies that, the United States specifically said, "there is no scientific basis for the tests". When, in fact, the United States didn't say that at all. The official State Department statement included the following:

"The United States believes that lethal research on whales is not necessary, and that the needed scientific data can be obtained by well-established non-lethal means."

Talk about twisting words to achieve a desired outcome!

A little "interpretation" of words here, a little "omission" there, a little more "opinion" further on, and don't forget that very leading headline, and presto, you have a very slanted and misleading story at best, and an editorial comment masquerading as a news story at worst.

I still say that this is much ado about nothing - except what they might have meant (whoever they are) and what someone is speculating about concerning what they might do, maybe 3 years from now.

Oh, and don't forget, The Sky is Falling!

(Where's my whale steak?)

"How would the Canadians feel, for example, if some American greenies tried to force them to cut down fewer trees - or more comparatively accurate, NO trees at all?"

There's NO WAY America would stop Canadians cutting down trees. Our prime lumber is mainly exported to the US, therefore it is in the better interests of America to have us clear cut the Canadian forests. Canadians are actually up in arms (real arms not guns)about the American's buying all our lumber and demanding that our forests are clear cut to supply thier demand. Many jobs are lost when American lumber exports are down, but compared to the amount of people who are against US exporting of lumber, those out of work would be barely discernable. I won't even get into how our fisherman hate sharing thier limited fiching runs and times with American firsherman who fish the Canadian West coast.

American greenies would be welcomed with open arms if they protected OUR forests and waters from gluttonous US corporations comsumers.

The IWC's scientific committee estimates that there are between 510,000 and 1.1 million minke whales in the southern hemisphere, with a best guess of 760,000. It estimates there are another 150,000 in the North Atlantic, and 25,000 in the North Pacific. Total world-wide population: About 1 million. (The most populous great whale is the sperm, which numbers about 2 million.)

For the past 10 years, the IWC's scientific committee has developed a complex quota system to work out the number of whales that can safely be hunted. Using conservative estimates, it estimates that up to 2,000 minke whales a year could be hunted without reducing the total population. Yet the 40 members of the IWC have repeatedly rejected their own scientists' advice. (They must be in the pockets of the beef industry.)

Some more specifics:

Whale steak with herbs

Ingredients (for 4 persons)

ca. 600 g whale beef in thin slices
1 1/2 teaspoon pepper
1 1/2 teaspoon salt
8-10 soup spoons finely chopped herbs (various)
butter (for the frying)
caviar (for decoration)
fried potatoes
green salad, small tomatoes

How to prepare

1) Mix pepper, salt and herbs and marinate the slices of meat in this mix just before frying

2) Fry the slices in butter in the pan; approximately 1 minute on each side

Decorate with caviar, serve with fried potatoes and salad.

Some more specifics:

Whale Steak

Ingredients

4 sl Whalemeat - (5 to 6 oz ea)
Butter; for frying
Salt; to taste
Freshly-ground black pepper;
- to taste
4 Onion rings
2 tb Finely-diced green or red
-peppers
1 tb Finely-diced parsley
1 tb Finely-diced gherkins

Instructions

Carve the meat into slices of about 3/4- to 1-inch thick, beat them with your hands and press them into shape. Preheat the frying pan and melt some butter in it. Brown the butter before adding the meat. Fry the steaks on both sides. Whale meat should be fried for about 4 to 5 minutes on each side. The steaks taste best when they are medium-rare, but they should be warmed right through and not eaten raw.

Serve the steaks on a plate, place an onion ring on each of them and fill it with peppers, parsley and gherkins. Potato scollops taste good together
with the steaks. Serve with a bowl of good, crisp lettuce and salad.

This recipe yields 4 servings.

Pass the wine, please.

My sister is a lawyer in Barrow--she's been on an Eskimo whale-hunt. Everyone in the village got about 2 pounds of fat to eat right away, which at that temperature was about like ice cream, they put about a couple of tons of fat into safe-keeping.
Whales are still endangered species (don't need thinning), there isn't a lot of meat on a whale compared to body size, this isn't efficient

OK - You are upset about a single Minke whale taken by Iceland -

Here's the count from the IWC on infractions - from Hunting - or ship hitting a whale ...

Demark control (Greenland/Iceland..etc) - 162 (139 - illegal hunt)
USA - 50 - infractions
Russa - 134 infractions

Thats the ones reported - and your upset about a single one in Iceland ... I hate to see whats going to happen when you see these numbers...

Doesn't include Japaneese - or other countries..

