This is why we love bush... 2

[FreeOnes]

U.S. May Expand Access To Endangered Species

The Bush administration is proposing far-reaching changes to conservation policies that would allow hunters, circuses and the pet industry to kill, capture and import animals on the brink of extinction in other countries.

Giving Americans access to endangered animals, officials said, would feed the gigantic U.S. demand for live animals, skins, parts and trophies, and generate profits that would allow poor nations to pay for conservation of the remaining animals and their habitat.

This and other proposals that pursue conservation through trade would, for example, open the door for American trophy hunters to kill the endangered straight-horned markhor in Pakistan; license the pet industry to import the blue fronted Amazon parrot from Argentina; permit the capture of endangered Asian elephants for U.S. circuses and zoos; and partially resume the trade in African ivory. No U.S. endangered species would be affected
etc etc -->
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Oct10.html

No further comments needed.

[<IMX>]

Damn right.

What good is a beautiful exotic animal unless it is stuffed and mounted by my fireplace.

I like hunting with


and

[FreeOnes]

I wouldn't have expected another reply then this. Don't worry I like hunting too, specially on very stupid people.

[directfiesta]

Bush is a low life ,uneducated, born again christian, AAA, coke brain dead, lousy COWBOY.

What do you expect...



Please, no, don't shoot me....

[sperbonzo]

This is a totally biased article that doesn't begin to address the realities of the situation at all. The entire US national park system was founded by and is funded by, hunting. Hunter contribute more to the preservation of habitats and wetlands then ANY other group COMBINED. They actually have a VESTED interest in seeing that species and habitats are preserved, and they are willing to put HUGE amounts of money into......far more than the other "enviromental" groups.

The hunting permits being discussed would range from $10,000 to $100,000 per animal, they would be VERY strictly controlled, and these fees are the ONLY hope that these non US reserves and habitats have to fund protection, and preservation programs. It is SO ironic that they same people who will think that this issue is SO cut and dried, can't seem to raise any of the money needed to keep these endangered species around. The fact is, is that the killing of 5 or 10 individual animals can fund the protection of all of the rest. The liberal "feel good" policies overseas have resulted in the decimation of populations and habitats.......but nobody wants to discuss that.

[Furious_Female]

I love animals. I hate them being abused and I don't condone hunting. I think it's cruel. But then again, bringing cows to the slaughter house makes me feel guilty after I have good filet mignon. I'm all for animal rights, but it would be hypocritical in a sense, when I am most definitely an omnivore.

On the other hand, some countries can't feed their people much less take care of their wildlife. These animals are on the brink of exstinction from lack of funds to protect them and from impoverished people killing and eating them or selling their parts for the only money they can make. This is a matter of rank on the food chain, not about trophies. Sometimes we as humans, have to do things to survive. There's many beautiful animals, I'd love to have one of each... but don't think for a second most of these animals would think twice about having any one of us for a snack.

[Rich]

Originally posted by sperbonzo
This is a totally biased article that doesn't begin to address the realities of the situation at all. The entire US national park system was founded by and is funded by, hunting. Hunter contribute more to the preservation of habitats and wetlands then ANY other group COMBINED. They actually have a VESTED interest in seeing that species and habitats are preserved, and they are willing to put HUGE amounts of money into......far more than the other "enviromental" groups.

The hunting permits being discussed would range from $10,000 to $100,000 per animal, they would be VERY strictly controlled, and these fees are the ONLY hope that these non US reserves and habitats have to fund protection, and preservation programs. It is SO ironic that they same people who will think that this issue is SO cut and dried, can't seem to raise any of the money needed to keep these endangered species around. The fact is, is that the killing of 5 or 10 individual animals can fund the protection of all of the rest. The liberal "feel good" policies overseas have resulted in the decimation of populations and habitats.......but nobody wants to discuss that.

Nice spin, Mr. Rove.

[JSA Matt]

I wonder how many assassination attempts on Bush there has been? Has anyone seen the movie Taxi Driver?

[sperbonzo]

Originally posted by Rich





Nice spin, Mr. Rove.

You can call it what you want, but check on the facts. Ask people who work in the national park system for example....or do some reading about how Kenya has funded their animal preserves, especially how they can afford guards to protect the animals from poaching......

[grogan]

Bush? I prefer shaved.

[directfiesta]

Originally posted by sperbonzo
This is a totally biased article that doesn't begin to address the realities of the situation at all. The entire US national park system was founded by and is funded by, hunting. Hunter contribute more to the preservation of habitats and wetlands then ANY other group COMBINED. They actually have a VESTED interest in seeing that species and habitats are preserved, and they are willing to put HUGE amounts of money into......far more than the other "enviromental" groups.

