154 little girls
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
I was thinking of dog girls, cute little girls, how kind they are and
how much cuter they act when they're in heat... I was thinking of
getting myself one. Just 1 that would be my happy little girl.
Then they told me. 154 dog girls got their sexual organs removed. One
Hundred Fifty Four little dog girls were turned into adult-cubs, stupid
sexless animals, because Humans thought it was a good idea.
This is just fucking disgusting. Nothing more to say. Utter form of life
abuse. And I know there are so many people who still think it's a good
idea. Well just go kill yourself if you think so, because you're not
even worth enough to be killed by others.
Stop the world, I want to get off...
Observer aka DustWolf aka CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
C'ya!
--
Cellphone: 0038640809676 (SMS enabled)
Don't feel bad about asking/telling me anything, I will always gladly
reply.
[AC/HFA(AS) -- no suprize]
Do anything... ICI:
http://www.aimetasearch.com/ici/index.htm
MesonAI -- If nobody else wants to do it, why shouldn't we?(TM)
Http://WWW.MesonAI.Com
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
light across the burning sky when CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
<jure...@guest.arnes.si> sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>This is just fucking disgusting. Nothing more to say. Utter form of life
>abuse. And I know there are so many people who still think it's a good
>idea. Well just go kill yourself if you think so, because you're not
>even worth enough to be killed by others.
Hmmm, The SPCA here Recommend it as a cure for everything.
Obesity, Poor behaviour, Inappropriate urinating, aggressiveness,
nervousness everything.
>Stop the world, I want to get off...
What about Tubal Litagation?
Is that OK?
---
Awake! All you constellations
To space's serene sonata
Forget the daily tribulations
And join the nebular multicoloured strata
I crown you kings of the hemispheres
Burn wild, like an untamed lion
The stellar eruption throws out like spears
From the offspring carnival within Orion
-Vintersorg
Moonwolf
> Today, I was absolutely shocked. And this was going on for weeks now.
>
> I was thinking of dog girls, cute little girls, how kind they are and
> how much cuter they act when they're in heat... I was thinking of
> getting myself one. Just 1 that would be my happy little girl.
>
> Then they told me. 154 dog girls got their sexual organs removed. One
> Hundred Fifty Four little dog girls were turned into adult-cubs, stupid
> sexless animals, because Humans thought it was a good idea.
>
> This is just fucking disgusting. Nothing more to say. Utter form of life
> abuse. And I know there are so many people who still think it's a good
> idea. Well just go kill yourself if you think so, because you're not
> even worth enough to be killed by others.
>
> Stop the world, I want to get off...
>
> Observer aka DustWolf aka CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
consider getting off this world?! All the posts I have read from you
are concerned with promoting your own gratifications, irregardless of
the needs of others. I think you promote much more utter abuse of
living creatures than any of the actions you rail against. Such
monumental selfishness and narcissism certainly deserves its own
unique environment. At least there is some solace in knowing that you
are quite likely to suffer from some zoonotic or otherwise venereal
affliction in the future, if not to expire when your underlings
realize what's what and whale the tar out of your arrogant self. Get
off the world, by all means...just don't think you're important enough
for it to stop for you.
Moonwolf, who does not gladly suffer fools past a certain point
Amethyst
On 24-Nov-2002, barbt...@yahoo.com (Moonwolf) wrote:
> Moonwolf, who does not gladly suffer fools past a certain point
> > C'ya!
Thank you..
Amethyst
Raab
are next to no natural predators for dogs, due to human interference and
thus we must regulate their population ourselves. Otherwise the result
would be widespread suffering amongst the population that did not have
owners, a high amount of deaths from starvation, dogs killing each other,
roadkilllings, euthanasia, disease and so on.
Also, animals that have been spayed, neutered or whatever do not
automatically become 'stupid.' There is no brain matter held in the
reproductive organs. Removing them does not alter the effect that hormones
have had on the body, though they do stop females from entering any more
heats.. but their genetalia does not immediately shrivel up and fall off,
leaving them adrogynous and mindless.
"CyberLegend aka Jure Sah" <jure...@guest.arnes.si> wrote in message
news:3DE0DFE1...@guest.arnes.si...
Shiborugu
> have had on the body, though they do stop females from entering any more
> heats.. but their genetalia does not immediately shrivel up and fall off,
> leaving them adrogynous and mindless.
Yeah. My dog STILL "humps" legs (and anything else too). And He's fixed.
Shiborugu
silverwolf
Rags is neutered also, yet still mounts Shadow when she's in heat.
sw
>
> Shiborugu
>
>
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
not. I have stopped on the side of the road and looked for a puppy that had
been hit by a car and no one else was looking. People were standing around
and watched it run off to die or suffer alone. I found the poor mangled
animal. A four month old German Shepherd dog. All covered in his own feces.
I opened his mouth to look at his gums they were ashen colored, I lifted his
hind leg to look at his belly. I knew there was no hope for him. I had no
money to help this sad animal. I didn't even have the money to putt him to
sleep. Yet my heart would not let me leave him. I hunted up the pups owners,
they were children that didn't seem too concerned about him. They just
looked
sad and went about there marry playing. The children's grandfather didn't
speak English he just shook his head and walked away. No one was going to
move this pup from his high grass hideaway to their home for his last
moments. So I stayed and watched him slowly suffering. I could take it no
more. I loaded him into my care and took him down the street to a friends
house to see if they had anything that could ease his pain. They raised
horses and might know what to do for the poor creature. He never made it
there. He died in my back seat with me stroking his fur and talking to him.
Then I felt so bad I cried over his little body all for what, a stupid
family that let this little baby run the streets. As he lay in my back seat
gone from his shell the fleas started to evacuate the now empty vessel.
Thousands of them. Hopping off. All into my car.
Do not open your mouth and spout about things you do not understand.
Population control in an uncaring world is the only way to help keep them
and their young from suffering. I have seen more than just this pup die
because they were born and no one had the money or cared enough to make sure
they were cared for. Most of these animals were left out and said to be
owned by children who were not old enough to feed themselves never mind take
care of an animal.
Dogs in heat are not cute nor are they deprived of their puppy hood when
they are spayed or neutered. Female dogs in heat bleed all over the place,
whine, climb, dig and chew for ten days in constant search to mate. The only
things they are deprived of is cancer, the desire to wonder the streets,
urine mark your carpet and eat down the house to escape you. All this to
mate with another that they do not plan to remain with. If you do not know,
dogs seldom mate with the same dog for life. This instinct has been bred
from them. Until there is a better way I support population control in
humans and domestic animals.
What do you do with 6 puppies that no one wants? Answer me that.
--
______________________________________________________
"Everyone's opinion is their own truth."
-Shadow Walker-
"If you talk to the animals, they will talk to you and you will know each
other. If you do not talk to them, you will not know them. And what you do
not know, you will fear. And what one fears, one destroys."
--Chief Dan George--
"CyberLegend aka Jure Sah" <jure...@guest.arnes.si> wrote in message
news:3DE0DFE1...@guest.arnes.si...
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
SONICIDE
ultimately are better off. Its not like in the wild where wolf pack have
their own natural methods of control, where mainly only the tops
,strongest wolves breed and their breeding instinct shuts down when
times are lean. Dogs are artificially breed by humans living in a
different sort of environment and it may be fine not to fix your animal,
if that is your choice, but if you don't there is a responsibility that
goes with that decision. A responsibility that most humans aren't up
too.
Mainly it comes down to the genetic quality too of the animal.
WF
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>> Yeah. My dog STILL "humps" legs (and anything else too). And He's fixed.
>
>Rags is neutered also, yet still mounts Shadow when she's in heat.
I know someone who has a Pyrenean mountain dog that humps people's
legs,
And considering that the dog is longer than most people are tall and
heavier.
---
En ododlig energi, som i naturen frodas
i varje levande fors och sjo, i varje maktig ek och reslig gran
Stilla den andas, lugnt och starkt
men ett vaket sinne ser och hor, hur den vacker sjalaminnen
The Loner Wolf
> Sorry, but this sort of thing is quite necessary in this day and age. There
> are next to no natural predators for dogs, due to human interference and
> thus we must regulate their population ourselves. Otherwise the result
> would be widespread suffering amongst the population that did not have
> owners, a high amount of deaths from starvation, dogs killing each other,
> roadkilllings, euthanasia, disease and so on.
> Also, animals that have been spayed, neutered or whatever do not
> automatically become 'stupid.' There is no brain matter held in the
> reproductive organs.
Jure thinks with his nuts. What else would explain him? ;) J/K. No
offense, but think about what you say.
I have a cat. We've had him for about a year, and he's 1.5 years old.
He's been neutered and declawed (front only). He's fine. He's really
very intelligent also. No, the declawing was not my idea. He's an
"indoor cat", meaning we never let him outside. I feel like we're
restraining him way, way too much, but there's no way in hell my
mother is letting him leave the house alone. She wants to get one of
those sled-dog harnesses and resize it for him and she'll walk him
outside (STUPID STUPID STUPID! IT'S A CAT!) but WHATEVER. My cat's
FINE. Don't be stupid Jure. Would you look at someone who had a
vasectomy and never talk to them again, or judge them based on your
own corrupt values? I guess you want more euthanasia. Well, you're
entitled to your opinion... well you're not in America, but I'll give
you the same rights. Still hate America? Perhaps you only say that
because you're kicking yourself that you're not here already.
Removing them does not alter the effect that hormones
> have had on the body, though they do stop females from entering any more
> heats.. but their genetalia does not immediately shrivel up and fall off,
> leaving them adrogynous and mindless.
Males: I'm pretty sure the sever is so late in the system that they
still have everything except the ability to impregnate a bitch.
Females: I don't have a clue how that works.
<Jure said...>
> > I was thinking of dog girls, cute little girls, how kind they are and
> > how much cuter they act when they're in heat... I was thinking of
> > getting myself one. Just 1 that would be my happy little girl.
> >
> > Then they told me. 154 dog girls got their sexual organs removed. One
> > Hundred Fifty Four little dog girls were turned into adult-cubs, stupid
> > sexless animals, because Humans thought it was a good idea.
Shut your ignorant mouth! Say something intelligent, or say nothing at
all. Prejudice! This is so rediculous... I wouldn't want an Alpha with
such warped values above my head! And no, sexual organs don't make you
smarter. As you're proving to us right now.
> > This is just fucking disgusting. Nothing more to say. Utter form of life
> > abuse. And I know there are so many people who still think it's a good
> > idea. Well just go kill yourself if you think so, because you're not
> > even worth enough to be killed by others.
Shut the fuck up already. But where's that gun you had for me
> > Stop the world, I want to get off...
OK, Jure, if you're going to quote someone, SAY WHO IT IS! GIVE HIM A
LITTLE CREDIT!
That was said by Calvin in the Calvin and Hobbes comic strip dated
November 4th, 1989 written by Bill Watterson. Calvin & Hobbes!
There'll never be anything else like it! Just wish I could see a few
new ones.
> > Observer aka DustWolf aka CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
A thousand masks...
-Rob
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> What do you do with 6 puppies that no one wants? Answer me that.
Simple: You kill them.
I've never said I wanted to let every one of them live or that I wanted
the world flooded with puppies. I'm not SOME FUCKING STUPID HUMAN like
all of you here want to be so badly, I don't want any puppies and take
care of them and all that BULLSHIT. I SIMPLY don't want them neutered if
you GET WHAT I MEAN, of course you're very OBVIOUSLY INCAPABLE of
concieving that.
Dogs and me have a diffirent kind of relationship, I see very clearly
you will NEVER understand. Even if you study it to the rest of your
life, you'll just LOCK UP IN YOUR BRAINS and stick with your old
representation of things. You barely even know what a dog is, which is
your main problem.
What's up with neutering? It's fucking disgusting, that's what it is.
Why? Very simply it's a thing you wouldn't be doing if you ever remotely
considered a dog your approximate equal. And thinking how dogs concieve
humans, I share their POV... it's just freaking overdisgusting. Way too
disgusting, I personaly need a drink whenever I think of it too
troughly. Killing little cubs (a twist of the neck is usualy preformed)
is a lot more acceptable, since it is done and was done long before
humans were around.
Geesus, you people make sueccide sound like a good option with your
total and complete ignorance. No wonder all my freinds gave up on
reasoning with you. Just sorry for taking it all out on you, it seems to
me now like the response would be more appropriate to be sent to just
about anyone else that replied, you at least read what I wrote.
--
I could run like the wind just to be with you.
Raab
> > What do you do with 6 puppies that no one wants? Answer me that.
>
> Simple: You kill them.
I thought you cared about dogs?
>
> I've never said I wanted to let every one of them live or that I wanted
> the world flooded with puppies. I'm not SOME FUCKING STUPID HUMAN like
> all of you here want to be so badly, I don't want any puppies and take
> care of them and all that BULLSHIT. I SIMPLY don't want them neutered if
> you GET WHAT I MEAN, of course you're very OBVIOUSLY INCAPABLE of
> concieving that.
So if we put contraceptives in their food would you be happier? It isn't
like your opinion matters too much. You're obviously in the minority and
you will never be able to effect the changes you want to see.
>
> Dogs and me have a diffirent kind of relationship, I see very clearly
> you will NEVER understand. Even if you study it to the rest of your
> life, you'll just LOCK UP IN YOUR BRAINS and stick with your old
> representation of things. You barely even know what a dog is, which is
> your main problem.
Have you ever actually existed in a pack structure with dogs? I grew up
with eight dogs living with us at one time. To keep them in line, we had to
act like a pack. My dad was alpha, my mom his mate. I was beta and my
siblings were the same. The dogs were all lower than us in the pack, though
they all had their own order as well.. Since we were in a pack structure,
of course when the females went into heat they would want my dad or myself
to mate with them. That doesn't mean I fucked the bitches, because I did
not. I don't get carried away with things like you obviously do.
> What's up with neutering? It's fucking disgusting, that's what it is.
> Why? Very simply it's a thing you wouldn't be doing if you ever remotely
> considered a dog your approximate equal.
If dogs are our equals then all the more reason. People get fixed all the
time, why shouldn't dogs? They can't wear condoms, so neutering is the next
logical step.
>And thinking how dogs concieve
> humans, I share their POV... it's just freaking overdisgusting. Way too
> disgusting, I personaly need a drink whenever I think of it too
> troughly. Killing little cubs (a twist of the neck is usualy preformed)
> is a lot more acceptable, since it is done and was done long before
> humans were around.
Trust me, most dogs would rather be fixed than be dead. They have a drive
for self preservation just like humans (mentally healthy ones anyway) do.
How much canine body language have you learned to be able to interpret their
wants for them?
>
> Geesus, you people make sueccide sound like a good option with your
> total and complete ignorance. No wonder all my freinds gave up on
> reasoning with you. Just sorry for taking it all out on you, it seems to
> me now like the response would be more appropriate to be sent to just
> about anyone else that replied, you at least read what I wrote.
I get the feeling you are just blowing out your ass. Are you just taking a
stand on this issue to seem more masculine?
I admit that I do not like the idea of neutering but it is necessary to
prevent unneeded suffering.. or would you rather the dogs suffer?
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
You are no lover of others or animals if you see taking a life as something
so easy plain and instant. Wolves only kill when there is a reason. Food,
Protecting their own and territory they live in. To them there is no other
way. But as much as you hate to admit it you were born to humans have there
genetics and can type, read, right and reason. So you are given a choice to
do things differently. Given a choice!
> I've never said I wanted to let every one of them live or that I wanted
> the world flooded with puppies. I'm not SOME FUCKING STUPID HUMAN like
> all of you here want to be so badly, I don't want any puppies and take
> care of them and all that BULLSHIT. I SIMPLY don't want them neutered if
> you GET WHAT I MEAN, of course you're very OBVIOUSLY INCAPABLE of
> concieving that.
If I had the choice I would have gone in with my dog and had the procedure
along with her. I don't need any more children. Don't assume you are the
only
one with the ability to understand any animal you may have special
connections with.
> Dogs and me have a diffirent kind of relationship, I see very clearly
> you will NEVER understand. Even if you study it to the rest of your
> life, you'll just LOCK UP IN YOUR BRAINS and stick with your old
> representation of things. You barely even know what a dog is, which is
> your main problem.
I know full well what a dog, is. My dog is a part of me not just something
that hangs out in my house and takes up space and adds to my food bill. She
is my spirit sister my pack member a part of my family. A soul mat if you
will. I did not want her to have to suffer another heat wanting to mate and
deprived of it.
Separated from me because she would bleed for ten days and not be allowed to
sleep on my bed or in the house.
> What's up with neutering? It's fucking disgusting, that's what it is.
> Why? Very simply it's a thing you wouldn't be doing if you ever remotely
> considered a dog your approximate equal. And thinking how dogs concieve
> humans, I share their POV... it's just freaking overdisgusting. Way too
> disgusting, I personaly need a drink whenever I think of it too
> troughly. Killing little cubs (a twist of the neck is usualy preformed)
> is a lot more acceptable, since it is done and was done long before
> humans were around.
Again I beg to differ with you. Wolves and wild dogs do not kill their
young. If one is sick it is let to die in whatever manner nature provides.
Twisting there neck is not always instant and it is crueler than never
giving
them the option of their birth. What you speak of is murder simple and
plain.
> Geesus, you people make sueccide sound like a good option with your
> total and complete ignorance. No wonder all my freinds gave up on
> reasoning with you. Just sorry for taking it all out on you, it seems to
> me now like the response would be more appropriate to be sent to just
> about anyone else that replied, you at least read what I wrote.
I try to read all of what I'm going to answer too. Even if I slip and fall
back in it. =) I really do hope one day you will see past your up bringing
and see the world for what it really is. I am nothing like anyone as you are
nothing like anyone else. Our own lives have given us our opinions and
truths. Do not ever compare me to another human being. You do not know me
you can never even know what thoughts are here and what makes me believe
what I believe. As I can not understand all that makes you believe what you
do. But mine is spoken from experience. Not pulled from the air on half
beliefs just because I wish to believe them. I am a were and that means to
me I am aware of what I do and who I am. I feel the earth the wind and hear
the wild things when no one else even knows it's there.
You talk about running with the wind. Have you. Can you understand what the
spirit wants?
The earth the sky the moon?
I know what it wants from me but do you know from you.
Tired and waiting to hunt.........
One name and I will always bear it........For I am the Shadow Walker
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
hotmail.com> sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>If I had the choice I would have gone in with my dog and had the procedure
What's That?
Can't you get Tubal litigations or vasectomies done there?
You can get them for free on the NHS here.
What about Abortions, are you allowed those?
Or do "pro-lifers" (hahaha) come and shoot you dead?
>Again I beg to differ with you. Wolves and wild dogs do not kill their
>young. If one is sick it is let to die in whatever manner nature provides.
Hmmm, and letting it die in whatever manner nature provides is somehow
better than overdosing it barbiturates?
Nature's manner usually includes starvation, Disease etc.
>truths. Do not ever compare me to another human being. You do not know me
However give that that you are human being, It is likely that you have
basic similarities to other people, For example I know I am minded, so
Since you are a human, you are presumably minded.
Since Mammals bear certain similarities to us, like dogs, it is
lieklt that they are minded.
Since you are a human in the United States at this time, It's likely
you will have certain polotical veiws, You're more likely to be more
relgious, conservative,work longer hours, pay less taxes but have less
public services than someone from Europe.
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> Jure thinks with his nuts. What else would explain him? ;) J/K. No
> offense, but think about what you say.
True.
> My cat's FINE.
Hm. I'm not a werecat and I have never met your cat so I can't tell.
However I do know male dogs very well and being a werewolf I very much
enjoy the teritorrial fights every now and then. I don't think I'd be
'FINE' not doing this type of socialization with dogs for a while, it's
too much fun for all of us.
> Don't be stupid Jure. Would you look at someone who had a
> vasectomy and never talk to them again, or judge them based on your
> own corrupt values?
My values are just as important as yours mind you. And yes, I guess I
couldn't avoid taking an extra judgment on a castrated individual.
Humans are not my species anyway.
> I guess you want more euthanasia.
=/
> Well, you're
> entitled to your opinion... well you're not in America, but I'll give
> you the same rights. Still hate America? Perhaps you only say that
> because you're kicking yourself that you're not here already.
Dream on, I'm still not a capitalist and will never be. It's not a
thing, like your parents say, you have to grow up into.
> <Jure said...>
> > > I was thinking of dog girls, cute little girls, how kind they are and
> > > how much cuter they act when they're in heat... I was thinking of
> > > getting myself one. Just 1 that would be my happy little girl.
> > >
> > > Then they told me. 154 dog girls got their sexual organs removed. One
> > > Hundred Fifty Four little dog girls were turned into adult-cubs, stupid
> > > sexless animals, because Humans thought it was a good idea.
>
> Shut your ignorant mouth! Say something intelligent, or say nothing at
> all. Prejudice! This is so rediculous... I wouldn't want an Alpha with
> such warped values above my head! And no, sexual organs don't make you
> smarter. As you're proving to us right now.
I never said that. However it is true that I value reproductive abbility
above life itself. And I'm tolerant enough to think dogs have an equal
right to reproduce as myself.
And I might tell you about the term "sexless animal". I originaly came
up with it on the basis of the point how humans treated me. To them it
wouldn't make a diffirence if I was neutered, which is rather simmilar
to the point about what you humans think about dogs. It takes a little
effort to understand this.
> > > Stop the world, I want to get off...
>
> OK, Jure, if you're going to quote someone, SAY WHO IT IS! GIVE HIM A
> LITTLE CREDIT!
I have no idea who said that. The term was introduced to me back in 1998
by a friend discussing social problems. I thought the insertion was
appropriate.
> That was said by Calvin in the Calvin and Hobbes comic strip dated
> November 4th, 1989 written by Bill Watterson. Calvin & Hobbes!
> There'll never be anything else like it! Just wish I could see a few
> new ones.
We have Miki Muster here, he's better.
> > > Observer aka DustWolf aka CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
>
> A thousand masks...
Not at all, simply a thousand locations.
> -Rob
--
I could run like the wind just to be with you.
Observer aka DustWolf aka CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
C'ya!
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> > > What do you do with 6 puppies that no one wants? Answer me that.
> >
> > Simple: You kill them.
>
> I thought you cared about dogs?
I do. They are more my species than humans. It is also true that being
one of many doesn't immediately mean you love and are loved by every
single one of them. Foregin packs can sound quite killable most of the
times.
> > I've never said I wanted to let every one of them live or that I wanted
> > the world flooded with puppies. I'm not SOME FUCKING STUPID HUMAN like
> > all of you here want to be so badly, I don't want any puppies and take
> > care of them and all that BULLSHIT. I SIMPLY don't want them neutered if
> > you GET WHAT I MEAN, of course you're very OBVIOUSLY INCAPABLE of
> > concieving that.
>
> So if we put contraceptives in their food would you be happier?
If the dogs would take them whenever they wanted and they were aware of
the results, yes maybe. Still I consider it all highly immoral.
> It isn't
> like your opinion matters too much. You're obviously in the minority and
> you will never be able to effect the changes you want to see.
But I have friends. Big, strong, everlasting friends.
> > Dogs and me have a diffirent kind of relationship, I see very clearly
> > you will NEVER understand. Even if you study it to the rest of your
> > life, you'll just LOCK UP IN YOUR BRAINS and stick with your old
> > representation of things. You barely even know what a dog is, which is
> > your main problem.
>
> Have you ever actually existed in a pack structure with dogs? I grew up
> with eight dogs living with us at one time. To keep them in line, we had to
> act like a pack. My dad was alpha, my mom his mate. I was beta and my
> siblings were the same. The dogs were all lower than us in the pack, though
> they all had their own order as well.. Since we were in a pack structure,
> of course when the females went into heat they would want my dad or myself
> to mate with them. That doesn't mean I fucked the bitches, because I did
> not. I don't get carried away with things like you obviously do.
You're playing on the wrong cards here. No I have not lived with dogs,
simply because my parents refuse to let me have any. That didn't prevent
me from finding dogs and socializing with them tho. I have my territory
and there are lots of dogs there, males, females and cubs. It didn't
take 10 years for me to get to them, it didn't go step by step, the
moment I claimed the territory, the dogs were picking up my scent from
extreemely large distances and responding to my every thought, even
exhibiting wolf behaviours at times (packmaking ones for instance).
Some dogs preffer to mimic my behaviours (the wink always being the
fastest learnt one) and are generaly very intereseted in me. I can hear
their thoughts and all of their behaviour is such that there is no
doubt. Most dogs consider me as a total peer (that is, dogs I meet on
the street for a cupple of seconds, not those I may have lived with all
my life), the relationship that I learned would fall appart within
minutes when attempted with humans, actualy works between myself and
dogs.
> > What's up with neutering? It's fucking disgusting, that's what it is.
> > Why? Very simply it's a thing you wouldn't be doing if you ever remotely
> > considered a dog your approximate equal.
>
> If dogs are our equals then all the more reason. People get fixed all the
> time, why shouldn't dogs? They can't wear condoms, so neutering is the next
> logical step.
No it's not the next logical step.
Dogs keep a neat diplomatic subordinative relationship to humans and
they trust their life with their mates anyhow. I live that relationship
with humans as well because nothing else will really work and I've
subordinated. I've let my legal owners remove my healthy cannine teeth
(because they didn't like what the society might think about how I
looked with them) because I trusted they would have a sufficient heart
to do what is actualy best for me. I still can't chew right and I know
it wasn't a good idea they did it, but I don't complain. Still they did
it.
And somebody's testicles are a lot more touchy topic that somebody's
teeth, still you like to remove them or do other grusome things with
them (because you think their look in the society would be better for
it). The dog is ok, he won't complain, yet it is a fucking bad thing to
do. Man, how do I tell you this? Somebody trusts his life with you and
you betray him completely so you can THINK you will make better use of
him! And you think it's a good idea!
> Trust me, most dogs would rather be fixed than be dead. They have a drive
> for self preservation just like humans (mentally healthy ones anyway) do.
> How much canine body language have you learned to be able to interpret their
> wants for them?
It's instinctive, I am not aware of it. It seems to be quite good tho on
getting a message accross in either direction.
> > Geesus, you people make sueccide sound like a good option with your
> > total and complete ignorance. No wonder all my freinds gave up on
> > reasoning with you. Just sorry for taking it all out on you, it seems to
> > me now like the response would be more appropriate to be sent to just
> > about anyone else that replied, you at least read what I wrote.
>
> I get the feeling you are just blowing out your ass. Are you just taking a
> stand on this issue to seem more masculine?
No. I write what I mean.
> I admit that I do not like the idea of neutering but it is necessary to
> prevent unneeded suffering.. or would you rather the dogs suffer?
I would rather have all my teeth right now if you get what I mean. Human
society is irrelevant to dogs.
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> > Simple: You kill them.
>
> You are no lover of others or animals if you see taking a life as something
> so easy plain and instant. Wolves only kill when there is a reason.
I fully admit that just because I am a werewolf I do not love every
since dog and wolf on the planet. It's simply an idea so stupid that it
could only be born in a human society.
> Food,
> Protecting their own and territory they live in. To them there is no other
> way. But as much as you hate to admit it you were born to humans have there
> genetics and can type, read, right and reason. So you are given a choice to
> do things differently. Given a choice!
I'm not as blindfolded as you might think. Dog society might work a
little diffirent, but they still have a choice. It's the humans that
take that choice away from them.
> > I've never said I wanted to let every one of them live or that I wanted
> > the world flooded with puppies. I'm not SOME FUCKING STUPID HUMAN like
> > all of you here want to be so badly, I don't want any puppies and take
> > care of them and all that BULLSHIT. I SIMPLY don't want them neutered if
> > you GET WHAT I MEAN, of course you're very OBVIOUSLY INCAPABLE of
> > concieving that.
>
> If I had the choice I would have gone in with my dog and had the procedure
> along with her. I don't need any more children.
Very nice, however that is your choice. I belive dogs might not make
such a decission and they should be given a choice. It's all about the
choice. Neuter your dog and you remove one of the options.
You might say that the drive is too strong with dogs to resist that,
however wake up, reasoning isn't and shouldn't be all based in the
brains. Hormones make up for a large amount of decission making anyhow.
If they can't resist it, that's exactly their choice.
> Don't assume you are the
> only one with the ability to understand any animal you may have special
> connections with.
I guess you'd need to see it to belive me.
> I know full well what a dog, is. My dog is a part of me not just something
> that hangs out in my house and takes up space and adds to my food bill. She
> is my spirit sister my pack member a part of my family. A soul mat if you
> will. I did not want her to have to suffer another heat wanting to mate and
> deprived of it.
In other words: You changed her mind.
> Twisting there neck is not always instant and it is crueler than never
> giving them the option of their birth. What you speak of is murder simple and
> plain.
Lemme guess: You're chatolic?
If you knew how much you kill every day, you would have had a diffirent
oppinion on that. Cubs are nothing more but a collony of cells.
> You talk about running with the wind. Have you. Can you understand what the
> spirit wants?
I might know or not, how could I know that. However it is true that I
live here and now and that there is a human society all around me,
making my life very bad indeed. The wolf within me is often miserably
tourtured. Too often in fact. And BTW: I AM the spirit.
> The earth the sky the moon?
Trying to make me feel safe, allas, failing heavily.
> I know what it wants from me but do you know from you.
Cubs.
Moonwolf
> "Raab" <rabe(inenglish)7...@chartermi.net> wrote in message news:<uu2g8g...@corp.supernews.com>...
> > Sorry, but this sort of thing is quite necessary in this day and age. There
> > are next to no natural predators for dogs, due to human interference and
> > thus we must regulate their population ourselves. Otherwise the result
> > would be widespread suffering amongst the population that did not have
> > owners, a high amount of deaths from starvation, dogs killing each other,
> > roadkilllings, euthanasia, disease and so on.
> > Also, animals that have been spayed, neutered or whatever do not
> > automatically become 'stupid.' There is no brain matter held in the
> > reproductive organs.
>
> Jure thinks with his nuts. What else would explain him? ;) J/K. No
> offense, but think about what you say.
>
> I have a cat. We've had him for about a year, and he's 1.5 years old.
> He's been neutered and declawed (front only). He's fine. He's really
> very intelligent also. No, the declawing was not my idea. He's an
> "indoor cat", meaning we never let him outside. I feel like we're
> restraining him way, way too much, but there's no way in hell my
> mother is letting him leave the house alone. She wants to get one of
> those sled-dog harnesses and resize it for him and she'll walk him
> outside (STUPID STUPID STUPID! IT'S A CAT!) but WHATEVER.
Hey, Rob, she doesn't have to cut down a dog harness...a cat can get
out of one of those anyway. Pet shops, and even WalMart, sells the
figure-8 harnesses for cats..more comfortable and safe. I use one for
my cat when she goes out to PetsMart or wherever. It may be stupid,
but at least she won't bolt away and get hit by a car. :) BTW, collars
are not secure enough to walk a cat in, either.
Moonwolf
Moonwolf
> Shadow Walker wrote:
> > What do you do with 6 puppies that no one wants? Answer me that.
>
> Simple: You kill them.
>
> I've never said I wanted to let every one of them live or that I wanted
> the world flooded with puppies. I'm not SOME FUCKING STUPID HUMAN like
> all of you here want to be so badly, I don't want any puppies and take
> care of them and all that BULLSHIT.
In your obvious assumption that all the world, dogs and all, exists
only for your use and gratification, in your arrogance, you epitomize
the worst qualities of humanity, and are much more human in that sense
than anyone I have ever seen post here. So, indeed, you ARE a
"fucking stupid human". You want dogs left sexually whole for your
own pleasure, which will result in them reproducing at some point, yet
you don't want to take the responsibility for the consequences of your
allegedly higher-valued viewpoint. Very human, IMHO.
I SIMPLY don't want them neutered if
> you GET WHAT I MEAN, of course you're very OBVIOUSLY INCAPABLE of
> concieving that.
>
> Dogs and me have a diffirent kind of relationship, I see very clearly
> you will NEVER understand. Even if you study it to the rest of your
> life, you'll just LOCK UP IN YOUR BRAINS and stick with your old
> representation of things. You barely even know what a dog is, which is
> your main problem.
Oh, I have seen your representation of things: very like the older
world view that humans took, that nature is there for humanity to use
in any way possible, even for frivolous gratification, because humans
considered themselves the Alphas of the world. You cannot
differentiate between what you want and what a dog might want.
>
> What's up with neutering? It's fucking disgusting, that's what it is.
> Why? Very simply it's a thing you wouldn't be doing if you ever remotely
> considered a dog your approximate equal.
If you considered a dog your approximate equal, you wouldn't want them
to suffer and die just for your pleasures. You seem to be on an
all-too-human power trip, dominating other creatures sexually and
socially. I will give you a free bit of analysis: this is almost
invariably a sign that someone has little or no self-esteem and is
trying to compensate for it. Even the zoos I know treat their animal
mates much more caringly than the attitude you express for the dogs
you claim to be so close to.
And thinking how dogs concieve
> humans, I share their POV... it's just freaking overdisgusting. Way too
> disgusting, I personaly need a drink whenever I think of it too
> troughly. Killing little cubs (a twist of the neck is usualy preformed)
> is a lot more acceptable, since it is done and was done long before
> humans were around.
Now, the thought of creating little souls and then killing them
immediately is what is "freaking overdisgusting"! BTW, dogs did not
exist before humans were around. And canids don't have hands, so how
could they kill by twisting little necks? And you drink...dogs don't
need to drink alcohol...do you give that to your beloved dogs too?
<makes face of disgust>
>
>
> Geesus, you people make sueccide sound like a good option with your
> total and complete ignorance. No wonder all my freinds gave up on
> reasoning with you.
I've never heard anyone else lay out this POV or line of reasoning
here. Where are all these friends? If it's your alleged "pack", they
would probably agree with you just because you are the "Alpha" in that
group-dominant/submissive relationship...they might not actually
believe it.
Moonwolf, wolf AND human and damn proud of it all!
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
you still live at home and are cared for by your parents, am I right? So
everything you say here is all the ramblings of someone about 14-18 years
old. Am I right? If so then you have nothing to base any of what you say,
on. No experience in dog, cat, wolf, bird, fish and or human socialization,
no experience in dog, cat, wolf, bird, fish and or human relationships and
no life. If you do not live with it in your home/den 24 7 it is not
happening. You will rant and rave that you do not need human anything, but
you know what, you do. Because to have cubs you need a human female/were
female. Let me tell you something, no female in her right mind will turn her
tail in your direction with you spouting off about twisting cubs necks.
Females are very protective of any young they come across. Remember there
are humans that have been raised by wolves. Wolves who have raised dogs and
etcetera etcetera....
So right now mommy and daddy control your every move and decision. Just like
people do with their dogs. They do what is best for their children. Even if
it is not always the best thing. So better to spay and neuter than to kill.
Better to prevent than to kill. It's probably best that you are not allowed
to have a dog. You are not mature enough to take on the responsibility.
Have a nice day....
Raab
> Raab wrote:
> > > > What do you do with 6 puppies that no one wants? Answer me that.
> > >
> > > Simple: You kill them.
> >
> > I thought you cared about dogs?
>
> I do. They are more my species than humans. It is also true that being
> one of many doesn't immediately mean you love and are loved by every
> single one of them. Foregin packs can sound quite killable most of the
> times.
Dogs do not automatically kill other packs they find. We had wild dogs
around in our woods for a while and they did not do this. You do not
understand how their society works at all if you think that is how they do
things. Also, caring about dogs does not mean automatically loving every
single one. It does mean that you care about their welfare. Obviously you
do NOT with how much you talk about killing dogs that you don't even know.
>
> Still I consider it all highly immoral.
Like I said, your opinion doesn't really matter. You are in the minority
and will not be able to effect any change.
> But I have friends. Big, strong, everlasting friends.
Big, strong, imaginary friends.
> You're playing on the wrong cards here. No I have not lived with dogs,
Then you do not really understand them. By being a were, you should have an
innate understanding of their instincts, society, etc, right? I am not
convinced you truly are were.
> simply because my parents refuse to let me have any. That didn't prevent
> me from finding dogs and socializing with them tho. I have my territory
> and there are lots of dogs there, males, females and cubs. It didn't
> take 10 years for me to get to them, it didn't go step by step, the
> moment I claimed the territory, the dogs were picking up my scent from
> extreemely large distances and responding to my every thought, even
> exhibiting wolf behaviours at times (packmaking ones for instance).
Why do you automatically assume you are alpha? You do not seem alpha to me.
I don't have time to address the rest of your points now, but I'll be back
after work.
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<ecfc068b.02112...@posting.google.com>:
I agree :O) My black cat I got from my ex neighbor gurl is used to
being "walked" in a cat-size harness.Hes an outside cat so hes pretty
smart but if you wanted to take him somwhere hes ok with a harness.
~Prince SNuhwolf~
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<uu72lqr...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
>"CyberLegend aka Jure Sah" <jure...@guest.arnes.si> wrote in message
>news:3DE33D7B...@guest.arnes.si...
>> Raab wrote:
>> > > > What do you do with 6 puppies that no one wants? Answer me that.
