Thread: History’s Most Notorious Criminals

I find it amusing that Nelson Mandela is the first of the "notorious" lot.

He's responsible for the deaths of innocents, many of which were women and children.

Whenever I hear someone that talks about achieving peace and mentions Mandela, I know with a 100% certainty that the person is an ignorant fucktard.

The page you linked to said his crime was "Saying that people should treat each other as equals." Ergo, that page is 100% fucktard material.

Originally Posted by DOMS

I find it amusing that Nelson Mandela is the first of the "notorious" lot.

He's responsible for the deaths of innocents, many of which were women and children.

Whenever I hear someone that talks about achieving peace and mentions Mandela, I know with a 100% certainty that the person is an ignorant fucktard.

The page you linked to said his crime was "Saying that people should treat each other as equals." Ergo, that page is 100% fucktard material.

calm down now, racism is still alive n well. he didn't fuck it up totally.

http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~springbk/enemy.html

two sides to every story as they say

"Disclaimer

Sunday, July 22nd, 2007

The opinions expressed on this site may not be those of the author, or indeed of any reasonable person. However, it is likely that (at the time of posting) the author thought they were interesting, controversial, amusing, insightful, inflammatory, overboard, credible, ridiculous, unpopular, or otherwise able to stimulate discussion."




Save the Animals with Endangered Species Jerky

Thursday, September 20th, 2007


The ban on trade in endangered species may be one of the most ill-conceived ideas of all time.
The idea is a noble one: protect threatened wildlife by removing the incentive to hunt it. After all, nobody wants to see the African elephant or white rhinoceros go the way of the dodo. The problem is that it ignores basic economics.
Prohibition doesn’t work
A blanket ban does nothing to diminish demand, it only tightens up on the supply. As a result, prices go up, until the incentive is such that a black market emerges to fill the demand. The only way to counter this without lifting the ban is to increase the disincentives: harsher punishments, more rigorous enforcement.
It’s a losing game; just have a look at prohibition or the war on drugs. Despite the ban (or perhaps because of) ivory poaching continues to this day.
However, that’s not the worst part of the ban. It actually has the effect of incentivizing a reduction in population. Fewer animals to kill means less poaching, so the cost of policing is less. Likewise, there is no incentive to increase the size of the herds, since it is illegal to profit from the animals raised. So, by investing in measures that increase the size of the population, you are at best spending your money with no hope of a return, and at worst enabling illegal poaching.
Instead, I suggest that we examine two of the most successful measures ever conceived for increasing the size of a species’ population, habitat, and range:
Hamburgers, and chicken wings
The world cattle population is in the hundreds of millions, with nearly a hundred million in the US alone. They can be found on every continent but Antarctica, and in the vast majority of the world’s countries. Every year, we spend billions of dollars are spent to keep them happy, healthy, and well fed. We build them new pastures, and sheltered enclosures. We ensure they have adequate food and warmth in climates that would otherwise be hostile.
We do all these things not because we love the cows, but because hamburgers and milkshakes are tasty.
Even more successful is the chicken, an awkward and nearly defenseless bird native to south east Asia, which can now be found nearly anywhere in the world. There are nearly four chickens on this planet for every human. We build barns to keep them warm and sheltered, we grow grain to feed them, and we protect them from their many predators.
The success of the chicken isn’t due to well funded game reserves, but to Buffalo wings and three-egg omelets.
Farming works where preservation doesn’t
The lesson is simple: if you want to increase the size of a population, encourage its commercial use.
I’ve seen llamas wandering the welsh countryside, and ostriches strolling the fields of Vancouver Island. There are farms for iguanas, for Japanese koi, for kangaroos, and even tarantulas.
If we were to encourage licensed trade in endangered animals, there would be farms for them as well.
So… white tiger jerky anyone?



the point of that site is debate. this one's cocked.