First of all, I don't smoke pot. I have done but quit years ago, please don't make defamatory comments like that. P.S. it's "Don't bogART that joint my friend".

As for me changing MY opinion. It was the USA who fought for control with the pelly agreement. NOW THE USA won't take a stand. As for who can't make up thier minds, it's the US who hasn't taken a stand after fighting for the right to make a stand. Like I said, it's just like Baghdad, you declare war to "Liberate the people and rebuild the Iraqi government", after the shooting is done, you pull out and let the other countries, who you slandered for not fighting, clean up the mess and help Iraq build a new system of government.

If ANYONE is two faced here it is the US government.

Again, you all just blindly read what others are saying about the US and turn your backs on the fact that America is not living up to its intentions...again, but leaving it up to the other 'useless' or 'non-supportive' country's to clean up your mess.

But you'll probably disagree with that fact also and say how wonderful the US army is and how you are unstoppable. Perhapse you NEED to stop and see what you've left behind one day.

P.S. As for the cheap whore on Saturday night, nobody's ever said anything that nice to me before, sniff, sniff.

Yes people do overlook the fact that nature has her own way of keeping her forests alive and clean. Man has mucked up her eco system for $$$. Clear cutting is not the way to harvest. Face it, timber is needed, it just needs to be taken in a more eco friendly way. No I am not a greenie, just someone who wants to leave something for my great grandkids

YES I'm aware of the softwood lumber embargo. Trees and forests were detroyed long before this was in place, when exporting lumber was a big cash grab. Didn't take the Canadian government long to see the money there, unfortunately, it's taken a long time for them to realize the effects on the natural course of the forests.

A killer whale recently attacked and destroyed a small sailing vessel off the east coast of Australia. The Australian family who was on the boat, was out cruising the seas, just minding their own business, when the unprovoked attack occurred. Although extremely terrorized and still in a state of shock, the family barely escaped with their lives.

This is obviously an act of retaliation for what's happening to the whale's cousins off the coast of Iceland. Whales do stick together, you know. Perhaps the United Nations should get involved and try to mediate this dispute.

I figured if you've read my opinions here, you wouldn't think I'd condone clear cutting.

they actually stopped the practice in BC some time ago. When the luimber demands from the US got out of control, they pretty much had NO choice but to clear cut. This caused the forests to be preserved for lumber exports and now has helped fuel the hundreds of wildfires burning away the province. Although a softwood lumber embargo was put in place, it was a little too late. Now out 'Protected' forests burn out of control due to the absence of natural firelines.

As for the Canadian recon, it has been stated as the world's best. The USA continues to use Canadian recon on a regular basis because of the speed and detection systems on the Coyote, if we join in.

http://tinyurl.com/l4gz

Honestly, no offense, I did sense a little satire in your post, but I often do even when you don't imply it. Seeing as your post was tagged after others referencing how Orca's are dangerous, I assumed that you were also referencing the Orca.

The article was quite amusing!
?We were ten miles off the beach with no radio and Helen was going into shock because of her injury.?

"After several hours the party managed to phone the yacht charter company with Anthony?s mobile and the coastguard eventually rescued them."

gee, what's wrong with this picture? 10 miles offshore with NO radio. Very clever. They must be from inland England and not the coast. Most British people are excellent sailors as that is what they are raised with while living on an island. I was sailing my first jib at 7 a catamaran at 9 (my dad built that one, thanks dad!)

But for the sheep herders and dairy farmers of the inland plains, I can see where they may find a cell phone to be enough, DOH!.

Bright as a 2 watt lightbulb.

...never reads/watches/listens to news, and never gets involved in politics, you sure do know a lot. Gee Whiz, you sure are smart. Thank you, sir, for setting me straight.

"The rest of the world has indeed followed the lead set by the United States insofar as quality, excellence, and allowing market forces drive their economies."

Now I'm sure it is actually sarcasm, but that's exactly the kind of comment that gets Americans the reputation of "we're the best" arrogance.

I've seen a lot of people stand up for their country here but none as blind to the rest of the world as you. I'm not gonna start ranting about what you should be like and what I think etc. It's just a note. Your stand here is as a somewhat esteemed and respected American, you are setting the example for what the American public is like. You make a statement like that and wonder how people could consider Americans arrogant over nothing?

Your country has no relevant history in comparison to the rest of the world (not old enough to have a REAL history just recent events that you've considered victories) yet you speak as if you founded the rest of the free world?

How big does your head actually get? With that much room, you could at least add a brain or some common sense.

You're just too fast. If you would have just sat back and enjoyed the show, you would have seen OzManiac blast those words, just as he's done over and over again in the past. I would have then corrected my "typo", and pointed out that those were the words of Sir Winston Churchill, not mine. (Not that I necessarily disagree.) So there ya' go. You tripped my trap too soon, but to avoid "misleading" others as well, I'll fess up. (And yes, there's no doubt I would have caught the varmint.)

I didn't know you were bear-baiting, next time I'll keep my mouth shut. Many apologies.

Stay tuned for my essay on America. I've been working on it for a few weeks, and it's close to completion. Although it will be positive in nature, and perhaps an answer to the constant "blame America" banter that's been thrown around, it will, I believe, show many aspects of what I believe is both right and wrong with our great nation. I would like to share it with many of you folks (both those who generally agree and disagree with me), however, I'm not quite sure of the best way to do it. It will be quite lengthy when it's finished, perhaps too lengthy for this discussion thread, not to mention the "off-topic" nature of the thing. (But I contribute enough to the "technical" aspects of this site that maybe I can take a liberty or two with the diversion.)

And about OzManiac, we all know too well the two-faced hypocrisy he spews around here, and the intellectually ignorant nature of his "opinions" But I believe that I bait him as much - or more - than he baits me. It would be an interesting - and very easy - task to go through his recent babblings and find contradictions, lies, mistruths, and so on. But personally, I have better things to do.-regards

I caught the WC comments. Although I didn't recognize the whole statement, I do recognize a few lines.

Funny but isn't that what apparently toer Britain apart? Churchill was a brilliant and powerful man, often considered crass and arrogant too.

As for my "unintelligent" opinions. You're right, I don't go sifting through hundreds of OTHER opinions inorder to find one that I agree with. I simply speak my mind, I can do that because I'm capable of forming an opinion without cutting and pasting what suits me and what doesn't, from websites.

But you're right, to see an American make such a statement, even if quoting from history as you so often do because you've run out of recent intelligent statements made by your OWN government, would have pissed me off. Not enough to bother me outside this forum, it never is, but at least towards your own ignorance.

The problem with people who see themselves as worldly and wise as to how everyone SHOULD be conducting thier lives, is that they rarely have any idea how THEY look or sound to others.
At least I have a life.

You said that you, "don't go sifting through hundreds of OTHER opinions in order to find one that (you) agree with." The implication here is that I do, and this is where you're wrong - very wrong. (Deep inside, you really know this, but it's the only thing you think you can use to attack me.) I consider myself very well read and very informed. You, on the other hand, have admitted on more than one occasion that you never, or seldom, read too much, and that you're not really "into" being informed and/or involved - and it's quite obvious. (You just talk to horses and travel around with some bands.) It's obvious to me (and others) that you're all mouth with nothing to back it up. Sure, you have an opinion, but most of the time it's an uninformed opinion.

Contrary to what you may think, I don't adopt anyone's opinion as my own. I do try to have my facts in order before forming my opinion, while you, on the other hand, seem to just have an opinion - at times, totally baseless as to the pertinent facts. Thus, my comment about your "unintelligent" opinions. I could give scores of examples, but you're too lost in la-la land to realize it.

You came charging into these discussion thread several months ago like a bull in a china shop spewing baseless accusations in a lame attempt to discredit me and/or otherwise knock me down. You know it; I know it; and many others know it. Your very first discussion thread is all one needs to look at to determine your intentions. You're a loud-mouth boorish clown who needs to grow up. You're a 30 something know-it-all, who is really lost in the fog of how you wish things to be. You can't see reality, only fantasy. Moreover, you've proven yourself to be cruel and mean-spirited - even to those with whom you've never conversed.

In a real debate of opinions based on facts - true facts - you're a novice, but you think you're king. Well you're nothing, little man, and you prove it time and time again. And the more you open your big mouth, the more you show these things to be true.

Many people have sent me emails asking me why I even bother conversing with an imbecile like you. I must admit, sometimes I ask myself the same question.

For finally realizing that I have NOTHING in common with you, nor do I wish to. I don't think I'd hold too many friends or win artist contracts if I was.

Your attitude is the whole reason I have a job in the music industry, peolpe just want to escape the conformity minded North American audience.

Your assumptions of my character are based on what? Yuo have NO idea, and YES you are STILL wrong about my employment with North American Telecom, but you choose to see everything your way anyhow and are a terrible judge of character.

I've spent YEARS studying human emotions, personalities and mostly the EGO (as a result of my interset in forensic studies and criminology). Your opinion of my beliefs political or social is formed based on information I have given you, therefore your conclusions are also those which I have fed you.

