OCinBuffalo Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Bah. I can't sleep, so I figured I would post something funny I read the other day. Link. My favorite comment: "Lin was Shanghai's number one cricket teaser." Cricket teaser? What does that make people that tease roosters? hmmmmm I have been saying cricket teaser to myself for the last three days and laughing, maybe I just need more sleep... Is a People for the Ethical Treatment of Insects on the horizon? How many more naive, stupid "causes" do "we need to get educated" about?(read: you will accept my delusional propaganda flyer at Thursday at the Square, when I hand it to you, with a smile on your face, or I will call you names like "narrow minded", and question your educational background. Comrade!/Seig Heil!) Anyway, I thought I would start a thread on PETA as well, given that Bill O'Reilly and PETA are now in lock step...really...and you don't get to say that often...over banning all exotic or wild pets, due to the insanity that has been happening lately = last week python almost kills kid, this week Chimp lays permanent beat down on a 55 year old lady. My first question: are they right? Any snake owners here?(yeah, I left that door open... ) Perhaps the most bizarre thing I have seen in a while is the interview with the Chimp's owner. Suffice it to say she didn't do herself any favors at the probable commitment hearing being scheduled. But, that's my 2nd question: what do you think will actually end up happening there? What stuck with me is she kept referring to the chimp as 'her son', 'her baby', etc. And so here is another question: in a land that is populated with more than a few people that feel a need to have a clutch of babies(idiots, let's call them what they are, why pretend?) instead of one or two at a time, why didn't she just adopt/foster a real kid, which we need desperately(mostly due to additional bad behavior), instead of keeping a chimp, and pretending it's a kid?("make believe" isn't supposed to be for adults) I see the same thing with dogs, cats, etc, and it staggers the imagination. (Save it, I have had a dog/cats around me most of my life and they are great, but they are not kids). I don't understand people's willingness to see pets = kids, and I worry that this f'ed up equation is a contributing factor to...well I dunno 100+ social/financial/civic/ciminal problems? I don't want to get into abortion(pro-choice here=I say let women work it out in their restroom, everything else seems to get solved there), but clearly the devaluing of human life, be it that or the re-institution of the death penalty, combined with this hippie/environtologist "logical argument"(which of course ignores about 500 facts) that: 1. Humans are the problem 2. USA is the problem 3. Therefore, USA humans are the biggest problem 4. Therefore, it's OK to do whatever we want to USA Humans, since we are "justified" 5. Animals = humans, and if you are going to kill animals, it's ok if I "kill" humans(USA first), one way or another is combining to create a perfect storm of "we don't need you anyway, and as long as I get to continue my ridiculous, inane, bad behavior, who cares if you die/we take your money?" mentality. Isn't that potentially dangerous? Duh? Thoughts? Again, could just be overtired.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Bah. I can't sleep, so I figured I would post something funny I read the other day. Link. My favorite comment: "Lin was Shanghai's number one cricket teaser." Cricket teaser? What does that make people that tease roosters? hmmmmm I have been saying cricket teaser to myself for the last three days and laughing, maybe I just need more sleep... Is a People for the Ethical Treatment of Insects on the horizon? How many more naive, stupid "causes" do "we need to get educated" about?(read: you will accept my delusional propaganda flyer at Thursday at the Square, when I hand it to you, with a smile on your face, or I will call you names like "narrow minded", and question your educational background. Comrade!/Seig Heil!) Anyway, I thought I would start a thread on PETA as well, given that Bill O'Reilly and PETA are now in lock step...really...and you don't get to say that often...over banning all exotic or wild pets, due to the insanity that has been happening lately = last week python almost kills kid, this week Chimp lays permanent beat down on a 55 year old lady. My first question: are they right? Any snake owners here?(yeah, I left that door open... ) Perhaps the most bizarre thing I have seen in a while is the interview with the Chimp's owner. Suffice it to say she didn't do herself any favors at the probable commitment hearing being scheduled. But, that's my 2nd question: what do you think will actually end up happening there? What stuck with me is she kept referring to the chimp as 'her son', 'her baby', etc. And so here is another question: in a land that is populated with more than a few people that feel a need to have a clutch of babies(idiots, let's call them what they are, why pretend?) instead of one or two at a time, why didn't she just adopt/foster a real kid, which we need desperately(mostly due to additional bad behavior), instead of keeping a chimp, and pretending it's a kid?