White Doors

I don't care what you do about your opinion. I am just suggesting to be more respectful of the people there. You may not agree with it, but they are THERE. NOW. Your opinion doesn't mean fuck all in comparison. get it?

Actually, no. It does not make me feel better. In fact, it makes me feel a lot of animosity towards people like you who insist on putting ridiculous responsibility on people like me. Did you ever stop to think that maybe I DID use my voice to gradually convince other Canadians to pull troops out of YOUR mission? I am tickled pink and no, it is not about the money. It is about principle and responsibility. Here is a question for you: if The Majority of Canadians go broke and can not afford to bring you back to Canada, how are you going to get home? Charles, I know it's hard but try not to be such an idiot will you? This guy is actually serving in Afghanistan you know. Don't be such a dork and remember your words can cause harm.

mmmm..... swaying breasts....

Says the person who believes the government pulled off 9/11. LOL

Why would you think I hate Natives?? I have native friends. I have issues with people saying one race of people are better than another race. We are all just people. full stop. Perhaps you could show me where I said I hate natives or even insinuated that. If not I could pull a 'figleaf' on you.

You are calling me a xenophobe because of my assertion that Natives are NOT inheritently better than any other race? Do you know what xenophobe means? You are the xenophobe, not me.

Could you please explain the disappearance of the old growth forest from the US? Who do you think is practicing deforestation in poor countries? Who own the corporations? Who is buying the product? There are still old growth forests in the States. In fact, there are more acres covered in forests today in the USA than even 100 years ago. It is a well managed forest system by all measures. Who is practicingf the defirestation? The poor peasants. They chop down wood for fire and to expand crop lands. that's who. No huge forestry corporations. If they were large forstry corporations they would be driven by profit to make sure there was going to be a continual supply of forest - you know, how they do it here? I see you fail to come up with an exampel of recreational hunting making ONE species extinct. sorry, you lose. In other words, even if it was true that some paleo-indians 10 000 years ago hunted some large mammals to extinction, it does not mean we should do the same thing. I have not heard anyne advocate the destruction of any species so please try and stick to the subject. I was merely debunking the idiotic myth that the Natives were somehow better stewards of the land. Have you been on a reserve lately? compare that with a modern city. Which is cleaner? Actually, the extremely limited agriculture practiced by some native tribes was ALOT better..... having a land turn fallow and then moving on allows the land to become fertile again. Its much better than farming the same land over and over again , pumping it with chemical fertilizers because it long ago became infertile due to overuse. Now our agricultural land is almost completely devoid of the minerals required for a healthy diet. You have heard of crop rotation have you not? It was invented by those dastardly Europeans. It is more beneficial to the soil to mix the crops planted on them to diversify the nutrients released. But you know that didn't you? LOL Unfortunately, these millions of years of erosion and centuries of unwise farming practices have made good, mineral rich soil a scarce commodity. Soil tests from all over the world have revealed that our soils are severely lacking in minerals. This in turn produces mineral deficient plants with greatly reduced food value for us humans and the animals we eat. Could you be more specific? I'm sure there are farmers in Canada on this forum. The erosion and soil degradation issues are much worse in un-developed countries. Look at Haiti for one example. Modernism is almost always better for the environment. Thank You. This proves my point. And why exactly do these colonizers burn acres of rainfoerst? Who own them? Who buys the products? No it doesn't dimwit. They burn the rainforest because they are trying to increase their farmland. Rainforest soil is incedibly poor for agrictulture so they can only plant crops for a couple of seasons and then they are 'forced' to burn more rainforest for new areas to plant crops. This does not happen in modern, efficient societies. Your arguments against the 'first world' do not stand up to facts. ie: There is no 'product' to buy once you burn it! Im not talking about war, althought it was generally not even close to as horrific as what we do now and what we did to them. Im talking about their communal life within the tribe. Oh, I see. They fought wars in a better way? is that your argument? LOL So you agree that they did not commit genocide on an industrial scale? And you argument is that they would have had they had the technology? That is such a ridiculous argument. It essentailly says" natives would have been just as murderous and cruel as europeans, had they been europeans...." no shit... the fact is they were not and they did not. You are the one who has been arguing that the natives are better than whitey. I am plainly showing you that it not the case. They are human like all the rest of us. You should stop being so racist. It's not becoming. Perhaps you can show me how you know this? Did you know that this argument rests solely on computer modeling of the ecosystem? Did you know there is no fossil or archaeological evidence of this at all? You disagree that the Giant beaver and the North American horse went extinct? perhaps you could show me evidence of their existence? thank you. I'll notify the WWF on your behest. For the sake of the worlds environment we desperately need to change the way we go about our subsistence. I suppose you have this naive view of utopia where all 6 billion adopt the same wasteful lifestyles we currently indulge in? So how exactly is that possible when we are all fed by chemical fertilizers derived from fossil fuels that is non-renewable? I agree. The third world needs to model their environmental legislation off of ours. Encourage resource management. Kind of hard to do when they are barely able to eat. So what's the solution? Globalization and the betterment of human existence so that there is not this need to waste resources in the developing world. It's kind of hard to convince a starving African to not to cut down that tree so they can prevent erorsion if they are not even sure where their next meal is coming from. If you are truly worried about the environment, fight for globalization and the liberalization of trade. THAT will go much furher to improving the world's ecosystems than 'carbon credits'. Your knee-jerk leftiist instincts won't allow you to see this truth however.