>> > >
>> > > Simple: You kill them.
>> >
>> > I thought you cared about dogs?
>>
>> I do. They are more my species than humans. It is also true that being
>> one of many doesn't immediately mean you love and are loved by every
>> single one of them. Foregin packs can sound quite killable most of the
>> times.
>
>Dogs do not automatically kill other packs they find. We had wild dogs
>around in our woods for a while and they did not do this.
Ah ok...so they represent _all_ packs in all areas.
Hmmm...
>You do not
>understand how their society works at all if you think that is how they do
>things.
And your degree in wildlife biology is from what university again?
>Also, caring about dogs does not mean automatically loving every
>single one. It does mean that you care about their welfare. Obviously you
>do NOT with how much you talk about killing dogs that you don't even know.
>
Dogs get killed by cars...do you drive a car?
>>
>> Still I consider it all highly immoral.
>
>Like I said, your opinion doesn't really matter. You are in the minority
>and will not be able to effect any change.
>
ROTFLMAO! Why dont you just say,"Move to the Back of the Bus!"
Yeah...minority dosent count...especially in America :O)
>> But I have friends. Big, strong, everlasting friends.
>
>Big, strong, imaginary friends.
>
I guess I'm a figlet of his Imag'gin ashin then...
-Popeye.
>> You're playing on the wrong cards here. No I have not lived with dogs,
>
>Then you do not really understand them. By being a were, you should have an
>innate understanding of their instincts, society, etc, right? I am not
>convinced you truly are were.
>
Wah.A classic "your not realy a were Lame".
How original of you :O)
>> simply because my parents refuse to let me have any. That didn't prevent
>> me from finding dogs and socializing with them tho. I have my territory
>> and there are lots of dogs there, males, females and cubs. It didn't
>> take 10 years for me to get to them, it didn't go step by step, the
>> moment I claimed the territory, the dogs were picking up my scent from
>> extreemely large distances and responding to my every thought, even
>> exhibiting wolf behaviours at times (packmaking ones for instance).
>
>Why do you automatically assume you are alpha? You do not seem alpha to me.
Nor you to me :O) But usenet is soooo unwieldy in such affairs...
>I don't have time to address the rest of your points now, but I'll be back
>after work.
>
Suuuuure...nice dodge M8ey.
~Prince Snuhwolf~
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<3de338b1...@news.cis.dfn.de>:
>
>>Again I beg to differ with you. Wolves and wild dogs do not kill
their
>>young. If one is sick it is let to die in whatever manner nature
provides.
>
>Hmmm, and letting it die in whatever manner nature provides is somehow
>better than overdosing it barbiturates?
>Nature's manner usually includes starvation, Disease etc.
>
You need to own a few pets first.
~Prince Snuhwolf`~
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
don't have a life. This is how I felt at that moment about that subject and
that person at that time.
--
______________________________________________________
"Everyone's opinion is their own truth."
-Shadow Walker-
"If you talk to the animals, they will talk to you and you will know each
other. If you do not talk to them, you will not know them. And what you do
not know, you will fear. And what one fears, one destroys."
--Chief Dan George--
"Shadow Walker" <shadowenwalker @ hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hFLE9.66414$Kj1.2...@twister.austin.rr.com...
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>Its called dying with dignity silly.
>You need to own a few pets first.
Overdosing With barbiturates is what the vets use to put an animal
down silly.
And don't talk to me about dieing with dignity; I've seen a friend die
from brain tumour at secondary school,
And he wasted away, couldn't hold down his food, crapped himself, was
in constant pain etc towards the end, he couldn't even breath very
well at some points till he went blue in the face, and if he'd been a
dog, he'd have been put down, but since he's a person no, we'll let
him die while coated with his own vomit and shit.
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
> since dog and wolf on the planet. It's simply an idea so stupid that it
> could only be born in a human society.
No it's born of reason. It's born from the knowlege that what we do as an
act has a reaction. we know that when we mate we will produce young. Animals
are not that tuned into it. If they were they would avoid the pain that
would be the end result. Believe me a have seen many animals not do
something twice if it involed the slightest pain. But since it feels good to
mate and the babies do not come until later the two acts may never connect
in their mind. I know my dog knew when she was going to have puppies but
what brought it on, I think not.
> I'm not as blindfolded as you might think. Dog society might work a
> little diffirent, but they still have a choice. It's the humans that
> take that choice away from them.
Simply because dogs would not be here if it were not for man. So it is mans
decision as to what happens to them as long as it is not cruel. Everyone
heres ideas of cruel is different I understand that. Yet when you are
talking about dogs and people you can not say a dog knows what it is doing.
A dog is mentally bred to be a puppy it's whole life. They never truly grow
up. So they have to be cared for. If not disease, hunger and worse befalls
them. So if I took the choice from my dog to have more puppies then I am
doing her and her unborn puppies a favor.
> Very nice, however that is your choice. I belive dogs might not make
> such a decission and they should be given a choice. It's all about the
> choice. Neuter your dog and you remove one of the options.
>
> You might say that the drive is too strong with dogs to resist that,
> however wake up, reasoning isn't and shouldn't be all based in the
> brains. Hormones make up for a large amount of decission making anyhow.
> If they can't resist it, that's exactly their choice.
Hormones, oh you are thinking with your privet area on this one. I'd be very
careful with that way of thinking people go to jail for acting with their
hormones and not reasoning. You are not above human low or anything.
Again they are not mentally mature enough to resist their hormones that's
not choice that's the inability to reason out why they should not do it.
> I guess you'd need to see it to belive me.
I see it every day.
> In other words: You changed her mind.
No, I didn't. I made the best chioce I thought for her.
> Lemme guess: You're chatolic?
What is that?
> If you knew how much you kill every day, you would have had a diffirent
> oppinion on that. Cubs are nothing more but a collony of cells.
I guess you are an unthinking collony of cells then?
Not once they are born. They have a soul and breath, eat and have the
ability to smell, hear and cry.
While in the womb before the heart starts beating they are just a colony of
cells. Oh I know how much I kill every day just being alive. But I make my
own decisions and I think about how they affect others. I use my empathy to
the best of my ability. I am not perfect but I try to do what I can every
day to make life better not just for myself but the animals and people in
it.
> I might know or not, how could I know that. However it is true that I
> live here and now and that there is a human society all around me,
> making my life very bad indeed. The wolf within me is often miserably
> tourtured. Too often in fact. And BTW: I AM the spirit.
LOL Right, If you were you would not be so tortured, so miserable. I really
wish you were not so, maybe you would not be so rigged and callous.
> Trying to make me feel safe, allas, failing heavily.
I was not trying to make you feel safe I asked a question, to which you did
not answer.
> Cubs.
Only if you change some of your views would a woman were or otherwise want
anything to do with you.
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
hotmail.com> sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>to have a dog. You are not mature enough to take on the responsibility.
>Have a nice day....
Don't be meen WAH!
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
--
______________________________________________________
"Everyone's opinion is their own truth."
-Shadow Walker-
"If you talk to the animals, they will talk to you and you will know each
other. If you do not talk to them, you will not know them. And what you do
not know, you will fear. And what one fears, one destroys."
--Chief Dan George--
"D. Saunders" <eisens...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3de3cff0...@news.cis.dfn.de...
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>"fucking stupid human". You want dogs left sexually whole for your
>own pleasure, which will result in them reproducing at some point, yet
>you don't want to take the responsibility for the consequences of your
>allegedly higher-valued viewpoint. Very human, IMHO.
Can't he have them Tubaly litagated or Vasectomised?
---
Plug: http://www.blind-guardian.com/
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
have to go in and take the parts out because of cancer. Vets do not like to
do surgery if they think they are not doing the right thing. The code of
ethics in vets "First do no harm." They see fixing animals as a way to
prolong their lives and make life healthier. As well as control unwanted
animals. Tying tubes only stops the possibility of pregnancy it can come
undone. But total removal is a guaranty.
--
______________________________________________________
"Everyone's opinion is their own truth."
-Shadow Walker-
"If you talk to the animals, they will talk to you and you will know each
other. If you do not talk to them, you will not know them. And what you do
not know, you will fear. And what one fears, one destroys."
--Chief Dan George--
"D. Saunders" <eisens...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3de3d81b...@news.cis.dfn.de...
Raab
"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >Dogs do not automatically kill other packs they find. We had wild dogs
> >around in our woods for a while and they did not do this.
>
> Ah ok...so they represent _all_ packs in all areas.
> Hmmm...
Yes, they do. Obviously we had more than one pack or else I would not have
been able to make the above observation. The only packs that would act
differently would be those driven to extreme measures by human interference
or those who's members are not healthy mentally, usually because of human
intervention.. or if they all just happened to have rabies.
>
> >You do not
> >understand how their society works at all if you think that is how they
do
> >things.
>
> And your degree in wildlife biology is from what university again?
I don't have a degree yet. I have worked extensively with dogs in former
jobs and I have taken classes toward a bachelors.
> >Also, caring about dogs does not mean automatically loving every
> >single one. It does mean that you care about their welfare. Obviously
you
> >do NOT with how much you talk about killing dogs that you don't even
know.
> >
> Dogs get killed by cars...do you drive a car?
That is not even relevant. You are reaching quite far for that one. Yes, I
drive a car and when I see a dog wandering in the road, I stop and scare him
or her away from the road so he/she will not get hit. Usually their house
is right nearby and they run back there when I yell at them. Sometimes I
knock on the door and tell the owner that the dog was out in the road.
> >Like I said, your opinion doesn't really matter. You are in the minority
> >and will not be able to effect any change.
> >
> ROTFLMAO! Why dont you just say,"Move to the Back of the Bus!"
> Yeah...minority dosent count...especially in America :O)
Yes, minority rarely makes much of an impact, especially in America. Or
have you been living somewhere else? The candidate with the fewest votes
does not win here in the United States. Our nation is quite a majority rule
nation.
> >Big, strong, imaginary friends.
> >
> I guess I'm a figlet of his Imag'gin ashin then...
> -Popeye.
Probably.
> >> You're playing on the wrong cards here. No I have not lived with dogs,
> >
> >Then you do not really understand them. By being a were, you should have
an
> >innate understanding of their instincts, society, etc, right? I am not
> >convinced you truly are were.
> >
>
> Wah.A classic "your not realy a were Lame".
> How original of you :O)
Earlier he said something about not understanding cats because he is not a
werecat. Going by that VERY SAME logic, if he is a werewolf/dog, then
shouldn't he understand them just as the werecat understands cats? If he
wants to claim to be a were, then he should live up to it.. otherwise he is
just making other weres look bad with his behavior.. or did you not notice
all the people here disagreeing with him?
I would point out that being a zoophile does not make one automatically a
were, just as the converse is also true.
> >Why do you automatically assume you are alpha? You do not seem alpha to
me.
>
> Nor you to me :O) But usenet is soooo unwieldy in such affairs...
And I never claimed to be alpha. Hell, I never claimed that I was wolf, did
I?
>
> >I don't have time to address the rest of your points now, but I'll be
back
> >after work.
> >
> Suuuuure...nice dodge M8ey.
My job takes precedence over Usenet. Sorry if it bothers you that much.
Well, I'm not really sorry.
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> No it's born of reason. It's born from the knowlege that what we do as an
> act has a reaction.
Stupid. The "reason" thing isn't all that special you know. It isn't
true that it always makes the right decision. In fact, it makes more
wrong than right decisions, that's why humans are the only type of
animals that make use of it.
> Simply because dogs would not be here if it were not for man.
Not really, but let's get on with it.
> So it is mans
> decision as to what happens to them as long as it is not cruel. Everyone
> heres ideas of cruel is different I understand that. Yet when you are
> talking about dogs and people you can not say a dog knows what it is doing.
> A dog is mentally bred to be a puppy it's whole life. They never truly grow
> up. So they have to be cared for. If not disease, hunger and worse befalls
> them. So if I took the choice from my dog to have more puppies then I am
> doing her and her unborn puppies a favor.
Your reasoning is too disgusting for me to consider. Don't ever expect
me to agree with you.
> Hormones, oh you are thinking with your privet area on this one. I'd be very
> careful with that way of thinking people go to jail for acting with their
> hormones and not reasoning. You are not above human low or anything.
> Again they are not mentally mature enough to resist their hormones that's
> not choice that's the inability to reason out why they should not do it.
I once wanted to be the smart human and I hurt myself badly. I will
never make that mistake again. And no, I will continue to listen to my
hormones and little more. I do know how to make use of them, for the
diffirence of the many humans that fight their bodies, I control my
hormones in fact and can have them as I want them to be.
> > I guess you'd need to see it to belive me.
>
> I see it every day.
I don't think so. If ppl saw it every day, they wouldn't be so suprized
about it when it happens.
> > In other words: You changed her mind.
>
> No, I didn't. I made the best chioce I thought for her.
Hah, you sound like my legal owners already.
> > Lemme guess: You're chatolic?
>
> What is that?
Nevermind, you are.
> > If you knew how much you kill every day, you would have had a diffirent
> > oppinion on that. Cubs are nothing more but a collony of cells.
>
> Not once they are born. They have a soul and breath, eat and have the
> ability to smell, hear and cry.
I'll stop wondering why humans need to have a mouth and eyes drawn on
every object they should consider existant.
> > Trying to make me feel safe, allas, failing heavily.
>
> I was not trying to make you feel safe I asked a question, to which you did
> not answer.
I answered it, you didn't accept the answer. The problem is yours not
mine.
> > Cubs.
>
> Only if you change some of your views would a woman were or otherwise want
> anything to do with you.
I already have a woman that wants to have my cubs, mind you.
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
>I do not think that is offered by vets. It only means that later they may
Some do.
>have to go in and take the parts out because of cancer. Vets do not like to
And should they do that with humans?
Cancer of the testes is becomeing increasiliy common,
Shall we therefore remove the testicles of men?
>do surgery if they think they are not doing the right thing. The code of
>ethics in vets "First do no harm." They see fixing animals as a way to
>prolong their lives and make life healthier. As well as control unwanted
Should we therefore do that to people then?
after all, It will prelong their lives and make life healthier.
>animals. Tying tubes only stops the possibility of pregnancy it can come
>undone. But total removal is a guaranty.
tying Tubes rarely ever comes undone, certaninly not with people.
dunno about dogs though, I wouldn't have though much.
---
The Master Builder came unto us. He built for us a new house, and the house was like His house.
And He gifted us with knowledge, and we learned to use Boiler and Gear. That unto us would come His Paradise, and there would be no pain.
- Mechanist Rote Texts for Novices
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<uu85lcc...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
>"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >Dogs do not automatically kill other packs they find. We had wild dogs
>> >around in our woods for a while and they did not do this.
>>
>> Ah ok...so they represent _all_ packs in all areas.
>> Hmmm...
>
>Yes, they do. Obviously we had more than one pack or else I would not have
>been able to make the above observation. The only packs that would act
>differently would be those driven to extreme measures by human interference
>or those who's members are not healthy mentally, usually because of human
>intervention.. or if they all just happened to have rabies.
>
Your sample size is too small, hth.
>>
>> >You do not
>> >understand how their society works at all if you think that is how they
>do
>> >things.
>>
>> And your degree in wildlife biology is from what university again?
>
>I don't have a degree yet. I have worked extensively with dogs in former
>jobs and I have taken classes toward a bachelors.
>
In wildlife biology?
Wow...how convienient :O)
Your extensive experience with dogs being that you lived in an area where there
was a "pack of wild dogs".Funny that no-one did anything about them.You'd think
a careing person such as yourself would have tried to find the dogs homes or
get them put into a humane society situation.
>> >Also, caring about dogs does not mean automatically loving every
>> >single one. It does mean that you care about their welfare. Obviously
>you
>> >do NOT with how much you talk about killing dogs that you don't even
>know.
>> >
>> Dogs get killed by cars...do you drive a car?
>
>That is not even relevant. You are reaching quite far for that one. Yes, I
>drive a car and when I see a dog wandering in the road, I stop and scare him
>or her away from the road so he/she will not get hit.
You've never run over an animal in your years of driving?
Thats impressive!
>Usually their house
>is right nearby and they run back there when I yell at them. Sometimes I
>knock on the door and tell the owner that the dog was out in the road.
>
And I'm to believe this after your stance of non interference with the "pack of
wild dogs that lived near our house".
Hmmmmm...
>> >Like I said, your opinion doesn't really matter. You are in the minority
>> >and will not be able to effect any change.
>> >
>> ROTFLMAO! Why dont you just say,"Move to the Back of the Bus!"
>> Yeah...minority dosent count...especially in America :O)
>
>Yes, minority rarely makes much of an impact, especially in America. Or
>have you been living somewhere else? The candidate with the fewest votes
>does not win here in the United States. Our nation is quite a majority rule
>nation.
>
Thats great logic.Shall we take the right to vote away from blacks then?
Maybe we should bring back slavery?
>> >Big, strong, imaginary friends.
>> >
>> I guess I'm a figlet of his Imag'gin ashin then...
>> -Popeye.
>
>Probably.
>
I feel like I have to take a shit...I'm guessing its a real feeling and not
imaginary :o)
>> >> You're playing on the wrong cards here. No I have not lived with dogs,
>> >
>> >Then you do not really understand them. By being a were, you should have
>an
>> >innate understanding of their instincts, society, etc, right? I am not
>> >convinced you truly are were.
>> >
>>
>> Wah.A classic "your not realy a were Lame".
>> How original of you :O)
>
>Earlier he said something about not understanding cats because he is not a
>werecat.
But he didnt say that the person wasn't were.
See the difference?
Hmmm...obviously not since your still typing...
>Going by that VERY SAME logic,
You mean _your_ "logic"...yeah...do continue...
> if he is a werewolf/dog, then
>shouldn't he understand them just as the werecat understands cats?
He said he didnt understand _werecats_ not "your not a were!"
Theres a difference.
>If he
>wants to claim to be a were, then he should live up to it.. otherwise he is
>just making other weres look bad with his behavior..
Huh? Hes not making anyone else look any particular way.Thats a pretty broad
statement.
>or did you not notice
>all the people here disagreeing with him?
Yeah...I saw that people , mainly female people, disagree'd with him.I also
disagreed with him...now...does that make me female?
>I would point out that being a zoophile does not make one automatically a
>were, just as the converse is also true.
>
Thank you Captain Obvious.
>> >Why do you automatically assume you are alpha? You do not seem alpha to
>me.
>>
>> Nor you to me :O) But usenet is soooo unwieldy in such affairs...
>
>And I never claimed to be alpha. Hell, I never claimed that I was wolf, did
>I?
>
Then why the intrest in AHWW?
>>
>> >I don't have time to address the rest of your points now, but I'll be
>back
>> >after work.
>> >
>> Suuuuure...nice dodge M8ey.
>
>My job takes precedence over Usenet. Sorry if it bothers you that much.
>Well, I'm not really sorry.
>
No bother...I like having new toys to play with :O)
~Prince SNuhwolf~
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<3de3c116...@news.cis.dfn.de>:
>Once upon a time alt.horror.werewolves was in decline. On a
>storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
>light across the burning sky when §ñühwØLf <snuhwo...@hotmail.com>
>sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>
>>Its called dying with dignity silly.
>>You need to own a few pets first.
>
>Overdosing With barbiturates is what the vets use to put an animal
>down silly.
Really? Do tell do tell...me mum was an animal control officer you know :O)
>And don't talk to me about dieing with dignity; I've seen a friend die
>from brain tumour at secondary school,
Are you saying euthanasia would have been better? I'd say that if he _wanted_
it, then yes.Now how is one to tell if an animal _wants_ to be euthanised?
Hmmmm...
>And he wasted away, couldn't hold down his food, crapped himself, was
>in constant pain etc towards the end, he couldn't even breath very
>well at some points till he went blue in the face, and if he'd been a
>dog, he'd have been put down, but since he's a person no, we'll let
>him die while coated with his own vomit and shit.
>
I agree...that was inhumane...he should have been given heroin on demand by his
physician.Didja know.....that in Iran its given freely to the terninally ill by
their government? And we think _they'r_ backwards...
FYI
HTH
HAND
~Prince SNuhwolf~
Raab
Even a small sample, as long as it shows more than one group, is enough to
predict the behaviors of larger groups. I stated the exceptions above, but
the dogs I observed do represent a NORMAL population of dogs that have been
raised in the wild. I didn't bother predicting how dogs in extreme
circumstances would react because that's not what was in question. Normal
packs of dogs do not go out and try to kill other dogs unless they have been
provoked. Usually they would find other dogs and try to get those dogs to
join them. They did take a few dogs from some of the houses nearby and
those dogs would be gone for a few months until they showed up again still
healthy. If dogs really did just kill other dogs they saw, then those dogs
I mentioned would never have returned.
>
> In wildlife biology?
> Wow...how convienient :O)
> Your extensive experience with dogs being that you lived in an area where
there
> was a "pack of wild dogs".Funny that no-one did anything about them.
Did I say no one did anything about them? The DNR around here wiped them
out completely about five years ago. And no, my degree isn't in wildlife
biology but general biology. Wildlife biology has nothing to do with
animals behavoirs anyway. The field you are thinking of is animal
husbandry. I have worked extensively with dogs in former jobs just as I
stated.
>You'd think a careing person such as yourself would have tried to
>find the dogs homes or get them put into a humane society situation.
In most cases, wild dogs can't be put in homes. They aren't domesticated in
the way that common house dogs are.. unless they were born in captivity,
then they might be able to be put back in a home with someone. A dog born
out in the wild will rarely stay in a house with someone.
> You've never run over an animal in your years of driving?
> Thats impressive!
I've never run over a dog. That makes that subject irrelevant. You are
saying that owning a car means that one does not care about dogs. That is
total crap. I know that I, and most people here, if they did hit a dog
would probably take the dog to a vet to try and save him/her. What does
that show? Holy crap Batman! I think that shows a little bit of compassion
toward the dog! And you know what compassion is, right? A form of CARING.
> And I'm to believe this after your stance of non interference with the
"pack of
> wild dogs that lived near our house".
> Hmmmmm...
Yep because I'm talking about DOMESTIC dogs. I don't mess with wild dogs,
just watch them. Are you really such an idiot that you can't think passed
the surface of things? It's really quite obvious that when I speak of
helping dogs, I would be referring to domesticated dogs.
> Thats great logic.Shall we take the right to vote away from blacks then?
> Maybe we should bring back slavery?
While black people are called a minority group, they are hardly in the
minority. That isn't how the comment applies anyway and you would know that
unless you are a moron who is simply trying to prolong an arguement. (which
I doubt) Most black people vote democratic, which is one of the majority
groups. Remember that thing called a bipartisan politics? Rarely will a
party other than one of the two major ones ever win anything because they
are a minority and to most people the majority is all that matters when it
comes to making decisions. Or are you from some alternate universe where we
have a Libertarian president?
It isn't ethnicity that makes one in the minority or majority when it
applies to beliefs or laws. It is which interest group you are a part of.
In the US and other countries around here, the majority supports spaying,
neutering, etc. Therefore he is in the minority and can effect very little
change since you need a majority vote to change anything.
> I feel like I have to take a shit...I'm guessing its a real feeling and
not
> imaginary :o)
So that's where your post came from. You were taking a shit. That explains
a lot.
> But he didnt say that the person wasn't were.
> See the difference?
> Hmmm...obviously not since your still typing...
That isn't relevant. He was outlining what makes one a were, things that he
doesn't seem to be living up to. I did not say he was not a were, I just
said that I'm not convinced he is since he obviously lacks understanding in
a few areas.
> You mean _your_ "logic"...yeah...do continue...
Reread it, dink. I said going by the logic used in his original post. That
is not mine, but his.
> He said he didnt understand _werecats_ not "your not a were!"
> Theres a difference.
No, he said he didn't understand CATS. BECAUSE he was NOT a werecat. He
never said he didn't understand werecats. Try to keep up here, okay?
> >If he
> >wants to claim to be a were, then he should live up to it.. otherwise he
is
> >just making other weres look bad with his behavior..
>
> Huh? Hes not making anyone else look any particular way.Thats a pretty
broad
> statement.
Okay, so his whole tirade against neutering and spaying dogs does not
reflect upon this group at all. What would a casual observer think if they
saw this? They might come off thinking that all werewolves think that way
which is not true. They also might get the impression that all weres are
into bestiality, which is definitely not true. In fact, most people get
that impression from all the people around who claim to be weres and endorse
bestiality. It's not an image that should really be propigated any further
than it has been.
> Yeah...I saw that people , mainly female people, disagree'd with him.I
also
> disagreed with him...now...does that make me female?
Where did this dumbass statement come from? That doesn't even make sense.
I never said that all the people who disagree with him are the same. Is
this a straw man arguement here or what?
> >And I never claimed to be alpha. Hell, I never claimed that I was wolf,
did
> >I?
> >
> Then why the intrest in AHWW?
Because I am a fan of werewolves. Jeez, that's kind of what the title of
the newsgroup implies, right? Alt.horror.werewolves. A newsgroup for fans
of werewolves in horror. It isn't called Alt.Culture.Lycanthropy or
anything like that.
Besides, plenty of people here are not wolf. If being wolf is a requirement
for reading or posting here, maybe you should let them all know.
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
your time to reply to Snuh' as well.
Raab wrote:
> > And your degree in wildlife biology is from what university again?
>
> I don't have a degree yet. I have worked extensively with dogs in former
> jobs and I have taken classes toward a bachelors.
Oh how conveninent. And in all this time, what have you kept being to
the dogs, may I ask?
> > Dogs get killed by cars...do you drive a car?
>
> That is not even relevant.
In fact it's quite relevant, if you consider the fact that your
adjusting defenitions of relevance according to the way you want to turn
this argument.
I guess what you want to hear from me is: No I don't give a shit about
dogs. But that's not exactly true, atho pretty close. I never said I
kill every wolf/dog I meet, I said that's what I feel sometimes
(particulary when the dog exhibits behaviour that leads me to belive he
has quite a simmilar thing in mind).
> > >Like I said, your opinion doesn't really matter. You are in the minority
> > >and will not be able to effect any change.
> >
> > ROTFLMAO! Why dont you just say,"Move to the Back of the Bus!"
> > Yeah...minority dosent count...especially in America :O)
>
> Yes, minority rarely makes much of an impact, especially in America. Or
> have you been living somewhere else?
Yes in fact.
> The candidate with the fewest votes
> does not win here in the United States. Our nation is quite a majority rule
> nation.
Imperialist! You might have to hear that some people in this world are
moraly healthy enough to also care for the interests of the minorities.
> > >Big, strong, imaginary friends.
Not quite immaginary. Some of them tend to stick around and others can
count to 2^16 faster than you ever will. Go figure.
> > >> You're playing on the wrong cards here. No I have not lived with dogs,
> > >
> > > Then you do not really understand them. By being a were, you should have
> > > an innate understanding of their instincts, society, etc, right? I am not
> > > convinced you truly are were.
Aha, so you're saying I'm not a were because my parents don't allow me
to have a dog. Very logical indeed. Tells a lot about your ignorance.
> Earlier he said something about not understanding cats because he is not a
> werecat. Going by that VERY SAME logic, if he is a werewolf/dog, then
> shouldn't he understand them just as the werecat understands cats? If he
> wants to claim to be a were, then he should live up to it..
Hm, it seems you, who I do not stand in front of right now have more to
say about my wereness than the dogs I meet IRL that can detect it simply
by picking up my scent. I still claim I have a better insider look of
the dog society than you do.
> otherwise he is
> just making other weres look bad with his behavior.. or did you not notice
> all the people here disagreeing with him?
Here. On the other hand, on furnet IRC #the_dingaroo_house, everybody
seemed to agree with me. Who should I consider more subjectively
objective?
> I would point out that being a zoophile does not make one automatically a
> were, just as the converse is also true.
I claim I am a were and a zoophile. I have proof for both. Can you live
with that?
> > > Why do you automatically assume you are alpha? You do not seem alpha to
> > > me.
I am a fully accepted Alpha male in my pack (me, Chrissy, Howler' and
Dingo), mind you.
I have been accepted as Alpha in a fully extended pack relationship (I
judge by the number of instinctive behaviours exhibited that aren't
normaly present in a relationship that includes a human) by a bunch of
young dogs (which I don't consider anything further than a personal and
otherwise rather awesome experience).
Otherwise, the status of Alpha as I consider relevant, is a biochemical
situation in my body that modifies my behaviour and thus sends out
signals to whoever I socialize with. I have noticed my biochemical
situation changes significantly if I take a Beta role in my pack (which
happens naturaly every once in a while). Again, a thing you might have
to experience yourself to belive.
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> > > Cubs.
> >
> > Only if you change some of your views would a woman were or otherwise want
> > anything to do with you.
>
> I already have a woman that wants to have my cubs, mind you.
That was why I started the whole thing anyway. My girl is a shifter and
I wouldn't like any smartarse humans have her castrated when she shifts
for a longer period of time one day. The reason is simple: Neither of us
could live with the idea of not being able to have cubs.
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
your doubts away if you're at least a bit of a reasonable person.
First of all, I figure you don't like zoophiles and it's very obvious
you don't get any bit of what I mean. I have never fucked a bitch or a
dog for that matter. Nor do I find it particulary fun to fuck anything
I'd otherwise have on a collar. All there is to me being a zoophile is
that my stick stands up when I see a bitch in heat. Can't help that
anyway.
Second of all, I'll tell you about a little fear I have. There was this
dog, the neighbour's dog. Cuddly thing, when I met him I knew we were
going to be freinds. Just freinds, nothing more. I needed a black fuzzy
friend then, somebody like myself. We read eachother's mind quite
clearly, I just wanted him for a freind and he, the cub he was,
subordinated himself to me (waging his tail low carefully whenever I was
near) what a nice boy. He mimicked my behaviour, actualy he mimicked
everything I did that he saw. I loved him and still love him as if he
was my own cub. I've always kept an eye on him and saw how he acted to
his owner, such an intelligent little boy, I was nearly sorry he was a
dog.
This boy, to me he really is like my son... He IS my packmate at least.
Let me ask you: Would you like to see your children neutered? Just tell
me, sincerely.
And I don't claim to be inpersonated justice herself, I am another
subject with a subjective oppinion. That does not reduce any of my
rights and is thus completely irrelevant in this discussion. Just answer
the questions.
Moonwolf wrote:
> And you drink...dogs don't need to drink alcohol...do you give that to your beloved dogs too?
WHAT?! Fuck, you take that right back you disgusting little slimebag!
I've drank less alchocol in my LIFE than you SAW TODAY. And that's quite
regardless of how much you've seen. I can't stand the smell/taste of
alcohol.
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> >have to go in and take the parts out because of cancer. Vets do not like to
>
> And should they do that with humans?
> Cancer of the testes is becomeing increasiliy common,
> Shall we therefore remove the testicles of men?
>
> >do surgery if they think they are not doing the right thing. The code of
> >ethics in vets "First do no harm." They see fixing animals as a way to
> >prolong their lives and make life healthier. As well as control unwanted
>
> Should we therefore do that to people then?
> after all, It will prelong their lives and make life healthier.
And remove the large amounts of negative behaviours, therefore greatly
reduce crime in general, for that matter.
Stupid. Psychopatic. I bet you're thinking about really doing it right
now you alchoslimebags. A good reason not to be living with you.
Raab
> This appears to be progressing in a reasonable direction. Please take
> your time to reply to Snuh' as well.
Already did.
> > I don't have a degree yet. I have worked extensively with dogs in
former
> > jobs and I have taken classes toward a bachelors.
>
> Oh how conveninent. And in all this time, what have you kept being to
> the dogs, may I ask?
The dogs are all mostly dead now. They don't live very long, as you know.
>
> In fact it's quite relevant, if you consider the fact that your
> adjusting defenitions of relevance according to the way you want to turn
> this argument.
No, it is not relevant to whether I care about dogs or not. There are
plenty of people who care about dogs that also drive cars.
> > Yes, minority rarely makes much of an impact, especially in America. Or
> > have you been living somewhere else?
>
> Yes in fact.
I know you have. That question wasn't addressed to you.
>
> > The candidate with the fewest votes
> > does not win here in the United States. Our nation is quite a majority
rule
> > nation.
>
> Imperialist! You might have to hear that some people in this world are
> moraly healthy enough to also care for the interests of the minorities.
> Not quite immaginary. Some of them tend to stick around and others can
> count to 2^16 faster than you ever will. Go figure.
Yeah, I never did like math. Most of my mathematical aptitudes are in
abstract reasoning anyway, so I bet they can count to 2^16 faster than I.
> Aha, so you're saying I'm not a were because my parents don't allow me
> to have a dog. Very logical indeed. Tells a lot about your ignorance.
No, I'm saying that if you have the instincts of that species inside of you,
which is the basic definition of a were to most people, then you should have
the instincts of the species inside of you.
> Hm, it seems you, who I do not stand in front of right now have more to
> say about my wereness than the dogs I meet IRL that can detect it simply
> by picking up my scent. I still claim I have a better insider look of
> the dog society than you do.
I'm just saying that if you are a were, then you probably have a deep
understanding of how a dog or a wolf mind works.
> Here. On the other hand, on furnet IRC #the_dingaroo_house, everybody
> seemed to agree with me. Who should I consider more subjectively
> objective?
Everyone's opinion as a whole.
> I claim I am a were and a zoophile. I have proof for both. Can you live
> with that?
Sure.
> I am a fully accepted Alpha male in my pack (me, Chrissy, Howler' and
> Dingo), mind you.
Which essentially means that regardless of how you are, your pack is
suboordinate to you. All that really means is that you are more dominant
than them. So yeah, you are alpha when you are with them and the other
people you described.
> Otherwise, the status of Alpha as I consider relevant, is a biochemical
> situation in my body that modifies my behaviour and thus sends out
> signals to whoever I socialize with.
Alpha is about dominance and power.
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
> me, sincerely.
>
I know this question was not directed at me. I figured if it was meant to be
answered only by the person named it could have been taken to privet email.
You can ask your human child not to have sex and explain to them the reasons
why not. If your child decides, there is that word, to have sex even though
they know the end result. You can putt them on the pill, have them use
rubbers, have hormone sticks placed in the skin and restrict their activity.
If they disobey then you have the fetus aborted or have grand kids and make
the kids raise them. Even if it means them dropping out of school to do it.
If not you end up with more grand kids. I have seen too many parents help
raise their grand kids and the parent/kids just go and do it again.
Since dogs do not control all of their actions and run by hormone and
instinct you can not ask them to not bear young by not having sex. Were I
live, oral, under the skin and shot birth control are not available for
dogs. Restricting her contact with other dogs is hard because they dig,
climb and do anything to get to a male. So only fixing or depriving the
mother the right to raise her litter are the only other options left. Either
way you look at it spaying her or depriving her in your words "Twist of the
neck" is tacking her rights away. Her right to have, hold and to raise her
young. So you are not better yet worse in that she would hear her babies,
feel them, birth them then they would be gone. She may even smell and hear
their death. Fixing them only removes the organ in the female and prevents
heat and pregnancy. Males can still mate and feel an ejaculation they just
loose allot of aggression and drive to pee all over the house.
If I had a child that wanted to have sex and she was under the age of 18 I
would take her right to bear children away in the only way legal. I would
put her on the pill.
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
you still live at home and are cared for by your parents, am I right? So
much or any social berings. If so then you have nothing to base any of what
you say,
on. No experience in dog, cat, wolf, bird, fish and or human socialization,
no experience in dog, cat, wolf, bird, fish and or human relationships and
no life. If you do not live with it in your home/den 24 7 it is not
happening. You will rant and rave that you do not need human anything, but
you know what, you do. Because to have cubs you need a human female/were
female. Let me tell you something, no female in her right mind will turn her
tail in your direction with you spouting off about twisting cubs necks.
Females are very protective of any young they come across. Remember there
are humans that have been raised by wolves. Wolves who have raised dogs and
etcetera etcetera....
So right now your parents still control your every move and decision. Just
like
people do with their dogs. They do what is best for their children. Even if
it is not always the best thing. So better to spay and neuter than to kill.
Better to prevent than to kill. It's probably best that you don't get a dog.
You are not mature enough to take on the responsibility.
Have a nice day....
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
light across the burning sky when §ñühwØLf <snuhwo...@hotmail.com>
sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>Really? Do tell do tell...me mum was an animal control officer you know :O)
They charge c. $60 to put a dog down!!!!
>Are you saying euthanasia would have been better? I'd say that if he _wanted_
>it, then yes.Now how is one to tell if an animal _wants_ to be euthanised?
>Hmmmm...
non0human animals are not considered to have that level of judgement,
since it involves and understanding of mortalitiy and the knowledge
that once you're dead, thats it, you gone forever.
>I agree...that was inhumane...he should have been given heroin on demand by his
>physician.Didja know.....that in Iran its given freely to the terninally ill by
>their government? And we think _they'r_ backwards...
In holland it's allowed, it was allowed for a time in australia, but
they chickend out in the end.
---
Plug: http://www.blind-guardian.com/
More Plug: http://www.blind-guardian.com/
Still Yet more Plug: http://www.blind-guardian.com/
Buy Them At: http://www.amazon.de/
Moonwolf
> "§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > Your sample size is too small, hth.
>
> Even a small sample, as long as it shows more than one group, is enough to
> predict the behaviors of larger groups. I stated the exceptions above, but
> the dogs I observed do represent a NORMAL population of dogs that have been
> raised in the wild. I didn't bother predicting how dogs in extreme
> circumstances would react because that's not what was in question. Normal
> packs of dogs do not go out and try to kill other dogs unless they have been
> provoked. Usually they would find other dogs and try to get those dogs to
> join them. They did take a few dogs from some of the houses nearby and
> those dogs would be gone for a few months until they showed up again still
> healthy. If dogs really did just kill other dogs they saw, then those dogs
> I mentioned would never have returned.
>
> >
> > In wildlife biology?
> > Wow...how convienient :O)
> > Your extensive experience with dogs being that you lived in an area where
> there
> > was a "pack of wild dogs".Funny that no-one did anything about them.
>
> Did I say no one did anything about them? The DNR around here wiped them
> out completely about five years ago. And no, my degree isn't in wildlife
> biology but general biology. Wildlife biology has nothing to do with
> animals behavoirs anyway.
science at Texas A&M. In that major were a couple of courses in
ethology (not ethnology), which is animal behavior. So, I am
thinking, wildlife biology might also involve the study of behavior.
Moonwolf
Moonwolf
> Moonwolf, there is something I have to tell you that should snip all
> your doubts away if you're at least a bit of a reasonable person.
>
> First of all, I figure you don't like zoophiles
I don't care at all for a lot of what you have posted, therefore I
don't like zoophiles? Gross misgeneralization.
> and it's very obvious
> you don't get any bit of what I mean.
I am only responding to what you have posted.
> I have never fucked a bitch or a
> dog for that matter. Nor do I find it particulary fun to fuck anything
> I'd otherwise have on a collar. All there is to me being a zoophile is
> that my stick stands up when I see a bitch in heat. Can't help that
> anyway.
But you have gotten quite passionate about being angry that females
who you would have liked to have for your own have had their sexual
organs removed, making them useless to you. That certainly sounds
like an interest in fucking a canid.
>
> Second of all, I'll tell you about a little fear I have. There was this
> dog, the neighbour's dog. Cuddly thing, when I met him I knew we were
> going to be freinds. Just freinds, nothing more. I needed a black fuzzy
> friend then, somebody like myself. We read eachother's mind quite
> clearly, I just wanted him for a freind and he, the cub he was,
> subordinated himself to me (waging his tail low carefully whenever I was
> near) what a nice boy. He mimicked my behaviour, actualy he mimicked
> everything I did that he saw. I loved him and still love him as if he
> was my own cub. I've always kept an eye on him and saw how he acted to
> his owner, such an intelligent little boy, I was nearly sorry he was a
> dog.
> This boy, to me he really is like my son... He IS my packmate at least.
> Let me ask you: Would you like to see your children neutered? Just tell
> me, sincerely.
First, I will answer your question. I provide my teen boys with
condoms so they will not breed, as they do not have the maturity to
fully understand all the ramifications thereof. Someday they will
understand, and then they can make their own decisions about having
children themselves. One of my older children has Gender Identity
Disorder and is planning to have herself (she is M to F) neutered to
achieve her ideal. Do I like that? That is not my business, it is
hers. What is important is that she live her life in a fulfilling way
for her, without harming others. My furkids are all neutered, as they
will never have the understanding of the results of breeding that a
fully mature human will have. My view is that, if I love them, I will
protect them in all ways available to me, such as shots and neutering.
They seem to enjoy sexual play just as much without the ability to
breed. Otherwise, why have animal companions that have been
domesticated for millennia? Just throw them out on the streets to live
the "natural" lives, suffer and die young? They are just as
intelligent neutered, and maybe able to express it more without the
pressures exerted by unchecked hormones on their behaviors. But what
is the "little fear" you refer to at the top of the paragraph? That
your friend will be neutered and therefore maybe not respond to you
the same way? Other posts you have spoken of your legal
owners/parents...are you afraid they might have you neutered, odd as
that might sound to some?
>
> And I don't claim to be inpersonated justice herself, I am another
> subject with a subjective oppinion. That does not reduce any of my
> rights and is thus completely irrelevant in this discussion. Just answer
> the questions.
>
> Moonwolf wrote:
> > And you drink...dogs don't need to drink alcohol...do you give that to your beloved dogs too?
>
> WHAT?! Fuck, you take that right back you disgusting little slimebag!
> I've drank less alchocol in my LIFE than you SAW TODAY. And that's quite
> regardless of how much you've seen. I can't stand the smell/taste of
> alcohol.
Oh, can the outraged arrogance. You are the one who spoke of needing
a drink at times. If you can't stand the smell/taste of alcohol, how
would you know if you wanted a drink of it?
Moonwolf, head up and ears pricked
Raab
"Moonwolf" <barbt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ecfc068b.02112...@posting.google.com...
> Sticking my old muzzle in again...many years ago I majored in wildlife
> science at Texas A&M. In that major were a couple of courses in
> ethology (not ethnology), which is animal behavior. So, I am
> thinking, wildlife biology might also involve the study of behavior.
> Moonwolf
Those are extra courses they make you take. Shoot, they are making me take
some political science courses for my degree, but that doesn't mean that
biology is a political science field. I think the idea they have is making
a 'well-rounded' individual.
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<uua6b4a...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
>"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> Your sample size is too small, hth.
>
>Even a small sample, as long as it shows more than one group, is enough to
>predict the behaviors of larger groups.
Then explain why exit polls sometimes predict the wrong outcomes of elections
:O)
> I stated the exceptions above, but
>the dogs I observed do represent a NORMAL population of dogs that have been
>raised in the wild.
"Raised in the wild" now if thats not an oxymoron...
>I didn't bother predicting how dogs in extreme
>circumstances would react because that's not what was in question.
Id say being raised in the wild is an extreme circumstance.
>Normal
>packs of dogs do not go out and try to kill other dogs unless they have been
>provoked.
Really? And your CITE for this is where? Pack behavior is driven by dominance
and territoriality.
Hint: you're too stupid for this game :O)
> Usually they would find other dogs and try to get those dogs to
>join them.
You have no clue as to how heirarchies work do you?
> They did take a few dogs from some of the houses nearby and
>those dogs would be gone for a few months until they showed up again still
>healthy.
I thought you said these were _wild_ dogs...sounds like somebodys feeding them.
>If dogs really did just kill other dogs they saw, then those dogs
>I mentioned would never have returned.
>
Because dead dogs dont come back? Yeah...go figure.
>>
>> In wildlife biology?
>> Wow...how convienient :O)
>> Your extensive experience with dogs being that you lived in an area where
>there
>> was a "pack of wild dogs".Funny that no-one did anything about them.
>
>Did I say no one did anything about them?
You clearly implied it silly.
>The DNR around here wiped them
>out completely about five years ago. And no, my degree isn't in wildlife
>biology but general biology. Wildlife biology has nothing to do with
>animals behavoirs anyway. The field you are thinking of is animal
>husbandry. I have worked extensively with dogs in former jobs just as I
>stated.
>
You're an idiot.Wildlife biology does indeed have to do with the behavior of
wild animals in their respective enviroments, hth.
>>You'd think a careing person such as yourself would have tried to
>>find the dogs homes or get them put into a humane society situation.
>
>In most cases, wild dogs can't be put in homes. They aren't domesticated in
>the way that common house dogs are.. unless they were born in captivity,
>then they might be able to be put back in a home with someone.
Funny...you said they came back after being gone just as healthy as before.Now
you're saying that no-one was feeding them?
Which is it?
>A dog born
>out in the wild will rarely stay in a house with someone.
>
Unless of course its fed regularly...but pleased do continue to amaze us with
your brilliance:O)
>> You've never run over an animal in your years of driving?
>> Thats impressive!
>
>I've never run over a dog. That makes that subject irrelevant. You are
>saying that owning a car means that one does not care about dogs. That is
>total crap. I know that I, and most people here, if they did hit a dog
>would probably take the dog to a vet to try and save him/her. What does
>that show? Holy crap Batman! I think that shows a little bit of compassion
>toward the dog! And you know what compassion is, right? A form of CARING.
>
And yet you said you never did anything about the pack of wild dogs living near
you.Yeah, you sound caring to me :O)
>> And I'm to believe this after your stance of non interference with the
>"pack of
>> wild dogs that lived near our house".
>> Hmmmmm...
>
>Yep because I'm talking about DOMESTIC dogs. I don't mess with wild dogs,
>just watch them.
So you only care about non-wild dogs? what if you hit a wild dog and didnt know
it was wild and took it to the vet.Hmmmm...
>Are you really such an idiot that you can't think passed
>the surface of things?
You mean "past" but I'll let that one slide for now :O)
>It's really quite obvious that when I speak of
>helping dogs, I would be referring to domesticated dogs.
>
Thats real compassion for you! Care about the non-wild dogs, fuck the feral
ones...
>> Thats great logic.Shall we take the right to vote away from blacks then?
>> Maybe we should bring back slavery?
>
>While black people are called a minority group, they are hardly in the
>minority.
Really?So now the population of blacks to anglos is about equal?How about
representation? Equality there too?
>That isn't how the comment applies anyway and you would know that
>unless you are a moron who is simply trying to prolong an arguement.
I'm forceing you to respond to my posts huh?
>(which
>I doubt) Most black people vote democratic, which is one of the majority
>groups.
And they control which...? Th house or th senate? Oh! Neither you say? Hmmm do
tell do tell...
>Remember that thing called a bipartisan politics? Rarely will a
>party other than one of the two major ones ever win anything because they
>are a minority and to most people the majority is all that matters when it
>comes to making decisions. Or are you from some alternate universe where we
>have a Libertarian president?
No I'm from an alternate universe where dead people dont vote ;O)
>It isn't ethnicity that makes one in the minority or majority when it
>applies to beliefs or laws.
H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H! Tell that to my black friends...
>It is which interest group you are a part of.
>In the US and other countries around here, the majority supports spaying,
>neutering, etc. Therefore he is in the minority and can effect very little
>change since you need a majority vote to change anything.
>
Still wrong...but no suprises there.YOu need a lot of money to have a powerful
PAC to get votes.
HTH
>> I feel like I have to take a shit...I'm guessing its a real feeling and
>not
>> imaginary :o)
>
>So that's where your post came from. You were taking a shit. That explains
>a lot.
>
I'm trying to image you're making an insult out of a Lame...sorry...just cant
manage today :O(
>> But he didnt say that the person wasn't were.
>> See the difference?
>> Hmmm...obviously not since your still typing...
>
>That isn't relevant. He was outlining what makes one a were, things that he
>doesn't seem to be living up to.
GREAT GOOGLY MOOGLY! We have here someone who "knows what it means to be a
were"!!! Please inform us all what it means to be a "were".
TIA
>I did not say he was not a were, I just
>said that I'm not convinced he is since he obviously lacks understanding in
>a few areas.
>
Ahhhhh...perhaps you'd like to take time from your busy day to enlighten us
then :O)
>> You mean _your_ "logic"...yeah...do continue...
>
>Reread it, dink. I said going by the logic used in his original post. That
>is not mine, but his.
>
But if he's not really a "were" why bother?
>> He said he didnt understand _werecats_ not "your not a were!"
>> Theres a difference.
>
>No, he said he didn't understand CATS. BECAUSE he was NOT a werecat. He
>never said he didn't understand werecats. Try to keep up here, okay?
>
Too funny...now you're saying that someone who isn't a were can understand what
it means to be a were...how that work?
>
>> >If he
>> >wants to claim to be a were, then he should live up to it.. otherwise he
>is
>> >just making other weres look bad with his behavior..
>>
>> Huh? Hes not making anyone else look any particular way.Thats a pretty
>broad
>> statement.
>
>Okay, so his whole tirade against neutering and spaying dogs does not
>reflect upon this group at all.
Bingo.You win a prize.
> What would a casual observer think if they
>saw this?
Why do I care again?
>They might come off thinking that all werewolves think that way
>which is not true.
Amazing powers of deduction, captain Obvious.
>They also might get the impression that all weres are
>into bestiality, which is definitely not true.
Say it isnt so!!!
> In fact, most people get
>that impression from all the people around who claim to be weres and endorse
>bestiality. It's not an image that should really be propigated any further
>than it has been.
>
Because you seek validation from "most people"? Gee...heres hopin you get your
needs met :O)
>> Yeah...I saw that people , mainly female people, disagree'd with him.I
>also
>> disagreed with him...now...does that make me female?
>
>Where did this dumbass statement come from? That doesn't even make sense.
This from a guy who dosent care for wild dogs...only domesticated ones.Wheres
the love?!?!
>I never said that all the people who disagree with him are the same. Is
>this a straw man arguement here or what?
>
Must not be since you're still trying to defend it :O)
>> >And I never claimed to be alpha. Hell, I never claimed that I was wolf,
>did
>> >I?
>> >
>> Then why the intrest in AHWW?
>
>Because I am a fan of werewolves. Jeez, that's kind of what the title of
>the newsgroup implies, right? Alt.horror.werewolves. A newsgroup for fans
>of werewolves in horror. It isn't called Alt.Culture.Lycanthropy or
>anything like that.
Damn! I thought it was!
>Besides, plenty of people here are not wolf. If being wolf is a requirement
>for reading or posting here, maybe you should let them all know.
>
It isn't.You say you "know what it means to be a were"...now you say your not a
were...I say your a lieing sack of shit :O)
Pick one...either you are a were or you arn't.If you arn't who are you to say
what wereness is?
~Prince Snuhwolf~
>
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<3de5fb7a...@news.cis.dfn.de>:
>Once upon a time alt.horror.werewolves was in decline. On a
>storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
>light across the burning sky when §ñühwØLf <snuhwo...@hotmail.com>
>sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>
>>Really? Do tell do tell...me mum was an animal control officer you
know :O)
>
>They charge c. $60 to put a dog down!!!!
>
Are you saying its too expensive?
>>Are you saying euthanasia would have been better? I'd say that if he
_wanted_
>>it, then yes.Now how is one to tell if an animal _wants_ to be
euthanised?
>>Hmmmm...
>
>non0human animals are not considered to have that level of judgement,
>since it involves and understanding of mortalitiy and the knowledge
>that once you're dead, thats it, you gone forever.
>
That was my point: how can a non human animal make its wishes
known.Thanks for agreeing with me :O)
>>I agree...that was inhumane...he should have been given heroin on
demand by his
>>physician.Didja know.....that in Iran its given freely to the
terninally ill by
>>their government? And we think _they'r_ backwards...
>
>In holland it's allowed, it was allowed for a time in australia, but
>they chickend out in the end.
>
It should be reinstated.
~Prince Snuhwolf~
>---
>Plug: www.skiareacitizens.org
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
> They charge c. $60 to put a dog down!!!!
They do it by weight so the price is not always that low. Then there is the
fact that not all vets will put a dog to sleep.
Raab
"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> Then explain why exit polls sometimes predict the wrong outcomes of
elections
Sometimes. Usually they are accurate.
> "Raised in the wild" now if thats not an oxymoron...
> Id say being raised in the wild is an extreme circumstance.
Yet you use it anyway. What do you think being raised means? Dogs raise
their pups unless the pups are taken away. Or do you think that dogs just
leave their puppies to die after they are born?
> Really? And your CITE for this is where? Pack behavior is driven by
dominance
> and territoriality.
> Hint: you're too stupid for this game :O)
Yeah, DOMINANCE. If they see a foreign dog on their territory and the dog
submits, they aren't going to kill it anyway. Hint: You're too stupid for
this game. When was the last time two dogs had a standoff, one submitted
and the other killed the dog anyway? That's not how dogs do things.
> > Usually they would find other dogs and try to get those dogs to
> >join them.
>
> You have no clue as to how heirarchies work do you?
I have a fairly good idea how some hierarchies work. These dogs would come
to our yard quite often, trying to get out dogs to dig out of the fence.
When they did, the wild dogs did not kill them. They just took off and then
our dogs showed back up a while later.
> I thought you said these were _wild_ dogs...sounds like somebodys feeding
them.
There are plenty of other animals out in the state forest. The dogs also
were known to occasionally tear into trash left by the road for pickup.
> Because dead dogs dont come back? Yeah...go figure.
Amazing concept, isn't it?
> You clearly implied it silly.
Not really, I just never stated what happened to them ultimately in my
original post.
> You're an idiot.Wildlife biology does indeed have to do with the behavior
of
> wild animals in their respective enviroments, hth.
The study of their behaviors is typically called Wildlife Ecology.
> Funny...you said they came back after being gone just as healthy as
before.Now
> you're saying that no-one was feeding them?
> Which is it?
No, the dogs just came back after a season or so. Probably because they
were low on the pack structure out in the wild while back at home they were
more important.
> Unless of course its fed regularly...but pleased do continue to amaze us
with
> your brilliance:O)
It will still run off whenever it gets the chance. Especially considering
how a wild dog will be more accustomed to a pack structure and so it the
owner of the house is not acting like an alpha, but still trying to be the
boss, then the dog will have some problems.
> And yet you said you never did anything about the pack of wild dogs living
near
> you.Yeah, you sound caring to me :O)
I didn't need to do anything. They were fine. I watched them, that was it.
So that makes me callous and uncaring?
> So you only care about non-wild dogs? what if you hit a wild dog and didnt
know
> it was wild and took it to the vet.Hmmmm...
If, by some miracle, I did hit a wild dog, I would take it to the vet and
then after the vet had checked him/her out, take the dog to the animal
shelter.
> >Are you really such an idiot that you can't think passed
> >the surface of things?
>
> You mean "past" but I'll let that one slide for now :O)
Nope. The proper word in that phrase is 'passed'. Maybe you should look
the words up. When you are referring to getting beyond something, it is
passed, the past tense form of pass. Past refers to time, not a form of the
word pass.
> And they control which...? Th house or th senate? Oh! Neither you say?
Hmmm do
> tell do tell...
The only ones who control the house or the senate are.. duh duh duh.. one of
the parties! Wow, imagine that! The house being controlled not by an
ethnicity but by a political party! Strange, eh?
> No I'm from an alternate universe where dead people dont vote ;O)
This is not the 1920s.
> H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H! Tell that to my black friends...
That has nothing to do with voting. Try to stay on topic here. I'm not
talking about ethnicity but about voting. The two subjects are not the
same.
>
>
> >It is which interest group you are a part of.
> >In the US and other countries around here, the majority supports spaying,
> >neutering, etc. Therefore he is in the minority and can effect very
little
> >change since you need a majority vote to change anything.
> >
>
> Still wrong...but no suprises there.YOu need a lot of money to have a
powerful
> PAC to get votes.
> HTH
> GREAT GOOGLY MOOGLY! We have here someone who "knows what it means to be a
> were"!!! Please inform us all what it means to be a "were".
> TIA
Ask him. He's the one who was outlining what it means to be were. I was
simply using the standards he created. You might want to check out the faq
that was posted for this newsgroup, which also states that a were is someone
who has the instincts of their phenotype.
> Ahhhhh...perhaps you'd like to take time from your busy day to enlighten
us
> then :O)
I doubt you'll ever actually listen anyway, just return with a straw man
arguement. It's useless trying to debate with someone who either doesn't
actually read what you write or just doesn't understand it.
> Too funny...now you're saying that someone who isn't a were can understand
what
> it means to be a were...how that work?
No, I'm just stating that what you said above was not what he said.
> >Because I am a fan of werewolves. Jeez, that's kind of what the title of
> >the newsgroup implies, right? Alt.horror.werewolves. A newsgroup for
fans
> >of werewolves in horror. It isn't called Alt.Culture.Lycanthropy or
> >anything like that.
>
> Damn! I thought it was!
That's what you get for thinking.
> now you say your not a were
No, I said I'm not WOLF. Read that carefully because "were" and "wolf" are
not synonymous.
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
<jure...@guest.arnes.si> sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>That was why I started the whole thing anyway. My girl is a shifter and
Are you claiming that your girlfriend can Physically Shift forms?
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>> WHAT?! Fuck, you take that right back you disgusting little slimebag!
>> I've drank less alchocol in my LIFE than you SAW TODAY. And that's quite
>> regardless of how much you've seen. I can't stand the smell/taste of
>> alcohol.
>
>Oh, can the outraged arrogance. You are the one who spoke of needing
>a drink at times. If you can't stand the smell/taste of alcohol, how
>would you know if you wanted a drink of it?
>Moonwolf, head up and ears pricked
I like Czech Lager, But Gin makes me sick.
White Wine Yes, but I prefer Dry Whites.
Alcopops are EVIL.
Coca Cola Is EVIL, as are all Softdrinks.
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
--
______________________________________________________
"Everyone's opinion is their own truth."
-Shadow Walker-
"If you talk to the animals, they will talk to you and you will know each
other. If you do not talk to them, you will not know them. And what you do
not know, you will fear. And what one fears, one destroys."
--Chief Dan George--
"D. Saunders" <eisens...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3de66d50...@news.cis.dfn.de...
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
--
______________________________________________________
"Everyone's opinion is their own truth."
-Shadow Walker-
"If you talk to the animals, they will talk to you and you will know each
other. If you do not talk to them, you will not know them. And what you do
not know, you will fear. And what one fears, one destroys."
--Chief Dan George--
"Shadow Walker" <shadowenwalker @ hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:wbyF9.83651$8D.19...@twister.austin.rr.com...
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
--
______________________________________________________
"Everyone's opinion is their own truth."
-Shadow Walker-
"If you talk to the animals, they will talk to you and you will know each
other. If you do not talk to them, you will not know them. And what you do
not know, you will fear. And what one fears, one destroys."
--Chief Dan George--
"Shadow Walker" <shadowenwalker @ hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:atBF9.84049$8D.20...@twister.austin.rr.com...
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> and wants everyone to believe....
Mind you, while my girlfriend has the same possibility to be were as
everyone else. I know I'm a were and I've said it. She said she has
shifted, I don't doubt her. Besides, she's a really kind littl' wolf
girl with all the instincts (including the heat bit) in place.
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> > and it's very obvious
> > you don't get any bit of what I mean.
>
> I am only responding to what you have posted.
And I'm just pushing buttons on my keyboard...
> > I have never fucked a bitch or a
> > dog for that matter. Nor do I find it particulary fun to fuck anything
> > I'd otherwise have on a collar. All there is to me being a zoophile is
> > that my stick stands up when I see a bitch in heat. Can't help that
> > anyway.
>
> But you have gotten quite passionate about being angry that females
> who you would have liked to have for your own have had their sexual
> organs removed, making them useless to you. That certainly sounds
> like an interest in fucking a canid.
Yes, fucking a canid. No, fucking anything I have on a collar. Clear?
> First, I will answer your question. I provide my teen boys with
> condoms so they will not breed,
You give them a choice.
> That is not my business, it is hers.
You admit him/her having a choice.
> My furkids are all neutered, as they will never
You take that choice right out of their minds.
> They seem to enjoy sexual play just as much without the ability to breed.
That's not the point, HTH.
> But what
> is the "little fear" you refer to at the top of the paragraph? That
> your friend will be neutered and therefore maybe not respond to you
> the same way?
He's my packmate. I guess he'd do for a beta even without his nuts,
still it would have modified his behaviour in inpredictable ways. In
short, it would have made him a sexual defect even tho he is perfectly
healthy genetic-wise.
> Other posts you have spoken of your legal
> owners/parents...are you afraid they might have you neutered, odd as
> that might sound to some?
Yes. Even tho I might have no direct reason, I am able to find some good
ones in the minds of the people that think like my owners on this NG.
> Oh, can the outraged arrogance. You are the one who spoke of needing
> a drink at times. If you can't stand the smell/taste of alcohol, how
> would you know if you wanted a drink of it?
> Moonwolf, head up and ears pricked
You ever think about having a drink of WATER, when you weren't feeling
good?? Sigh...
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> There is no point talking to you about any of this, if I remember correctly
> you still live at home and are cared for by your parents, am I right? So
> everything you say here is all the ramblings of someone who doesn't have
> much or any social berings. If so then you have nothing to base any of what
> you say,
> on. No experience in dog, cat, wolf, bird, fish and or human socialization,
> no experience in dog, cat, wolf, bird, fish and or human relationships and
> no life. If you do not live with it in your home/den 24 7 it is not
> happening. You will rant and rave that you do not need human anything, but
> you know what, you do. Because to have cubs you need a human female/were
> female. Let me tell you something, no female in her right mind will turn her
> tail in your direction with you spouting off about twisting cubs necks.
> Females are very protective of any young they come across. Remember there
> are humans that have been raised by wolves. Wolves who have raised dogs and
> etcetera etcetera....
Your arrogance can some times get into extreemes. You might want to read
all what I wrote, not only the parts you want to read, mrs. Sonicide II.
> So right now your parents still control your every move and decision. Just
> like people do with their dogs. They do what is best for their children. Even if
> it is not always the best thing. So better to spay and neuter than to kill.
> Better to prevent than to kill. It's probably best that you don't get a dog.
> You are not mature enough to take on the responsibility.
> Have a nice day....
Die a horrible death. Thanx in advance.
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> Have a nice day....
Me takes out a daily schedule and is satisfied to see it's time for his
daily walk for socialization with dogs... It was fun every day, to see
those human owners go out of their minds and to see their dogs so
interacting to my every thought, but today I'm not going. Time to clear
it up with theese sillys that will kindly hate you regardless what you
say.
Wasn't it a shame with all those dogs that didn't get a chance to
reproduce, shaken me badly actualy. And the more I feel I need to
protect my pack, the more others attack me... see here, this is the
exact thing that humans used to do to me when I was still alone: Try to
protect the only friends you think you have and the humans will whack
them down beyond recgotnigion. They did it all the time.
What? I'm immoral? Well sorry if it seems so, I guess I can't help it,
even tho I'll try. And I'll keep trying, mind you. For now it is like it
is, can't do anything about it.
Me looks in the schedule again... Ah, look. Time for work. The money
earned will help my packmates survive and the programs made will help
these old freinds keep on living.
No sigificant effect, still working hard... The world sucks, can't help
it.
P.S.: Symbolics, if you can understand it: Just yesterday, there was
some food caringly left for me. Well the food wasn't there, somebody
else ate it, but still Nofood is waiting for me. Will I take time and
caringly eat Nofood? You can't say it's not worth the effort.
Moonwolf
Actually, they were electives. :)
moonwolf
SONICIDE
Moonwolf wrote:
>
> CyberLegend aka Jure Sah <jure...@guest.arnes.si> wrote in message news:<3DE2A5AA...@guest.arnes.si>...
> > Shadow Walker wrote:
> > > What do you do with 6 puppies that no one wants? Answer me that.
> >
> > Simple: You kill them.
> >
> > I've never said I wanted to let every one of them live or that I wanted
> > the world flooded with puppies. I'm not SOME FUCKING STUPID HUMAN like
> > all of you here want to be so badly, I don't want any puppies and take
> > care of them and all that BULLSHIT.
>
> In your obvious assumption that all the world, dogs and all, exists
> only for your use and gratification, in your arrogance, you epitomize
> the worst qualities of humanity, and are much more human in that sense
> than anyone I have ever seen post here. So, indeed, you ARE a
> "fucking stupid human". You want dogs left sexually whole for your
> own pleasure, which will result in them reproducing at some point, yet
> you don't want to take the responsibility for the consequences of your
> allegedly higher-valued viewpoint. Very human, IMHO.
exactly! And that is WAY more disgusting than neutering. I wouldn't have
minded having it done after my first kid. It would have been great to
not suffer severe
pms symptoms every month for so many years. But being a male the poster
has no concept of what its like.
>
> I SIMPLY don't want them neutered if
> > you GET WHAT I MEAN, of course you're very OBVIOUSLY INCAPABLE of
> > concieving that.
> >
> > Dogs and me have a diffirent kind of relationship, I see very clearly
> > you will NEVER understand. Even if you study it to the rest of your
> > life, you'll just LOCK UP IN YOUR BRAINS and stick with your old
> > representation of things. You barely even know what a dog is, which is
> > your main problem.
>
> Oh, I have seen your representation of things: very like the older
> world view that humans took, that nature is there for humanity to use
> in any way possible, even for frivolous gratification, because humans
> considered themselves the Alphas of the world. You cannot
> differentiate between what you want and what a dog might want.
really if your not an actually dog there is NO WAY you can know what
they
think and feel and go through. He is so rapped up in himself and his own
obvious mental difficulties that he could never have a close bonding
with any animal I'm sure. My critter think so too *snorting of annoyance
from critter in back ground, especially my cat, shes an orny cuss and
spayed too)
I'm sure we have all know ,or may be one of those people even, where
animals (or atleast certain ones) just flock to them. Those people
understand animals, and the animals know it. These people tend to elicit
the same response from children.
> >
> > What's up with neutering? It's fucking disgusting, that's what it is.
> > Why? Very simply it's a thing you wouldn't be doing if you ever remotely
> > considered a dog your approximate equal.
>
> If you considered a dog your approximate equal, you wouldn't want them
> to suffer and die just for your pleasures. You seem to be on an
> all-too-human power trip, dominating other creatures sexually and
> socially. I will give you a free bit of analysis: this is almost
> invariably a sign that someone has little or no self-esteem and is
> trying to compensate for it. Even the zoos I know treat their animal
> mates much more caringly than the attitude you express for the dogs
> you claim to be so close to.
> And thinking how dogs concieve
> > humans, I share their POV... it's just freaking overdisgusting. Way too
> > disgusting, I personaly need a drink whenever I think of it too
> > troughly. Killing little cubs (a twist of the neck is usualy preformed)
> > is a lot more acceptable, since it is done and was done long before
> > humans were around.
>
> Now, the thought of creating little souls and then killing them
> immediately is what is "freaking overdisgusting"! BTW, dogs did not
> exist before humans were around. And canids don't have hands, so how
> could they kill by twisting little necks? And you drink...dogs don't
> need to drink alcohol...do you give that to your beloved dogs too?
> <makes face of disgust>
The dude is totally friggin warped. Thats why I got into such a fight
with him right from the start when he was first posting all this crap
about his 'pack' and about being a were. I sniffed out his foul stench
in our midst right from the start. But people gave me a hard time for
it. *huff* I'm so unappreciated. <:)
> >
> >
> > Geesus, you people make sueccide sound like a good option with your
> > total and complete ignorance. No wonder all my freinds gave up on
> > reasoning with you.
>
> I've never heard anyone else lay out this POV or line of reasoning
> here. Where are all these friends? If it's your alleged "pack", they
> would probably agree with you just because you are the "Alpha" in that
> group-dominant/submissive relationship...they might not actually
> believe it.
well it seems that his pack has had a lot of defectors as of late.
>
> Moonwolf, wolf AND human and damn proud of it all!
arrooo you go Moonwolf!
*scruff up a huge cloud of dirt*
Whitefell
> Just sorry for taking it all out on you, it seems to
> > me now like the response would be more appropriate to be sent to just
> > about anyone else that replied, you at least read what I wrote.
SONICIDE
when they dont want to breed their females. I dont know anything for
males. But mabee somebody should bake Jure some saltpeter brownies for
christmas....
WF
Shadow Walker wrote:
>
> I do not think that is offered by vets. It only means that later they may
> have to go in and take the parts out because of cancer. Vets do not like to
> do surgery if they think they are not doing the right thing. The code of
> ethics in vets "First do no harm." They see fixing animals as a way to
> prolong their lives and make life healthier. As well as control unwanted
> animals. Tying tubes only stops the possibility of pregnancy it can come
> undone. But total removal is a guaranty.
> --
> ______________________________________________________
> "Everyone's opinion is their own truth."
> -Shadow Walker-
>
> "If you talk to the animals, they will talk to you and you will know each
> other. If you do not talk to them, you will not know them. And what you do
> not know, you will fear. And what one fears, one destroys."
> --Chief Dan George--
>
> "D. Saunders" <eisens...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3de3d81b...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> > Once upon a time alt.horror.werewolves was in decline. On a
> > storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
> > light across the burning sky when barbt...@yahoo.com (Moonwolf)
> > sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
> >
> > >"fucking stupid human". You want dogs left sexually whole for your
> > >own pleasure, which will result in them reproducing at some point, yet
> > >you don't want to take the responsibility for the consequences of your
> > >allegedly higher-valued viewpoint. Very human, IMHO.
> >
> > Can't he have them Tubaly litagated or Vasectomised?
> >
> > ---
> > Plug: http://www.blind-guardian.com/
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<uucpmc1...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
>"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
>> Then explain why exit polls sometimes predict the wrong outcomes of
>elections
>
>Sometimes. Usually they are accurate.
>
Didnt watch the Bush Gore election much?
>> "Raised in the wild" now if thats not an oxymoron...
>> Id say being raised in the wild is an extreme circumstance.
>
>Yet you use it anyway.
Dumbass...its _your_ text which you snipped.Post editing wont save you silly
:O)
> What do you think being raised means? Dogs raise
>their pups unless the pups are taken away. Or do you think that dogs just
>leave their puppies to die after they are born?
>
Obfuscating the real issue is known hearabouts as Dodgeing.
HTH
>> Really? And your CITE for this is where? Pack behavior is driven by
>dominance
>> and territoriality.
>> Hint: you're too stupid for this game :O)
>
>Yeah, DOMINANCE. If they see a foreign dog on their territory and the dog
>submits, they aren't going to kill it anyway. Hint: You're too stupid for
>this game. When was the last time two dogs had a standoff, one submitted
>and the other killed the dog anyway? That's not how dogs do things.
>
And you know this because? Lets reveiw: you're not a were, not species
dysphoric, and not an accredited animal behaviorist.
So therefore....I know! You're that lady who does the pet psychic thingy on
Animal Planet!
Kewl :O)
>> > Usually they would find other dogs and try to get those dogs to
>> >join them.
>>
>> You have no clue as to how heirarchies work do you?
>
>I have a fairly good idea how some hierarchies work. These dogs would come
>to our yard quite often, trying to get out dogs to dig out of the fence.
>When they did, the wild dogs did not kill them. They just took off and then
>our dogs showed back up a while later.
>
Hows that prove dominance and submissiveness? Sounds like dogs playing.
>> I thought you said these were _wild_ dogs...sounds like somebodys feeding
>them.
>
>There are plenty of other animals out in the state forest. The dogs also
>were known to occasionally tear into trash left by the road for pickup.
>
So if the 'wild-dogs' were eating wild animals why wern't they eating your tame
dogs? Since they are killing things.
Hmmm...
>> Because dead dogs dont come back? Yeah...go figure.
>
>Amazing concept, isn't it?
>
Yes I'm amazed at your grasp of the obvious.
>> You clearly implied it silly.
>
>Not really, I just never stated what happened to them ultimately in my
>original post.
>
Yes you did :O)
>> You're an idiot.Wildlife biology does indeed have to do with the behavior
>of
>> wild animals in their respective enviroments, hth.
>
>The study of their behaviors is typically called Wildlife Ecology.
>
So you're saying that behavior isn't part of studying wildlife?
Wow...better change your major.
>> Funny...you said they came back after being gone just as healthy as
>before.Now
>> you're saying that no-one was feeding them?
>> Which is it?
>
>No, the dogs just came back after a season or so. Probably because they
>were low on the pack structure out in the wild while back at home they were
>more important.
>
Why didnt they kill the owners? Since you said they were killing animals in the
State Park.
>> Unless of course its fed regularly...but pleased do continue to amaze us
>with
>> your brilliance:O)
>
>It will still run off whenever it gets the chance. Especially considering
>how a wild dog will be more accustomed to a pack structure and so it the
>owner of the house is not acting like an alpha, but still trying to be the
>boss, then the dog will have some problems.
>
Because its trying to kill its owner?
>> And yet you said you never did anything about the pack of wild dogs living
>near
>> you.Yeah, you sound caring to me :O)
>
>I didn't need to do anything. They were fine. I watched them, that was it.
>So that makes me callous and uncaring?
>
Yes.
>> So you only care about non-wild dogs? what if you hit a wild dog and didnt
>know
>> it was wild and took it to the vet.Hmmmm...
>
>If, by some miracle, I did hit a wild dog, I would take it to the vet and
>then after the vet had checked him/her out, take the dog to the animal
>shelter.
>
Somehow...I don't believe you :O)
>> >Are you really such an idiot that you can't think passed
>> >the surface of things?
>>
>> You mean "past" but I'll let that one slide for now :O)
>
>Nope. The proper word in that phrase is 'passed'. Maybe you should look
>the words up. When you are referring to getting beyond something, it is
>passed, the past tense form of pass. Past refers to time, not a form of the
>word pass.
>
CITE?
>> And they control which...? Th house or th senate? Oh! Neither you say?
>Hmmm do
>> tell do tell...
>
>The only ones who control the house or the senate are.. duh duh duh.. one of
>the parties! Wow, imagine that! The house being controlled not by an
>ethnicity but by a political party! Strange, eh?
>
Thank you for makeing my point for me :O)
>> No I'm from an alternate universe where dead people dont vote ;O)
>
>This is not the 1920s.
>
So Bush's brother was fine in doing all the back door shenanigans?
Its FloriDUH...yeah...I'll buy that :O)
>> H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H! Tell that to my black friends...
>
>That has nothing to do with voting. Try to stay on topic here. I'm not
>talking about ethnicity but about voting. The two subjects are not the
>same.
>
Liar. You clearly stated that minority dosent count in this country.
Backpedddaling so soon?
>
>> GREAT GOOGLY MOOGLY! We have here someone who "knows what it means to be a
>> were"!!! Please inform us all what it means to be a "were".
>> TIA
>
>Ask him. He's the one who was outlining what it means to be were. I was
>simply using the standards he created.
BAckpeddaling some more? You stated that _you_ knew what it means to be a were.
> You might want to check out the faq
>that was posted for this newsgroup, which also states that a were is someone
>who has the instincts of their phenotype.
>
Ive been here since '99...I'm familiar with the document.
You still didnt answer my question: how do you know what it means to be a were?
Predicted response: more dodgeing and weaving.
>> Ahhhhh...perhaps you'd like to take time from your busy day to enlighten
>us
>> then :O)
>
>I doubt you'll ever actually listen anyway, just return with a straw man
>arguement. It's useless trying to debate with someone who either doesn't
>actually read what you write or just doesn't understand it.
>
Dumb it down then...or continue to make Lame excuses for why you cant support
your "argument".
LOL!
>> Too funny...now you're saying that someone who isn't a were can understand
>what
>> it means to be a were...how that work?
>
>No, I'm just stating that what you said above was not what he said.
>
Idiot.I said you stated that you know what it means to be a were.
I predict more backpeddaling from you.
>> >Because I am a fan of werewolves. Jeez, that's kind of what the title of
>> >the newsgroup implies, right? Alt.horror.werewolves. A newsgroup for
>fans
>> >of werewolves in horror. It isn't called Alt.Culture.Lycanthropy or
>> >anything like that.
>>
>> Damn! I thought it was!
>
>That's what you get for thinking.
>
I see my sublime humor is lost on you :O(
>> now you say your not a were
>
>No, I said I'm not WOLF. Read that carefully because "were" and "wolf" are
>not synonymous.
>
No...you said you're not either.Further you said that according to the FAQ you
dont have to be were to post here and the NG was originally created for
interest in werewolves in horror movies etc.
Lie much obsesso?
~Prince Snuhwolf~
Moonwolf
There, there, I know I appreciate it....:)
>
> > >
> > >
> > > Geesus, you people make sueccide sound like a good option with your
> > > total and complete ignorance. No wonder all my freinds gave up on
> > > reasoning with you.
> >
> > I've never heard anyone else lay out this POV or line of reasoning
> > here. Where are all these friends? If it's your alleged "pack", they
> > would probably agree with you just because you are the "Alpha" in that
> > group-dominant/submissive relationship...they might not actually
> > believe it.
>
> well it seems that his pack has had a lot of defectors as of late.
If I were in a pack with someone who would kill cubs without any
compunction or guilt, I'd defect too!
>
> >
> > Moonwolf, wolf AND human and damn proud of it all!
>
>
> arrooo you go Moonwolf!
>
> *scruff up a huge cloud of dirt*
<grins> Thanks!
Moonwolf
Moonwolf
> They make birth control dogfood for professional dog breeders to use
> when they dont want to breed their females. I dont know anything for
> males. But mabee somebody should bake Jure some saltpeter brownies for
> christmas....
Dunno...if he's "Alpha", then sex is majorly about domination and
power, just as it is for some other human men. No kind of castration,
chemical or physical, will stop such a person's sexual activity.
Moonwolf
Raab
> Raab <spamless...@nospam.chartermi.net> scribbled
> illegibly<uucpmc1...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
> >
> >"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> >> Then explain why exit polls sometimes predict the wrong outcomes of
> >elections
> >
> >Sometimes. Usually they are accurate.
> >
> Didnt watch the Bush Gore election much?
The exit polls for most of the states (aside from Florida and a couple
others) predicated accurately how that state went.
> >> "Raised in the wild" now if thats not an oxymoron...
> >> Id say being raised in the wild is an extreme circumstance.
> >
> >Yet you use it anyway.
>
> Dumbass...its _your_ text which you snipped.Post editing wont save you
silly
> :O)
People can go back and read my post. If they are even following this, they
will know that I wasn't "post editting" just to make myself look better.
You said that saying "raised in the wild" is using an oxymoron, then you use
it anyway. That's all I was pointing out right there.
> > What do you think being raised means? Dogs raise
> >their pups unless the pups are taken away. Or do you think that dogs
just
> >leave their puppies to die after they are born?
> >
> Obfuscating the real issue is known hearabouts as Dodgeing.
Of course you mean 'dodging' but I'll let that one slide for now.
> And you know this because? Lets reveiw: you're not a were, not species
> dysphoric, and not an accredited animal behaviorist.
> So therefore....I know! You're that lady who does the pet psychic thingy
on
> Animal Planet!
> Kewl :O)
Where did I claim not to be a were? Please link to the posting where I say
"I am not were." As far as I recall, I've only said that I am not wolf.
> >> > Usually they would find other dogs and try to get those dogs to
> >> >join them.
> >>
> >> You have no clue as to how heirarchies work do you?
> >
> >I have a fairly good idea how some hierarchies work. These dogs would
come
> >to our yard quite often, trying to get out dogs to dig out of the fence.
> >When they did, the wild dogs did not kill them. They just took off and
then
> >our dogs showed back up a while later.
> >
> Hows that prove dominance and submissiveness? Sounds like dogs playing.
The first sentence is independent of the rest of the paragraph. That was
simply a reply to your comment, then the rest of the paragraph was a
clarification on the sentence which you were responding to.
> >There are plenty of other animals out in the state forest. The dogs also
> >were known to occasionally tear into trash left by the road for pickup.
> >
> So if the 'wild-dogs' were eating wild animals why wern't they eating your
tame
> dogs? Since they are killing things.
> Hmmm...
Because the 'tame dogs' are part of the same species. Obviously, they eat
prey animals.
> >> Because dead dogs dont come back? Yeah...go figure.
> >
> >Amazing concept, isn't it?
> >
> Yes I'm amazed at your grasp of the obvious.
Which you seem to be lacking.
> >Not really, I just never stated what happened to them ultimately in my
> >original post.
> >
> Yes you did :O)
Not in my original post.
> >The study of their behaviors is typically called Wildlife Ecology.
> >
> So you're saying that behavior isn't part of studying wildlife?
> Wow...better change your major.
It isn't a part of Wildlife Biology, though usually the courses in Wildlife
Ecology are put into the WB curriculum because they are closely related.
Just like how when you take Biology they typically make you take some
Chemistry courses too. That doesn't mean that Biology = Chemistry.
> Why didnt they kill the owners? Since you said they were killing animals
in the
> State Park.
Why would they?
> >It will still run off whenever it gets the chance. Especially
considering
> >how a wild dog will be more accustomed to a pack structure and so it the
> >owner of the house is not acting like an alpha, but still trying to be
the
> >boss, then the dog will have some problems.
> >
> Because its trying to kill its owner?
Your statement doesn't make sense in this context. If a person catches a
wild dog and tries to keep it as a pet AND does not give it a proper
hierarchal then obviously that dog will be aggressive. It will either end
up biting someone or running off.
> >> And yet you said you never did anything about the pack of wild dogs
living
> >near
> >> you.Yeah, you sound caring to me :O)
> >
> >I didn't need to do anything. They were fine. I watched them, that was
it.
> >So that makes me callous and uncaring?
> >
> Yes.
No, it does not.
> >If, by some miracle, I did hit a wild dog, I would take it to the vet and
> >then after the vet had checked him/her out, take the dog to the animal
> >shelter.
> >
> Somehow...I don't believe you :O)
Doesn't really matter, does it? Your beliefs do not effect my actions out
in the real world.
> >> >Are you really such an idiot that you can't think passed
> >> >the surface of things?
> >>
> >> You mean "past" but I'll let that one slide for now :O)
> >
> >Nope. The proper word in that phrase is 'passed'. Maybe you should look
> >the words up. When you are referring to getting beyond something, it is
> >passed, the past tense form of pass. Past refers to time, not a form of
the
> >word pass.
> >
>
> CITE?
Try checking dictionary.com, it should tell a little about each word and the
usage. You'll see that I'm right.
> >The only ones who control the house or the senate are.. duh duh duh.. one
of
> >the parties! Wow, imagine that! The house being controlled not by an
> >ethnicity but by a political party! Strange, eh?
> >
> Thank you for makeing my point for me :O)
No, that was not your point. You were trying to say that I was talking
about ethnic groups and not political groups, when in fact I was talking
about political groups. Now who's backpedalling?
> >> No I'm from an alternate universe where dead people dont vote ;O)
> >
> >This is not the 1920s.
> >
> So Bush's brother was fine in doing all the back door shenanigans?
> Its FloriDUH...yeah...I'll buy that :O)
There were no dead people voting, just people counting 'wrong' and things
like that.
> >That has nothing to do with voting. Try to stay on topic here. I'm not
> >talking about ethnicity but about voting. The two subjects are not the
> >same.
> >
> Liar. You clearly stated that minority dosent count in this country.
I was clearly referring to minority *interest* groups, which one could
easily see by the context in which it was used. There are some political
groups out there which are based on ethnicity, but most are based solely on
political ideals. Groups with a large amount of the vote and a lot of
support are usually in the majority. Groups that get very little support
are minority interest groups. Understand now?
> Backpedddaling
What's that?
> BAckpeddaling some more? You stated that _you_ knew what it means to be a
were.
I did not say "This is what *I* think makes one a were." I said all along
that I was using logic from another person and applying it to that person.
> Ive been here since '99...I'm familiar with the document.
> You still didnt answer my question: how do you know what it means to be a
were?
By what people here have said being a were is. Course if you go by the
common myths, a were is not what people here consider it to be, but ignoring
that, if you check what most people around here or anywhere else online say,
they will say that a were is a person who has the instincts of their
phenotype either instead of or in conjunction with their human ones.
> >> Ahhhhh...perhaps you'd like to take time from your busy day to
enlighten
> >us
> >> then :O)
> >
> >I doubt you'll ever actually listen anyway, just return with a straw man
> >arguement. It's useless trying to debate with someone who either doesn't
> >actually read what you write or just doesn't understand it.
> >
> Dumb it down then...or continue to make Lame excuses for why you cant
support
> your "argument".
> LOL!
> Idiot.I said you stated that you know what it means to be a were.
> I predict more backpeddaling from you.
Yeah, and I told you that I was using the outline that he posted.
> I see my sublime humor is lost on you :O(
And you were saying that Ben Stiller wasn't that funny. Well he's got you
beat.
> >No, I said I'm not WOLF. Read that carefully because "were" and "wolf"
are
> >not synonymous.
> >
> No...you said you're not either.Further you said that according to the FAQ
you
> dont have to be were to post here and the NG was originally created for
> interest in werewolves in horror movies etc.
> Lie much obsesso?
I never said "I am not a were." Provide a link to the post where I said
this.
> ~Prince Snuhwolf~
>
Raab
news:<3DE78527...@sonicide.com>...
> > They make birth control dogfood for professional dog breeders to use
> > when they dont want to breed their females. I dont know anything for
> > males. But mabee somebody should bake Jure some saltpeter brownies for
> > christmas....
>
> Dunno...if he's "Alpha", then sex is majorly about domination and
> power, just as it is for some other human men. No kind of castration,
> chemical or physical, will stop such a person's sexual activity.
> Moonwolf
It would hopefully stop reproduction though.
Moonwolf
> Moonwolf wrote:
> > > and it's very obvious
> > > you don't get any bit of what I mean.
> >
> > I am only responding to what you have posted.
>
> And I'm just pushing buttons on my keyboard...
There is a vast difference between just pushing buttons on a keyboard
and responding to a post in a thoughtful manner. And just because I
don't agree with what you say does not mean that I don't get what you
mean.
>
> > > I have never fucked a bitch or a
> > > dog for that matter. Nor do I find it particulary fun to fuck anything
> > > I'd otherwise have on a collar. All there is to me being a zoophile is
> > > that my stick stands up when I see a bitch in heat. Can't help that
> > > anyway.
> >
> > But you have gotten quite passionate about being angry that females
> > who you would have liked to have for your own have had their sexual
> > organs removed, making them useless to you. That certainly sounds
> > like an interest in fucking a canid.
>
> Yes, fucking a canid. No, fucking anything I have on a collar. Clear?
There are physical collars, and there are mental collars. Being
lorded over by an "Alpha" is my idea of a mental collar.
>
> > First, I will answer your question. I provide my teen boys with
> > condoms so they will not breed,
>
> You give them a choice.
>
> > That is not my business, it is hers.
>
> You admit him/her having a choice.
>
> > My furkids are all neutered, as they will never
>
> You take that choice right out of their minds.
The "choice" was never in their minds to begin with: animals, unless
kept isolated (not psychologically healthy for them) will have sex and
reproduce when the time hits them.
>
> > They seem to enjoy sexual play just as much without the ability to breed.
>
> That's not the point, HTH.
I have had children, and the sex I had to get them was no
more/less/whatever fulfilling than sex at other times.
>
> > But what
> > is the "little fear" you refer to at the top of the paragraph? That
> > your friend will be neutered and therefore maybe not respond to you
> > the same way?
>
> He's my packmate. I guess he'd do for a beta even without his nuts,
> still it would have modified his behaviour in inpredictable ways. In
> short, it would have made him a sexual defect even tho he is perfectly
> healthy genetic-wise.
Actually the behavior modifications are quite predictable: ask any
veterinarian.
>
> > Other posts you have spoken of your legal
> > owners/parents...are you afraid they might have you neutered, odd as
> > that might sound to some?
>
> Yes. Even tho I might have no direct reason, I am able to find some good
> ones in the minds of the people that think like my owners on this NG.
I think this is the heart of the matter. As I posted earlier, many
men identify so strongly with companion animals that they cannot bring
themselves to have them neutered, feeling like it was neutering
themselves. This is quite typical of men unsure of their own
masculinity. And, it is very sad to regard one's parents as only
one's legal owners. I grew up in a severely emotionally abusive
family, and still didn't quite get to the point of regarding my
parents as simply my owners. (And after age 18, at least in the US,
unless one is judged incompentent and in need of legal guardianship,
one is one's own owner.) Of course, this could be due to the
asocialness you admit to.
>
> > Oh, can the outraged arrogance. You are the one who spoke of needing
> > a drink at times. If you can't stand the smell/taste of alcohol, how
> > would you know if you wanted a drink of it?
> > Moonwolf, head up and ears pricked
>
> You ever think about having a drink of WATER, when you weren't feeling
> good?? Sigh...
Well, at least in this society, when one speaks of needing a drink
under stress, the implied beverage is alcohol, as borne out by a
responding post.
Moonwolf
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> > Dunno...if he's "Alpha", then sex is majorly about domination and
> > power, just as it is for some other human men. No kind of castration,
> > chemical or physical, will stop such a person's sexual activity.
> > Moonwolf
>
> It would hopefully stop reproduction though.
Die a hard death you immoral, genetic-defficient, intentionaly
self-entoxicating, subintelligent, imperialist. And make it quick.
Thanx in advance.
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> I'm sure we have all know ,or may be one of those people even, where
> animals (or atleast certain ones) just flock to them. Those people
> understand animals, and the animals know it.
That's me, you stupid, canibalistic bitch.
> > I've never heard anyone else lay out this POV or line of reasoning
> > here. Where are all these friends? If it's your alleged "pack", they
> > would probably agree with you just because you are the "Alpha" in that
> > group-dominant/submissive relationship...they might not actually
> > believe it.
True my packmates will do what I tell them to do. It is also true that I
will do everything I can to protect them. Like I am right now. I'm glad
they aren't here right now.
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> > Oh how conveninent. And in all this time, what have you kept being to
> > the dogs, may I ask?
>
> The dogs are all mostly dead now. They don't live very long, as you know.
Well of course, but that's not what I meant. Anyway, nevermind.
> > Not quite immaginary. Some of them tend to stick around and others can
> > count to 2^16 faster than you ever will. Go figure.
>
> Yeah, I never did like math. Most of my mathematical aptitudes are in
> abstract reasoning anyway, so I bet they can count to 2^16 faster than I.
=/ You give the impression that you didn't get my point about that some
of my good friends are computers, but not that that's particulary
relevant (other than the fact that they're as great as Betas sometimes).
> No, I'm saying that if you have the instincts of that species inside of you,
> which is the basic definition of a were to most people, then you should have
> the instincts of the species inside of you.
I do. Which is not an answer to my question BTW, but nevermind.
> I'm just saying that if you are a were, then you probably have a deep
> understanding of how a dog or a wolf mind works.
See above.
> > I am a fully accepted Alpha male in my pack (me, Chrissy, Howler' and
> > Dingo), mind you.
>
> Which essentially means that regardless of how you are, your pack is
> suboordinate to you. All that really means is that you are more dominant
> than them. So yeah, you are alpha when you are with them and the other
> people you described.
Hm, actualy we did change roles a number of times, I nearly always used
to be Beta at start. It's just that now whenever I mention I was feeling
Betaish to my packmates they go like "Uh-oh! Not again!" (citing Howler'
actualy), so I don't quite have a choice, I've got to stay Alpha and,
amazingly, my instinct appears to be following this abstract logic. The
Alpha female in my pack however, always appeared to be willing to mate
with whoever happened to be Alpha.
> > Otherwise, the status of Alpha as I consider relevant, is a biochemical
> > situation in my body that modifies my behaviour and thus sends out
> > signals to whoever I socialize with.
>
> Alpha is about dominance and power.
To you maybe, to me only secondarily. As it seems to me, it's a purely
instinctive matter that I could only make very little rational use of.
SONICIDE
Moonwolf wrote:
>
> CyberLegend aka Jure Sah <jure...@guest.arnes.si> wrote in message news:<3DE5300C...@guest.arnes.si>...
> > Moonwolf, there is something I have to tell you that should snip all
> > your doubts away if you're at least a bit of a reasonable person.
> >
> > First of all, I figure you don't like zoophiles
>
> I don't care at all for a lot of what you have posted, therefore I
> don't like zoophiles? Gross misgeneralization.
The pervious poster doesn't seem to grasp the fact that it was the
unconsensuality and implied rape in his statements that are what are so
offensive at least from my
perspective. He could have said the same type of thing about, women, or
the mentaly or physically handicapped and it would have been just as
bad. Talking about
just keeping someone around for your own sexually gratification and
inflicting it upon them because they were born into a weak or
subordinant position is rape and abuse. He's trying to take it back now
but he can't ,it's there for everyone to read. He a friggin sexual
predator and a sicko.
