Save The Planet; Chainsaw The Tree Huggers

As some of you may know, Canada’s western-most provinces of Alberta and British Columbia are/had been engulfed in the worst forest fires the region has seen in over a century. The fire raging in the Crow’s-nest Pass is over 180 square kilometers and there is no rain in sight for at least 8 days. Apparently it was started by one lone cigarette from one careless idiot.

Consider this: The situation is desperate.

One tactic that has been used effectively in the past is to race ahead of the fire and cut down about half a kilometer of tree line to deny the fire a source of fuel. Once it reaches the swath of clear-cut land, its progress is halted. Since it cannot go burn in reverse, it is easy to snuff it out or douse it from above.

Good idea right? Well not in the minds of a few invasive protesters.

Upon hearing of the cutting of the tree line in the Crow’s-nest pass, a group of protesters chained themselves to the forest to prevent what they called “the unnecessary rape of BC’s natural landscape”. Not only have they chained themselves to the tree line, they have also “spiked” a few trees in the process. This is a common practice of eco-terrorists in which a railroad spike is hammered into a random tree.

Any chainsaw or mechanical device that attempts to cut down said tree will shatter or break, possibly maiming or killing the person wielding the device. And there they are, chanting, eating granola and shitting into their Depends from a standing position to the tunes of Jewel, Burning Man and Phish as the flames creep closer and closer.

It’s no secret that I HATE protesters of all kinds and breeds. But these ones are different. Try as I might, I can’t hate them. In fact, they humor me. Their misguided and unbelievable stupidity has actually driven me to hysterics.

Maybe they will be eaten alive by the animals that will no doubt come rampaging out of the blazing inferno leaving tattered shreds of idiocy hanging from bloodied chains. Either that or I can watch their unwashed, pot-reeking asses light up like Roman candles on the 6’clock news.

I know that the average human is a mindless ignorant mongrel. But really, are some people actually THAT dumb?
Ah well, I guess as nature burns and devastates, she also cleans up the shit in the process.

Cartman? Is that you?

HAHAHAHAHAAHA wow… the wit. I see how you did that. See, its like… Cartman… he hates hippies… and

Get this…

lol…

So do I.

LOL

Damn good irony there.

oh man.

Lemme catch my breath.

See! I told you he’d get it! Where’s my $5?

HAHAHA

You are so witty. You’re amazing!

Do another funny!

Where’s the debate, Cartman?

If you have no qualms with what I posted, then there is none with you.

‘Why must I explain this’, I think, is a better question.

Hey, OP, you gotta cite so we can see this fact that the protesters are trying to thwart efforts to contain the fire? I can’t one.

Or am I reading it that the protesters had put the spikes in trees previously and now 5 years later*, they can’t stop the fires because of what was done. *(Just using 5 years as any old number).

If that’s the case…wouldn’t the Marlboro man also be getting some blame. I mean, if it weren’t for smoking the fire wouldn’t have started.

There is no link at this time. This is a local news story, if at all that.

Regardless.

Assuming this is true, what are your thoughts?

Ya think smoking is to blame here?

Really?

Well, that’s a novel new concept … Let’s bring up hypothetical situations and debate them to death.

So, I hear you are still beating your wife. Any thoughts, masses?

Anyway, there are always a few crazy extremists on any side of an issue. The fact that they exist on this forestry issue doesn’t mean that the current forestry practices in general aren’t misguided or that the responsibility for the current devasting fires doesn’t lie in part from those practices. This is something that seems to me to be more worthy of debate than what a few extremists may or may not be doing.

Why would any of us assume anything you tell us is true, (O_o), especially after your lied your tail off to us about “your” autism & “your” experience with the education system?

You’ve told me in the first half of this post how hypotheticals should not be debated.

But then given a stance on this, what is to you, hypothetical.

Why the first two sentences?

From what I gather, you have declared the subjects of my post to be extremists.

Why not just…

Say that?

What?

Do we have an… ad hominem here?

lol, you’re a fun one. Let’s try to NOT contradict ourselves today.

k?

No. We have a valid question regarding why you fail to provide a citation in your OP.

Oh, and speaking of contradicting oneself, feel free to check your own postings in the following threads:
[ul][li]This is the place where I tell you about my autism[/li][li]The Education System[/ul][/li]
So, since your track record here is the opposit of truth-telling, I’d say that we shouldn’t assume your OP is veracious unless and until you provide a citation.

Dratted misspellings! “Opposit” above should read “opposite” of course.

I’m not anal like you. Don’t worry.

As long as meaning is delievered - I’m satisfied with the semantic.

No chance of use actually debating the topic is there?

Just thought I’d check.

So, do you care to actually provide a citation to your thesis (thus proving it’s not someone else’s thesis this time) or perhaps even explaining why you thin I’ve contradicted myself?