("make believe" isn't supposed to be for adults) I see the same thing with dogs, cats, etc, and it staggers the imagination. (Save it, I have had a dog/cats around me most of my life and they are great, but they are not kids). I don't understand people's willingness to see pets = kids, and I worry that this f'ed up equation is a contributing factor to...well I dunno 100+ social/financial/civic/ciminal problems? I don't want to get into abortion(pro-choice here=I say let women work it out in their restroom, everything else seems to get solved there), but clearly the devaluing of human life, be it that or the re-institution of the death penalty, combined with this hippie/environtologist "logical argument"(which of course ignores about 500 facts) that: 1. Humans are the problem 2. USA is the problem 3. Therefore, USA humans are the biggest problem 4. Therefore, it's OK to do whatever we want to USA Humans, since we are "justified" 5. Animals = humans, and if you are going to kill animals, it's ok if I "kill" humans(USA first), one way or another is combining to create a perfect storm of "we don't need you anyway, and as long as I get to continue my ridiculous, inane, bad behavior, who cares if you die/we take your money?" mentality. Isn't that potentially dangerous? Duh? Thoughts? Again, could just be overtired.... While I was reading that article I was 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999% sure it was a joke article from a site like "The Onion". At the end of it I started to think that it might actually be true and despite being embarrassed if I did a search on it and it was a joke I did a search and A LOT of articles came up about it. Serious articles!!! I would have no problem with people holding ant fights but I'm sickened by dog fights. So somewhere in between is the line I'd draw. Cricket fights are damn close to that line and I can't decide which side they'd be on because the very idea is funny/absurd. Agitating crickets, Tang Dynasty, cricket hunting for the perfect cricket, crickets sold for $1,000, prod to agitate them til they're angry and then let them loose in a fight to the death. These are all things that screamed joke to me, but it's not. From the article; "Lin was famous among cricket fanciers,'' Tang Jun, one of the officers who led the raid, was quoted as saying in the Shanghai Daily. "If Lin teased a cricket he could make it angry enough to beat even a stronger opponent. Lin was Shanghai's number one cricket teaser.'' The organised crime ring, which took five to 10 per cent of the winnings, would bus about 800 gamblers to unusual secret locations, including in one instance an office at a cemetery, Mr Tang was quoted as saying. Today's raid took place at a cafeteria on the western outskirts of the city, police said. A cafeteria?! I wonder if the losers are coated in chocolate and eaten? That the article isn't a satirical joke is stunning!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 19, 2009 Author Share Posted February 19, 2009 While I was reading that article I was 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999% sure it was a joke article from a site like "The Onion". At the end of it I started to think that it might actually be true and despite being embarrassed if I did a search on it and it was a joke I did a search and A LOT of articles came up about it. Serious articles!!! I would have no problem with people holding ant fights but I'm sickened by dog fights. So somewhere in between is the line I'd draw. Cricket fights are damn close to that line and I can't decide which side they'd be on because the very idea is funny/absurd. Agitating crickets, Tang Dynasty, cricket hunting for the perfect cricket, crickets sold for $1,000, prod to agitate them til they're angry and then let them loose in a fight to the death. These are all things that screamed joke to me, but it's not. From the article; "Lin was famous among cricket fanciers,'' Tang Jun, one of the officers who led the raid, was quoted as saying in the Shanghai Daily. "If Lin teased a cricket he could make it angry enough to beat even a stronger opponent. Lin was Shanghai's number one cricket teaser.'' The organised crime ring, which took five to 10 per cent of the winnings, would bus about 800 gamblers to unusual secret locations, including in one instance an office at a cemetery, Mr Tang was quoted as saying. Today's raid took place at a cafeteria on the western outskirts of the city, police said. A cafeteria?! I wonder if the losers are coated in chocolate and eaten? That the article isn't a satirical joke is stunning!!!!!!! Nah, I checked it out. More confirmation of truth being stranger... I wish I could read Chinese or felt like bothering with a translation to see if there were any "cricket, and cricket accessories" websites. Kinda interesting that a bunch of unemployed, middle-aged Chinese men have nothing better to do than play with crickets. Perhaps the Chinese aren't as powerful as they like to say. Then again, you look at our Congress of the last 4 years...mostly otherwise unemployed, middle-aged men...and you wonder who is being more productive. At least the cricket guys know the importance of enterprise that is actually capable of turning a profit, and probably have more experience in real business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 PETA's headquarters is based in downtown Norfolk off the Elizabeth River For a couple years, the local morning show clowns here, Tommy and Rumble, would host an annual fishing tournament right off PETAs HQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I don't know where to draw the line. What do others think. Is ant fighting wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts