Whale impaled by cruise ship!

In article ,
"Nonny" wrote:

Do you think this is enough of a reason to petition for wildlife
detection devices on bigger ships?
Let me know what you think
Sarah

Sarah, you really need to get out more. Most cruise lines do this
intentionally, adding to the food stores aboard the ship. When
not impaling whales, are you aware that passengers can rent rifles
to shoot dolphins? I got 2 on the last cruise to Alaska, but
still didn't get the prize. There's also a lot of shotgun fun off
the aft deck with gulls, terns and other birds that are drawn to
the ship from the spilled blood of the impaled whales.

And who can ever forget the baby seal bashing shore excursion we
took in '06.

--
"Politics should be limited in its scope to war,
protection of property, and the occasional
precautionary beheading of a member of the ruling class."
-P.J. O'Rourke

I think that Sarah is a humor challenged PETA member.

In article ,
(Kenn Smith) wrote:

I think that Sarah is a humor challenged PETA member.

Or is using the computer at the Home for the Perpetually Offended.

--
"Politics should be limited in its scope to war,
protection of property, and the occasional
precautionary beheading of a member of the ruling class."
-P.J. O'Rourke

Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
(Kenn Smith) wrote:

I think that Sarah is a humor challenged PETA member.

Or is using the computer at the Home for the Perpetually Offended.


Good one.

I'm going to have to remember that.

Home for the Perpetually Offended.

HeHeHe

In article ,
linnie wrote:

Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
(Kenn Smith) wrote:

I think that Sarah is a humor challenged PETA member.

Or is using the computer at the Home for the Perpetually Offended.


Good one.

I'm going to have to remember that.

Home for the Perpetually Offended.

In religious contexts it is Our Lady of the Perpetually Offended.

--
"Politics should be limited in its scope to war,
protection of property, and the occasional
precautionary beheading of a member of the ruling class."
-P.J. O'Rourke

In no way am i perpetually offended.
Though i do appreciate the line.
I do, however, happen to have a conscience.
If killing animals is what you do for fun then good for you.
But a creature as majestic as a whale deserves some respect in my
opinion.
Of course there will be smart replies but that's what i believe.

Sarah Adams wrote:
In no way am i perpetually offended.
Though i do appreciate the line.
I do, however, happen to have a conscience.
If killing animals is what you do for fun then good for you.
But a creature as majestic as a whale deserves some respect in my
opinion.
Of course there will be smart replies but that's what i believe.


ALL creatures deserve our respect, right down to the smallest minnow.
Size alone does not create majesty. Rather, life itself dominates
nature's wonders, regardless of how large or small the embodiment may
be. We should respect whales, yes, but consider the fleas and geckos of
the world. Based on size alone, do they deserve less respect than elks?
Does a coral reef or lichen deserve the most respect of all, just
because they can cover thousands of square meters? If size is the
criterion by which we judge, where does the lowly human fit into the
equation? At what weight do we attach the term "majestic"? Where should
that line be drawn?

I propose something properly metric and easy to remember: 1,000
kilograms, 2,200 pounds. Anything smaller is simply not majestic, and
anything larger is majestic as hell.

Also, regarding the original subject, I should mention that whales are
much easier to hit. Especially dead ones.

Ike

This is old news,it was on rtc a few weeks ago.





cruise lover(~~~~~)






..

Sarah Adams wrote:
In no way am i perpetually offended.
Though i do appreciate the line.
I do, however, happen to have a conscience.
If killing animals is what you do for fun then good for you.

Do you *seriously* believe that's what anyone here does? good grief.

But a creature as majestic as a whale deserves some respect in my
opinion.

Do you think the dead whale was offended?

Of course there will be smart replies but that's what i believe.

You also appear to believe that a cruise ship deliberately (or by
negligence) hit a live whale out at sea. You appear to have no clue that
the said whale was already dead before the ship "aimed" for it.

I'd say you take yourself entirely too seriously and could stand to get
a sense of humor infusion.

"Sarah Adams" wrote in message
...
In no way am i perpetually offended.
Though i do appreciate the line.
I do, however, happen to have a conscience.
If killing animals is what you do for fun then good for you.
But a creature as majestic as a whale deserves some respect in my
opinion.
Of course there will be smart replies but that's what i believe.

Hi Sarah,

I fear you have been had...

Tom (nonny) is an old timer here at RTC who has quite the reputation for
both his fabricating of written tall tales and leading newbies down a
similar path as he did with you with his utterly crazy stories. His
writings all belong in the "fiction" bookshelves.

Ask him for a copy of his story of the "Great Tractor Race" (which actually
might be true) or about the time he cut his wife's hair and hooked up a
vacuum cleaner system that went berserk... or when he rigged a rubber
heating bottle under his clothes so he could smuggle inexpensive booze onto
a cruise ship... the stories are endless... and totally untrue (except of
course for his true love of both Martha Stewart, and all ultra right wing
conservatives on the TV and radio)...

--Tom (a totally different Tom than "nonny")