Huh? So natives had big corporations whose sole purpose was to extract resources until the reources were no more and then move on to the next batch? I see. your so called 'environmentalism' is really code for your leftist leanings. For an example of how WRONG you are with this simply look to deforestation. Where is the world being deforested? I'll give you a hint, it's NOT where there are big logging coorporations, but there people are living on a subsitence existence. ergo, poor does NOT equal good environmental stewards - in fact the exact opposite. Did natives hunt for sport or for subsistence? what difference does that make? They hunted numerous species to extinction. In our evil first world civilization, I cannot recall a SINGLE species going extinct from sport hunting. Perhaps you could correct me? Did they practice agriculture and factory farming? No, they just farmed until the land turned fallow and moved on. That's ALOT better! LOL Did they tear down forests so they could build cities and roads Why don't you ask the farmers in Brazil who burn acres of rainforest so they can farm? they live in nurturing communities or did they live in isolation from their neighbors? What? They fought continual wars with each other long before whitey got here. Did the natives ever construct gas chambers and commit genocide for no other reason than perverted ideology? Only because they did not have the know-how to do so. They did master the art of human sacrifice though! But they only used small pyramids and knives to cut out the still beating hearts of their victims. Woudl that qualify as a perverted ideology? Sacrificing women and children to please the sun gods? LOL The natives were not people like us and they did treat the ecosytem as if they were a part of it, not separate from it, not with some perverted notion of having dominion over it. Then perhaps you can explain all of those NA speciaes going extinct a way before Columbus got here? LOL Your post above is possibly the most uninformed and idiotic thing i have read in while. Maybe ever. At least mine is based on facts, not popular mythology. Wealthy industrial first world states certainly have lower birth rates than the poor parts of civilization, ill give you that one. But are you under the impression that all 6 billion people on the planet can live like we do? For the sake of the world's environment, I certainly hope so.

Reported.

WTF? are you mad? The natives are just people like us. They didn't treat the ecosystem any better and in fact, trated it much worse then we do now. You are rambling now. You are basing your premise on myths. Another fallacy. Civilization actually encourages lower birth rates. Hey, but don't let that stop your self hate. as you were good leftist soldier!

I see you have a lot in common with the militias in Iraq. I see you have a lot in common with slaves. I don't accept the notion that the state should have a monopoly on violence. And i will never accept the notion that any poeple would ever accept occupation or invasion. Andrew Well perhaps you can set the good example and beat a hasty retreat to south wales.

What does religion have to do with this? did you take your meds this morning?

Did the first European settelers do bad things? Of course. Did the natives here do bad things, sure. Was there a systematic plan to eradicate the natives like the final solution in Nazi Germany? Not even close. For those that think and say so - they are either being disengenius or have mental problems. take your pick.

haha Yeah, they did a GREAT job before bad bad whitey got here. haha Let's see.. made the North American horse extinct? natives - check. The giant beaver? check. Whooly mammoth. check. Yes, I'm sure that 'ancient knowledge' will save us all. LOL BTW, 'modern ecological failures'? The environment of the western democracies is the best of any other countries in thw world. Damnit when those pesky facts get in the way of your racist rants eh?

aborigional? WTF? Your 'comfort level' should not be able to infringe on my right to own firearms.

Just like there is nothing in the charter of rights that protects ANY property. That includes your home. Specious argument. And yes Remiel, the Charter is legislation too. LOL.

Oh boys.. Just exactly how is the constitution and 'human rights' NOT legislation?

Exactly. Last I checked murders are already illegal.

You really are dense, White Doors. Way to screw up your own counter attack. If I can take away your " rights " with legislation, are they really " rights " ? I do not really care if they tighten gun laws any further, I am mostly arguing against those who want to loosen them. So spare me your childish assertions about my intent. ALL rights are legislation. care to try again?

The last I looked shooting someone with a gun was illegal too! feel liek a tit yet? dangit! the dreaded spell checker retort! I got nothing!! (you know you are losing an argument when...) damn it all!

I think it's time they are oncluded in the debates. Why not? It might help them modernize their politics.

Great post FTA. Feels like people want to pass laws out of their ying yangs so they can sleep better at night. Well screw that, those are my rights that they are trying to infringe here.

And just how the fuck could you presume to know this? Are you always this pompous? replace shot with hit by a drunk driver. Does your argument hold water? Of course not. Well bully for you. Lots of people have had these thnsg happen to them. You think you are the only one? Get over yourself. Well this is all really muchy and touching, what the heck does it have to do with taking away my rights to own firearms for whatever purpose I so choose? So persuasive. Why didn't you just respond with the GUNS SUCK part because that's all you really said. Lots of things in life can suck. fyi - guns are already VALIDATED in society.

So, if your plan is to make guns completely legal, that doesn't just mean that innocent people start having guns, it means criminals start having MORE guns. The offsite storage I was referring to was actually storage of personal firearms where you intend to use them, like where the hunting is, not in the cities. Not to mention, its a lot easier and cheaper to hire security guards for a single location than for every home. So, " one stop shopping " works to the advantage of both parties. You would almost think that the concept of surprise and planning are completely foreign concepts to you. You can kill a lot of armed people with an automatic weapon if you catch them unawares. More people with guns doesn't mean less crime, it means better planning on the part of the criminals. Sure it does. Guns don't kill people, people do. I like the legislation we had in Canada befreo the long gun registry. Unfortunately, you can't legislate yourself to a perfect world. Great, let's legislate more gun restyrictions and make our criminals more 'prepared'. Wow, is this the best the gun control lobby can bring forth?