Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (68898)	10/2/1998 5:35:00 PM
From: Peter W	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

OT Hey Chuzz, you're absolutely right. If something is wrong then it's wrong, no matter who is doing it. (and this is wrong). Peter

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (68898)	10/2/1998 5:37:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

<OT> Chuzz, youve got great political leanings.... oh and you pick good stocks too! MH

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (68898)	10/3/1998 8:31:00 AM
From: nihil	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

OT RE: Aboriginal peoples In my opinion, it is all a matter of the rule of law. Either you believe in settling disputes through law or through force. There is no question that organized whites can blow everyone else off the face of the earth. Usually they lack the brass to cover up their use of force with hypocrisy. Thus the Spanish Conquistadores brought Christianity to the poor suffering, misguided Aztecs and Quechua. True, the Aztecs were great ball players and heart snatchers, but the Church and Spain were still engaged in slaughtering Moors, and Jews, and heretics (including Protestants in Germany. Who gave the Spanish the right to destroy other people? Anyone who can assert that the Roman Church of the 15th and 16th century was a moral institution has a strange set of values or is sublimely ignorant. America's 18th and 19th century struggle with the Indians was conducted with extraordinary inhumanity. Fallen Timbers, Sand Creek and Wounded Knee come to mind. The Army was hardly a welfare organization. The Indians were hardly innocent of cruelty -- but they had the virtue of defending themselves, while the Army was seizing their land. The United States, whatever its faults -- and they are extensive -- provided in the Constitution and in its negotiations to treat Native American Peoples as independent nations with some of the rights of nations under international law. It signed treaties -- establishing rights enforceable in American courts. It then widely neglected them for years. The recent successes of Native American Peoples in US courts is evidence of one of the most honorable acts in American history. The American Constitution provides (5th Amendment) that no life, liberty, or property may be taken without due process of law. It is time for the United States to respect the promises into which it entered, and to protect the vested rights of all people and to compensate any that it has seized for overriding public purposes, such as protection of the environment. If a species is not threatened, it is hard for me to justify protection of all its members at vast expense when many other animals -- Kossovian children for instance -- are not being protected. I am an animal lover, and I especially like marine mammals. I would like to protect them all. But there are easier ways to protect innocent life. I ask you -- are you a vegetarian? Do you fight to protect experimental animals against abuse? Have you ever adopted a neutered dog from the pound? I think these are steps that can have much more influence for the welfare of animals than criticizing the legal behavior of other people who have their own values and their own rights.

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (68898)	10/3/1998 11:15:00 AM
From: Fangorn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

CTC, I assume you are an absolute vegetarian. You must also oppose hunting and fishing in all forms and animal husbandry too. If not, then opposing whale hunting by a tribe with a heritage of doing just that is hypocrisy. They quit hunting whales because they couldn't be true to their spiritual heritage by hunting an endangered species. They did this before Greenpeace and Sea Shepherds even exsisted. Now the whales can sustain such limited hunting. To claim, as you seem to be doing, that this tribe's hunt is going to destroy the earth is absurd. Your use of electricity, a car, heat for your home does more damage to the ecosystem than this tribe's hunt will ever do. When you give all that up you will be in a position to preach to the rest of us. As for using rifles instead of harpoons I say good for them. The whale they do take will be dispatched quickly with little chance that it will escape wounded and suffer for an extended period. We all kill to survive. The difference between killing a carrot or a whale is only a creation of the human mind. Did you thank the beings that gave up their lives for your salad last night?