The hunting permits being discussed would range from $10,000 to $100,000 per animal, they would be VERY strictly controlled, and these fees are the ONLY hope that these non US reserves and habitats have to fund protection, and preservation programs. It is SO ironic that they same people who will think that this issue is SO cut and dried, can't seem to raise any of the money needed to keep these endangered species around. The fact is, is that the killing of 5 or 10 individual animals can fund the protection of all of the rest. The liberal "feel good" policies overseas have resulted in the decimation of populations and habitats.......but nobody wants to discuss that.

As expected: extreme right.

"As soon as you place a financial price on the head of wild animals, the incentive is to kill the animal or capture them," Roberts said. "The minute people find out they can have an easier time killing, shipping and profiting from wildlife, they will do so."

BTW, what happens if it was the wrong policy... How do you replace them?




" Bring them on" and go ahead: take a shot, cowboy.

[slapass]

Making conservation of these animals a commercial endeavor has its merit. Lots of big names are behind this. I am too much of a tree hugger to think it will work out but lets hope it does.

[hyatla]

Originally posted by freeones
U.S. May Expand Access To Endangered Species

The Bush administration is proposing far-reaching changes to conservation policies that would allow hunters, circuses and the pet industry to kill, capture and import animals on the brink of extinction in other countries.

Giving Americans access to endangered animals, officials said, would feed the gigantic U.S. demand for live animals, skins, parts and trophies, and generate profits that would allow poor nations to pay for conservation of the remaining animals and their habitat.

This and other proposals that pursue conservation through trade would, for example, open the door for American trophy hunters to kill the endangered straight-horned markhor in Pakistan; license the pet industry to import the blue fronted Amazon parrot from Argentina; permit the capture of endangered Asian elephants for U.S. circuses and zoos; and partially resume the trade in African ivory. No U.S. endangered species would be affected
etc etc -->
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Oct10.html

No further comments needed.

Is that real? Are they out of their mind? First they are killing people, now animals.

[Sly_RJ]

I think we should raise all of our taxes so we can support the endangered species. Yes, 50% looks mighty fine.

On the other hand, how are the endangered species doing? Have they been growing? Are there more of said species now than say, 10 years ago?

[Sly_RJ]

Originally posted by slapass
Making conservation of these animals a commercial endeavor has its merit. Lots of big names are behind this. I am too much of a tree hugger to think it will work out but lets hope it does.

I'm skeptical, and I'm far from a tree hugger. But I do know about the positive effect of logging, who knows, maybe the ecology of this could work out. I've spoken with DNR people before, population control (hunting) of animals is a good thing and they do make a shitload of money from licenses and tags. Hunters do NOT like poachers, so they are policed pretty well in the States. In a third world country it could easily be a fucking disaster.

[Luft]

Fock politics, better make money!

[JDog]

Fuck bush! He's the stupidest president we've had yet and I can't wait to get his ass outta this place!

jDoG

[foolio]

Originally posted by sperbonzo
This is a totally biased article that doesn't begin to address the realities of the situation at all.

lol, I knew you were a fucking idiot right there.

[EZRhino]

That really sucks, how can anyone do that. The problems that will arise from such policy will be devistating to all of us.
Thats why I like shaved pussy and not bush.
Oh ......... and President Bush sucks too.

[sperbonzo]

Originally posted by foolio


lol, I knew you were a fucking idiot right there.

I guess that is what you would term a reasoned, educated response in a debate situation.

Do you bother to read anything other than informational sources that support your own view point?

Or do you just read the things that you already agree with, then just call everybody else a "fucking idiot".

Seems to me that you are needlessly limiting your access to information, and thus your viewpoints. I'm sorry that you seem to be so narrow minded. Good luck with that....

[sperbonzo]

As expected: extreme right.

Why can't anyone seem to discuss information and points of view? Does anyone here read anything but stuff they already agree with? It's hilarious that people on this board complain that most people are a bunch of brainwashed sheep, then proceed to act like sheep themselves by only getting info from one sided sources.

Do yourselves a favour....read EVERYTHING first.....THEN make decisions on issues.....

It's a real eye-opener

[LadyMischief]

It;s a damn fucking shame we can't give the animals a gun and teach them to shoot back.

[digi]

Originally posted by Furious_Female
Sometimes we as humans, have to do things to survive. There's many beautiful animals, I'd love to have one of each... but don't think for a second most of these animals would think twice about having any one of us for a snack.

another brilliant quote from the furious female.. in what way are you securing the human survival by hunting down ENDANGERED species?

[directfiesta]

Originally posted by LadyMischief
It;s a damn fucking shame we can't give the animals a gun and teach them to shoot back.

"Planet of the Apes"?

[Furious_Female]

Originally posted by digi


another brilliant quote from the furious female.. in what way are you securing the human survival by hunting down ENDANGERED species?

Yet another one sided and leftist post from digi. In a perfect world, there would be an abundant amount of money to care for humans, animals and the enviroment properly. In the realistic world, this would come out of US tax payers pockets and we need to prioritize.

If you do not understand the concept of giving poor countries a way to use animals as a way to make money for their nation, then you obviously don't understand the basics of the food chain.

As humans we are on top. I ADORE animals, I even feed deer in my backyard almost everyday, even though the DEC advises us not to. Here we are talking about countries that cannot afford to feed themselves, much less feed their endangered species. It's unfortunate and heartbreaking, that such extreme measures would be condoned, but again, these animals would die regardless because there simply isn't enough food or protection for them in many of these impoverished countries.

It's not exactly the best idea, but poaching and black market trade already exists. This would just legalize it. And again, the illegal poaching and sale of these animals, also contributes to their extinction and desperate poachers often sell much more valuable things, for only a fraction of what thet are worth, because it is on the black market.

In my newspaper today, someone hit a black bear on the road. A few people came and stole the carcass, because it's organs are valuable on the black market for Chinese medicines. It was illegal for them to do this but to reiterate, these things already happen and making it legal for countries that need the money to help their HUMANS and also put money back into conservation, isn't necessarily the worst thing in the world. This also isn't just about killing the animals, many circus and other entertainment facilities like zoos etc would simply have better access to exotic animals. They are not exactly saying, all brink of extinction animals will be slaughtered immediately, who knows what will really happen or if we will even notice any difference. Science has come a long way in the reproduction sense, we could always prevent total extinction. Humans may not have the right to choose how much or when animals reproduce, but we do have the brains to decide it, they don't. If all animals were never killed, we'd have have a horrible over population problem, that comes down to humans or wildlife.

Again, I repeat, I love animals and feel horrible for the ones that suffer, but sometimes we have to choose between ourselves or them. Not pleasant at all.

[FreeOnes]

Originally posted by Furious_Female


If all animals were never killed, we'd have have a horrible over population problem, that comes down to humans or wildlife.

You are kidding, right?
The only sort which does NOT have itself under control are human beings. Because they have developped all kind of things with their brains and therefore depend less on mother nature. Unfortunately they don't use their brains enough to keep their sort under control. All other sorts are being kept in balance by the nature itself. Just take some biology lessons and you wil find out....

[Adorno]

sweet mother of jesus

the rationalization of hunting endangered species because a tiger would eat us if we were in its habitat.

you seriously need to die.

[The Truth Hurts]

All these Bush bashing threads make me laugh.

They always resort to mindless namecalling and cliche canned responses.

Love him, or hate him, you've got 5 more years* of him, get used to him.






*zero year curse is in play, so the haters do have a little hope.

[Adorno]

Originally posted by The Truth Hurts
All these Bush bashing threads make me laugh.

They always resort to mindless namecalling and cliche canned responses.

Love him, or hate him, you've got 5 more years* of him, get used to him.

And so you will get to read 5 more years of threads like this as you watch your beloved manchild decimate the industry that keeps you off welfare.

[The Truth Hurts]

Originally posted by Adorno


And so you will get to read 5 more years of threads like this as you watch your beloved manchild decimate the industry that keeps you off welfare.

I'll forgive your ignorance this one time.

[directfiesta]

Originally posted by The Truth Hurts


I'll forgive your ignorance this one time.

Let me educate you a bit:

Bush's Aids 'gift' has been seized by industry giants

Now the US may block the provision of cheap generic drugs for Africa

Naomi Klein
Monday October 13, 2003
The Guardian

Fighting Aids was supposed to show George Bush's softer side. "Seldom has history offered a greater opportunity to do so much for so many," he said in his State of the Union address in January.
He has since reconsidered, deciding instead to offer a few more opportunities to the few. First he handed the top job of his global Aids initiative to a Big Pharma boss, then he broke his $3bn promise of Aids relief. And now there are concerns that he may sabotage a plan to send cheap drugs to countries ravaged by Aids.