Get it yet, puppet?

You buy into my American slander like a little child with his allowance at the candy store. Bottom line is, I've never actually expressed my true political beliefs here because you'd assume I was jealous of America (which is far from true, believe me on that atleast). Who wants a conformist when you can have an argument instead, they're much more satisfying.

My original POST to you was NOT as it was interpreted, as MOST statements made here are misinterpreted but you will never see that wit your eyes closed, which you have proven many times.

As a person in my life, you'd last half a minute before being 86'd. As a Canadian, you'd probably be one of the few shot each year. You underestimate people, make assumptions, spew your Republican BS (like a true politician) and generally just act like a loser (maybe they accept people like yourself in the states, I dunno, but you'd be considered a dork here).

Anyone who knows that much about thier government doesn't fit in BC because nobody cares or wants to hear it.

I've said before that I don't want anything to do with you, I don't want to converse with you. In the ONE post that I placed under yours, I stated that I wasn't interested in another faggy little flame off with a yankee who thinks he's cool, yet here we are again.

I'd like to know what it would take to get you to ignore my comments and live your own miserable little existence. Perhapse you don't know yourself and that's why you are so unhappy with your life and those around you.

There are peple here who I will agree with and at other times disagree with. It is ususally left at that. With you, unless you have the world agreeing with you, you just keep going until it ends up in your pathetic attempts at name calling and personality analysis, you've never been even remotely accurate there.

I guess that even though I know NOTHING of American politics other than Americans believe and back anything thier retarded president says, I can say I don't like Republicans,they are arrogant, assumptive, dorky, geeks, if you're an example of course.

I can't belive I spend this much time reading and answering your long winded crap. It is worth NOTHING and says NOTHING other than American's are losers (apologies to the other American's who have shown me otherwise).

Go put some more tape on your glasses and turn on your communicator, your worse than syphillis, you never go away and you make people crazy.

Beam him up Scotty he thinks he's the most intelligent life down here...heaven help us, we'd all be dead.

(heaven forbid) a ........ no, I can't say it. I just can't bring myself to say that you sound like ....................... well, it's the "L" word. (or "D" word).

Have I been misreading you all this time?

DID WHALES SUDDENLY8 BECOME PART OF IT INFRASTRUCTURE? WHAT IS THIS B.S. DOING ON A TECH SITE?

A trade deficit is the difference between the costs of imports weighed against the profits made from exports. Our current exports are around the 700 billion range, and imports are in the 1100 billion (1.1 trillion) range, for a difference of around 400 billion. The difference, by the way, could be almost totally attributed to our dependence on foreign oil. Moreover, the trade deficit is also affected by the strong dollar, weak dollar, strong euro, weak euro, interest rates here and there, and so on. (Trying to understand it makes my brain hurt.)

You said that the US trade deficit is 7-1. What do you mean by that?

Are you a friend or life partner of a man who calls himself RiverFreight?

Nobody has implied this is relevant to TR. It is an open/off topic discussion.

There are no rules that I've read so far that say you must participate if the topic doesn't amuse you. Or maybe just the thought of pushing a button and having it print a letter on your computer screen is still amusing you, so you find it neat to read your own words online?

Look in the mirror, open your mouth and blab away.

Of narrow minded people who can't agree to disagree and must always be correct.

They should know better than to imply I'm the one who's wrong. Until such time, flame on (God I hate that phrase, do you not consider a "flamer" in the same context as Canadian's do?).

Actually most people here can have diagreements without attmepting to belittle of defame his/her opponent in an attempt to look better. Usually it is just let go and the next discussion start without bias. Unfortunately, those who can't agree will sometimes resort to little head games and start using their 'peers' to justify thier actions. Not everyone is as immature as me though, some people here actually work for a living.

OK - I am a registered republican - but my beliefs are found in the definitions of libertarian and conservative. I don't believe that the government should control anything but the safety of the boards - I believe that my freedoms were given to me by a higher power than man - "These truths are self evident - that all men are created equal" - gee isn't that a nasty little thing to put into a document that a government is to live by.

So its not that I associate my self with a party but with the definition of a term - which makes it easier for people to understand where you stand.

Better than saying I swing like a blade of grass in the breeze - never standing up for anything -

Hope that helps ... clean your mind about - why I classify themselves as a CL or others classify themselves as LD - L - Dem - Rep - Socialist - Communist - Fascis - whatever ... is the beliefs of that system that they argee with ... kind of like religon - Christian - budish - Musilum - Hindi - whatever ...

If you have no beliefs then you can't understand someone that does...