In August, the World Trade Organisation announced a new deal on drug patents that was supposed to give poor countries facing health problems the right to import generic drugs. But the deal seemed unworkable: the United States, at the behest of the pharmaceutical lobby, had successfully pushed for so many conditions that the agreement exploded from a straightforward 52 words to a sprawling 3,200-word maze.

Nice going Bush... Can't feed all your friends with Irak's contracts, so you highjack another part of the State of the Union address:

Lies, more lies ...

[Furious_Female]

Originally posted by Adorno
sweet mother of jesus

the rationalization of hunting endangered species because a tiger would eat us if we were in its habitat.

you seriously need to die.

Yes wish death upon a human being like myself, but defend animals that live in countries where there is not enough food for humans much less for them. You really sound like a moron you know that?

All you "Democrats" that are so in favor of protecting wildlife but support abortion. Fucked up bunch of wackos.

[The Truth Hurts]

You need not try to educate me on anything.

I look at things from both sides, I decide where I stand based on how I feel about the issue. (this one, for example, seems rather fucking stupid)

I do NOT however, AUTOMATICALLY side with one side or another, while bashing the other, as you seem to do with EVERY post you make.

In other words, I call them as I see them, and you're a bitter fool with extremely tight blinders on, so much so that anyone that disagrees with you in the slightest is a fucking idiot that needs to be taught a lesson.

Pretty sad if you ask me.

[directfiesta]

Originally posted by Furious_Female


All you "Democrats" that are so in favor of protecting wildlife but support abortion. Fucked up bunch of wackos.

You really are a retard!

Is the human race under menace of extinction???

After reading so many of your long idiotic post, I am more convinced the ever that abortion is often the right choice...

[Adorno]

Originally posted by Furious_Female


human being like myself

debateable

but defend animals that live in countries where there is not enough food for humans much less for them. You really sound like a moron you know that?

hmmmm, if someone handed me a shotgun and then stuck me in a room with an endangered bird or Furious_Mongoloid, which would I shoot between the eyes? Which would be the greater loss to humanity? A soon to be extinct bird, or another idiot American? Yeah, thats gonna take a lot of debate.

I am guessing in that backwoods catholic school of yours, that did not cover the basics of biology, they conveniently left out the basics of ecology as well? Obviously.

[digi]

Originally posted by Furious_Female


Yet another one sided and leftist post from digi. In a perfect world, there would be an abundant amount of money to care for humans, animals and the enviroment properly. In the realistic world, this would come out of US tax payers pockets and we need to prioritize.

Yeah, you rather pay billions of dollars invading a country and killing people than put the money to good causes.

Originally posted by Furious_Female

If you do not understand the concept of giving poor countries a way to use animals as a way to make money for their nation, then you obviously don't understand the basics of the food chain.

ehm.. ok, lets let hunters shoot off all the panda bears in china.. yoppi! chinese ppl get mucho money until one day all pandas are dead. Then what? You tell me how killing off endangered species benefits ANYONE in the long term?

Originally posted by Furious_Female

It's not exactly the best idea, but poaching and black market trade already exists. This would just legalize it. And again, the illegal poaching and sale of these animals, also contributes to their extinction and desperate poachers often sell much more valuable things, for only a fraction of what thet are worth, because it is on the black market.

Right, and murder exist despite laws so lets just legalize it.

Originally posted by Furious_Female

This also isn't just about killing the animals, many circus and other entertainment facilities like zoos etc would simply have better access to exotic animals.

are you stupid? animals arent here to fit your purposes, they are meant to be out in the wild as part of nature.. not caged up in a fucking zoo.

Originally posted by Furious_Female
If all animals were never killed, we'd have have a horrible over population problem, that comes down to humans or wildlife.

You do realize animals eat each other right? You do know that nature is all linked together, the only reason there are over population problems of some species is because HUMANS have killed a link in the chain.

Originally posted by Furious_Female Again, I repeat, I love animals and feel horrible for the ones that suffer, but sometimes we have to choose between ourselves or them. Not pleasant at all. [/B]

You keep acting like its either us or the animals? lol.. are you even a real fucking person? are you seriousley believing that we have to kill endangered species to survive?

Someone definatley need to slap you hard. WAKE THE FUCK UP PEE BRAINS!!

[Libertine]

Originally posted by Furious_Female


Yet another one sided and leftist post from digi. In a perfect world, there would be an abundant amount of money to care for humans, animals and the enviroment properly. In the realistic world, this would come out of US tax payers pockets and we need to prioritize.

If you do not understand the concept of giving poor countries a way to use animals as a way to make money for their nation, then you obviously don't understand the basics of the food chain.

As humans we are on top. I ADORE animals, I even feed deer in my backyard almost everyday, even though the DEC advises us not to. Here we are talking about countries that cannot afford to feed themselves, much less feed their endangered species. It's unfortunate and heartbreaking, that such extreme measures would be condoned, but again, these animals would die regardless because there simply isn't enough food or protection for them in many of these impoverished countries.

It's not exactly the best idea, but poaching and black market trade already exists. This would just legalize it. And again, the illegal poaching and sale of these animals, also contributes to their extinction and desperate poachers often sell much more valuable things, for only a fraction of what thet are worth, because it is on the black market.

In my newspaper today, someone hit a black bear on the road. A few people came and stole the carcass, because it's organs are valuable on the black market for Chinese medicines. It was illegal for them to do this but to reiterate, these things already happen and making it legal for countries that need the money to help their HUMANS and also put money back into conservation, isn't necessarily the worst thing in the world. This also isn't just about killing the animals, many circus and other entertainment facilities like zoos etc would simply have better access to exotic animals. They are not exactly saying, all brink of extinction animals will be slaughtered immediately, who knows what will really happen or if we will even notice any difference. Science has come a long way in the reproduction sense, we could always prevent total extinction. Humans may not have the right to choose how much or when animals reproduce, but we do have the brains to decide it, they don't. If all animals were never killed, we'd have have a horrible over population problem, that comes down to humans or wildlife.

Again, I repeat, I love animals and feel horrible for the ones that suffer, but sometimes we have to choose between ourselves or them. Not pleasant at all.

Your logic is flawed. Yes, killing animals brings in money. However, after the animal is dead... it's dead. It's a one time profit that uses up the resources being used (the animals). The argument that science can help reproduction doesn't work - there is a certain amount of genetic diversity, and with each animal that gets killed that diversity decreases. We can *not* prevent total extinction, once a certain threshold is reached only artificial measures (transporting individuals to other areas and such) can keep the species intact, and if we go any further after that genetic diversity will reach the level where it becomes impossible for the species to survive in the long term. (in an optimal situation, 200 unrelated individuals are needed to ensure long term survival, and in a less than optimal situation it's ten times that or more) Ofcourse, preventing the animals from going extinct with artificial means also costs money... and loads of it.

It gets even worse... killing those animals will only bring in relatively small amounts of money. On a small population, there are only so many you can kill without killing off the entire species as a result. Obviously, killing a few dozen animals a year can not and will not provide substantial results for the economy of an entire nation. Killing them all off would bring in those results, but it would be a one time profit.

However, keeping the animals alive also brings in money. Tourists wanting to see the wildlife on safaris and such can bring in substantial amounts of money. In fact, they can bring in even more money than killing off the animals - even in the short term. The real profits, however, are to be found in the long term. Since letting tourists watch animals does not kill off those animals, this is a source of income that will potentially last forever.
Even better... economies can thrive on tourism. While a country may get a few dozen or even a few hundred well-paying hunters, thousands or even millions of tourists really make much more of a difference... a whole economy can be built upon such profits.


In short: this proposal really doesn't help the local economies, it even hurts the local economies in the long term, it will lead to the extinction of endangered species and it will rob future generations of the chance to ever see those species. Oh, and locally, it will rob future generations of a huge economical chance.

So what benefits does it bring? Short-term economical benefits for a few people, some fun for a few American millionaires who like to hunt, and more individuals of endangered species in American zoos and circuses.

[Adorno]

You do realize you are trying to rationalize with an individual that does not even believe in or understand the basics of evolution right? The whole concept of the food chain is alien and will most likely bewilder and confuse her, causing her to pull at her hair and curse at the words on the magic computer screen.

[Libertine]

Originally posted by Furious_Female

I ADORE animals, I even feed deer in my backyard almost everyday, even though the DEC advises us not to. Here we are talking about countries that cannot afford to feed themselves, much less feed their endangered species. It's unfortunate and heartbreaking, that such extreme measures would be condoned, but again, these animals would die regardless because there simply isn't enough food or protection for them in many of these impoverished countries.

Ehm... excuse me?! Are you serious?
These animals do not *need* to be fed. They can do perfectly well by themselves... if only those pesky humans don't shoot them.

[Libertine]

Originally posted by Adorno
You do realize you are trying to rationalize with an individual that does not even believe in or understand the basics of evolution right? The whole concept of the food chain is alien and will most likely bewilder and confuser her, causing her to pull at her hair and curse at the words on the magic computer screen.

That actually had me laughing out loud