>
> > and it's very obvious
> > you don't get any bit of what I mean.
>
> I am only responding to what you have posted.
>
> > I have never fucked a bitch or a
> > dog for that matter. Nor do I find it particulary fun to fuck anything
> > I'd otherwise have on a collar. All there is to me being a zoophile is
> > that my stick stands up when I see a bitch in heat. Can't help that
> > anyway.
>
> But you have gotten quite passionate about being angry that females
> who you would have liked to have for your own have had their sexual
> organs removed, making them useless to you. That certainly sounds
> like an interest in fucking a canid.
>
> >
> > Second of all, I'll tell you about a little fear I have. There was this
> > dog, the neighbour's dog. Cuddly thing, when I met him I knew we were
> > going to be freinds. Just freinds, nothing more. I needed a black fuzzy
> > friend then, somebody like myself. We read eachother's mind quite
> > clearly, I just wanted him for a freind and he, the cub he was,
> > subordinated himself to me (waging his tail low carefully whenever I was
> > near) what a nice boy. He mimicked my behaviour, actualy he mimicked
> > everything I did that he saw. I loved him and still love him as if he
> > was my own cub. I've always kept an eye on him and saw how he acted to
> > his owner, such an intelligent little boy, I was nearly sorry he was a
> > dog.
> > This boy, to me he really is like my son... He IS my packmate at least.
> > Let me ask you: Would you like to see your children neutered? Just tell
> > me, sincerely.
>
> First, I will answer your question. I provide my teen boys with
> condoms so they will not breed, as they do not have the maturity to
> fully understand all the ramifications thereof. Someday they will
> understand, and then they can make their own decisions about having
> children themselves. One of my older children has Gender Identity
> Disorder and is planning to have herself (she is M to F) neutered to
> achieve her ideal. Do I like that? That is not my business, it is
> hers. What is important is that she live her life in a fulfilling way
> for her, without harming others. My furkids are all neutered, as they
> will never have the understanding of the results of breeding that a
> fully mature human will have. My view is that, if I love them, I will
> protect them in all ways available to me, such as shots and neutering.
> They seem to enjoy sexual play just as much without the ability to
> breed. Otherwise, why have animal companions that have been
> domesticated for millennia? Just throw them out on the streets to live
> the "natural" lives, suffer and die young? They are just as
> intelligent neutered, and maybe able to express it more without the
> pressures exerted by unchecked hormones on their behaviors. But what
> is the "little fear" you refer to at the top of the paragraph? That
> your friend will be neutered and therefore maybe not respond to you
> the same way? Other posts you have spoken of your legal
> owners/parents...are you afraid they might have you neutered, odd as
> that might sound to some?
> >
> > And I don't claim to be inpersonated justice herself, I am another
> > subject with a subjective oppinion. That does not reduce any of my
> > rights and is thus completely irrelevant in this discussion. Just answer
> > the questions.
> >
> > Moonwolf wrote:
> > > And you drink...dogs don't need to drink alcohol...do you give that to your beloved dogs too?
> >
> > WHAT?! Fuck, you take that right back you disgusting little slimebag!
> > I've drank less alchocol in my LIFE than you SAW TODAY. And that's quite
> > regardless of how much you've seen. I can't stand the smell/taste of
> > alcohol.
>
> Oh, can the outraged arrogance. You are the one who spoke of needing
> a drink at times. If you can't stand the smell/taste of alcohol, how
> would you know if you wanted a drink of it?
> Moonwolf, head up and ears pricked
Actually when it comes to animals and alcohol I one saw a documentary
where they have a type of fruit, in africa I think ,that ripens all at
once and falls off and ferments and the animals come from far and wide
to eat it. The monkeys were funny they were all plastered. But on the
show they said they actually seemed to prefer the fermented stuff to the
ripe ones still left on the tree.
WF
SONICIDE
something?
good band by the way.
with metal,
Whitefell
SONICIDE
Moonwolf wrote:
> > The dude is totally friggin warped. Thats why I got into such a fight
> > with him right from the start when he was first posting all this crap
> > about his 'pack' and about being a were. I sniffed out his foul stench
> > in our midst right from the start. But people gave me a hard time for
> > it. *huff* I'm so unappreciated. <:)
>
> There, there, I know I appreciate it....:)
*wag wag*
> > well it seems that his pack has had a lot of defectors as of late.
>
> If I were in a pack with someone who would kill cubs without any
> compunction or guilt, I'd defect too!
Yup ,among other things >:/ In a real pack he would most likely be
demoted to total omega and forced to submit even to the juvie cubs or be
totally ousted.
Even in the case of this NG , because of his attitude, he has been made
the proverbial NG omega. Everybody is chompin on him now , he's shown he
deserves no position higher. Not even above snuh or the trolls.
WF
SONICIDE
Moonwolf wrote:
>
> SONICIDE <a...@sonicide.com> wrote in message news:<3DE78527...@sonicide.com>...
> > They make birth control dogfood for professional dog breeders to use
> > when they dont want to breed their females. I dont know anything for
> > males. But mabee somebody should bake Jure some saltpeter brownies for
> > christmas....
>
> Dunno...if he's "Alpha", then sex is majorly about domination and
> power, just as it is for some other human men. No kind of castration,
> chemical or physical, will stop such a person's sexual activity.
> Moonwolf
I guess so if you are a herd animal or something. I dont see where it
belongs in the context of a wolf pack tho. Mabee he wants to be the
stallion donkey. He's got the jackass part down...
WF
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>Are you saying its too expensive?
Yes, I was charged c. $13 to put down an animal weighing about 3oz.
>>>I agree...that was inhumane...he should have been given heroin on
>demand by his
>>>physician.Didja know.....that in Iran its given freely to the
>terninally ill by
>>>their government? And we think _they'r_ backwards...
>>
>>In holland it's allowed, it was allowed for a time in australia, but
>>they chickend out in the end.
>>
>It should be reinstated.
It won't be, Austraila has gone all racist and rightwing.
---
Kings will be kings
Pawns will be pawns
Aeons of tears
Wild and severe
Blessed be the young
Strong enough to bear
What before long
Will come, Will be, might never disappear
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
hotmail.com> sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>They do it by weight so the price is not always that low. Then there is the
Actually, The same people charged me c. $13 or £10, to put down a
Gerbil with a tumour, and given that it weighed about 3oz, I think
that's rather excessive.
>fact that not all vets will put a dog to sleep.
Why not,
They'd rather have it suffer?
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<uug244f...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
>"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:as8c2j$ohncr$1...@ID-137945.news.dfncis.de...
>> Raab <spamless...@nospam.chartermi.net> scribbled
>> illegibly<uucpmc1...@corp.supernews.com>:
>>
>> >
>> >"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >
>> >> Then explain why exit polls sometimes predict the wrong outcomes of
>> >elections
>> >
>> >Sometimes. Usually they are accurate.
>> >
>> Didnt watch the Bush Gore election much?
>
>The exit polls for most of the states (aside from Florida and a couple
>others) predicated accurately how that state went.
>
Like I said: you didnt watch the election very closely...CNN announced that
Gore had won FloriDUH.
HTH
>> >> "Raised in the wild" now if thats not an oxymoron...
>> >> Id say being raised in the wild is an extreme circumstance.
>> >
>> >Yet you use it anyway.
>>
>> Dumbass...its _your_ text which you snipped.Post editing wont save you
>silly
>> :O)
>
>People can go back and read my post. If they are even following this, they
>will know that I wasn't "post editting" just to make myself look better.
Denial is your only option at this point I see...
>You said that saying "raised in the wild" is using an oxymoron, then you use
>it anyway. That's all I was pointing out right there.
>
Now you're attributing your text as _mine_?
Wow...you're not just a Liar, you're a compulsive Liar :O)
>> > What do you think being raised means? Dogs raise
>> >their pups unless the pups are taken away. Or do you think that dogs
>just
>> >leave their puppies to die after they are born?
>> >
>> Obfuscating the real issue is known hearabouts as Dodgeing.
>
>Of course you mean 'dodging' but I'll let that one slide for now.
>
How original to borrow my lames.But hey...youre already attributing your text
as mine so why not make it a double?
>> And you know this because? Lets reveiw: you're not a were, not species
>> dysphoric, and not an accredited animal behaviorist.
>> So therefore....I know! You're that lady who does the pet psychic thingy
>on
>> Animal Planet!
>> Kewl :O)
>
>Where did I claim not to be a were? Please link to the posting where I say
>"I am not were." As far as I recall, I've only said that I am not wolf.
>
You implied that you are not were and specifically stated that you are here not
for spiritual discussions of therianthropy but for the horror movie and fiction
aspect of the NG.
HTH
>> >> > Usually they would find other dogs and try to get those dogs to
>> >> >join them.
>> >>
>> >> You have no clue as to how heirarchies work do you?
>> >
>> >I have a fairly good idea how some hierarchies work. These dogs would
>come
>> >to our yard quite often, trying to get out dogs to dig out of the fence.
>> >When they did, the wild dogs did not kill them. They just took off and
>then
>> >our dogs showed back up a while later.
>> >
>> Hows that prove dominance and submissiveness? Sounds like dogs playing.
>
>The first sentence is independent of the rest of the paragraph. That was
>simply a reply to your comment, then the rest of the paragraph was a
>clarification on the sentence which you were responding to.
>
Still cant answer my questions: same old same old.
Dogs just playing it is then :O)
>> >There are plenty of other animals out in the state forest. The dogs also
>> >were known to occasionally tear into trash left by the road for pickup.
>> >
>> So if the 'wild-dogs' were eating wild animals why wern't they eating your
>tame
>> dogs? Since they are killing things.
>> Hmmm...
>
>Because the 'tame dogs' are part of the same species. Obviously, they eat
>prey animals.
>
And so now you're saying that dogs wont kill & eat each other?
You are an idiot.
>> >> Because dead dogs dont come back? Yeah...go figure.
>> >
>> >Amazing concept, isn't it?
>> >
>> Yes I'm amazed at your grasp of the obvious.
>
>Which you seem to be lacking.
>
Still cant explain how dead dogs could come back could you?
Feel free to dodge & weave some more :O)
>> >Not really, I just never stated what happened to them ultimately in my
>> >original post.
>> >
>> Yes you did :O)
>
>Not in my original post.
>
Then why would we know beforehand?
>> >The study of their behaviors is typically called Wildlife Ecology.
>> >
>> So you're saying that behavior isn't part of studying wildlife?
>> Wow...better change your major.
>
>It isn't a part of Wildlife Biology, though usually the courses in Wildlife
>Ecology are put into the WB curriculum because they are closely related.
>Just like how when you take Biology they typically make you take some
>Chemistry courses too. That doesn't mean that Biology = Chemistry.
>
And this explains why behavior isn't a part of Wildlife Biology how?
>> Why didnt they kill the owners? Since you said they were killing animals
>in the
>> State Park.
>
>Why would they?
>
To survive???
Please try and keep up or we'll have to make you stand in the corner...again.
>> >It will still run off whenever it gets the chance. Especially
>considering
>> >how a wild dog will be more accustomed to a pack structure and so it the
>> >owner of the house is not acting like an alpha, but still trying to be
>the
>> >boss, then the dog will have some problems.
>> >
>> Because its trying to kill its owner?
>
>Your statement doesn't make sense in this context. If a person catches a
>wild dog and tries to keep it as a pet AND does not give it a proper
>hierarchal
WTF does "heirarchal" mean? I think you ment pack-order status.Are you sure
your studying _any_ sort of biology????
then obviously that dog will be aggressive. It will either end
>up biting someone or running off.
>
Which is exactly what I stated before hand.
You're drool cup is full.
>> >> And yet you said you never did anything about the pack of wild dogs
>living
>> >near
>> >> you.Yeah, you sound caring to me :O)
>> >
>> >I didn't need to do anything. They were fine. I watched them, that was
>it.
>> >So that makes me callous and uncaring?
>> >
>> Yes.
>
>No, it does not.
>
You provided no solution to the problem of the wild dogs existence.
Therefore you are "callous and uncareing".
HTH
>> >If, by some miracle, I did hit a wild dog, I would take it to the vet and
>> >then after the vet had checked him/her out, take the dog to the animal
>> >shelter.
>> >
>> Somehow...I don't believe you :O)
>
>Doesn't really matter, does it? Your beliefs do not effect my actions out
>in the real world.
>
Perhaps...but you appear to be a liar on this NG :O)
BTW, you also just contradicted yourself.You said above that you did nothing
for the wild dogs: now you say you would do something for a wild dog.
Which is it?
>> >> >Are you really such an idiot that you can't think passed
>> >> >the surface of things?
>> >>
>> >> You mean "past" but I'll let that one slide for now :O)
>> >
>> >Nope. The proper word in that phrase is 'passed'. Maybe you should look
>> >the words up. When you are referring to getting beyond something, it is
>> >passed, the past tense form of pass. Past refers to time, not a form of
>the
>> >word pass.
>> >
>>
>> CITE?
>
>Try checking dictionary.com, it should tell a little about each word and the
>usage. You'll see that I'm right.
>
DYOFDW. Still a liar I see, liar.
>> >The only ones who control the house or the senate are.. duh duh duh.. one
>of
>> >the parties! Wow, imagine that! The house being controlled not by an
>> >ethnicity but by a political party! Strange, eh?
>> >
>> Thank you for makeing my point for me :O)
>
>No, that was not your point. You were trying to say that I was talking
>about ethnic groups and not political groups, when in fact I was talking
>about political groups. Now who's backpedalling?
>
I was making a point about your statement that minority dosent count in this
country.I used the house & senate as examples.
Try again.
>> >> No I'm from an alternate universe where dead people dont vote ;O)
>> >
>> >This is not the 1920s.
>> >
>> So Bush's brother was fine in doing all the back door shenanigans?
>> Its FloriDUH...yeah...I'll buy that :O)
>
>There were no dead people voting, just people counting 'wrong' and things
>like that.
>
Really? The voting roles clearly showed that some "deceased" people managed to
vote in FloriDUH.
>> >That has nothing to do with voting. Try to stay on topic here. I'm not
>> >talking about ethnicity but about voting. The two subjects are not the
>> >same.
>> >
>> Liar. You clearly stated that minority dosent count in this country.
>
>I was clearly referring to minority *interest* groups, which one could
>easily see by the context in which it was used. There are some political
>groups out there which are based on ethnicity, but most are based solely on
>political ideals. Groups with a large amount of the vote and a lot of
>support are usually in the majority. Groups that get very little support
>are minority interest groups. Understand now?
>
So you agree with me that minority _does_ count in America?
Fine...I'm glad you see it my way :O)
>> Backpedddaling
>
>What's that?
>
Take a wild guess.
>> BAckpeddaling some more? You stated that _you_ knew what it means to be a
>were.
>
>I did not say "This is what *I* think makes one a were." I said all along
>that I was using logic from another person and applying it to that person.
>
Damn! We finally have a certified Mind Reader in our fine NG!
Alert the press...
>> Ive been here since '99...I'm familiar with the document.
>> You still didnt answer my question: how do you know what it means to be a
>were?
>
>By what people here have said being a were is. Course if you go by the
>common myths, a were is not what people here consider it to be, but ignoring
>that, if you check what most people around here or anywhere else online say,
>they will say that a were is a person who has the instincts of their
>phenotype either instead of or in conjunction with their human ones.
>
Nicely g00gled & unattributed...so how do _you_ know what it means to be a
were?Not what Joe or Bubba knows.
>
>> Idiot.I said you stated that you know what it means to be a were.
>> I predict more backpeddaling from you.
>
>Yeah, and I told you that I was using the outline that he posted.
>
So _you_ dont know what it means to be a were; but you think you understand
because you read some stuff that Joe & Bubba wrote?
Wow...so you think you know that Jure isnt were after reading some text.
Brilliant...pure Genius!
>> I see my sublime humor is lost on you :O(
>
>And you were saying that Ben Stiller wasn't that funny. Well he's got you
>beat.
>
Nepotism.
*shrugs*
>> >No, I said I'm not WOLF. Read that carefully because "were" and "wolf"
>are
>> >not synonymous.
>> >
>> No...you said you're not either.Further you said that according to the FAQ
>you
>> dont have to be were to post here and the NG was originally created for
>> interest in werewolves in horror movies etc.
>> Lie much obsesso?
>
>I never said "I am not a were." Provide a link to the post where I said
>this.
>
Its been implied all along.And DYOFDW...the burden of proof is on someone "who
dosent know what it means to be a were, but read some stuff about it on the
net".
ROTFLMAO!!!!
HTH
HAND
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<3DE8D1F9...@guest.arnes.si>:
>Raab wrote:
>> > Oh how conveninent. And in all this time, what have you kept being to
>> > the dogs, may I ask?
>>
>> The dogs are all mostly dead now. They don't live very long, as you know.
>
>Well of course, but that's not what I meant. Anyway, nevermind.
>
Fascinating how he claims to care for wild dogs and yet dosent care for wild
dogs...simultaneously!!!
>
>> No, I'm saying that if you have the instincts of that species inside of you,
>> which is the basic definition of a were to most people, then you should have
>> the instincts of the species inside of you.
>
>I do. Which is not an answer to my question BTW, but nevermind.
>
He wont believe you because he read some stuff on the NG about what it means to
be a were...and suddenly he knows what it means to be a were!
Even though hes backpeddaling about being were...and then not being were.Quite
amusing :O)
>> I'm just saying that if you are a were, then you probably have a deep
>> understanding of how a dog or a wolf mind works.
>
>See above.
>
He's not a were "but he read some stuff on usenet what it means to be were".
Yeah, I'm convinced!
LOL!
>> > I am a fully accepted Alpha male in my pack (me, Chrissy, Howler' and
>> > Dingo), mind you.
>>
>> Which essentially means that regardless of how you are, your pack is
>> suboordinate to you. All that really means is that you are more dominant
>> than them. So yeah, you are alpha when you are with them and the other
>> people you described.
>
>Hm, actualy we did change roles a number of times, I nearly always used
>to be Beta at start. It's just that now whenever I mention I was feeling
>Betaish to my packmates they go like "Uh-oh! Not again!" (citing Howler'
>actualy), so I don't quite have a choice, I've got to stay Alpha and,
>amazingly, my instinct appears to be following this abstract logic. The
>Alpha female in my pack however, always appeared to be willing to mate
>with whoever happened to be Alpha.
>
My question is: if they arnt teaching Behavior in Wildlife Biology, and hes not
a were...hows he know all this?
Oh yeah: he read some stuff on usenet.
H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^!!!
>> > Otherwise, the status of Alpha as I consider relevant, is a biochemical
>> > situation in my body that modifies my behaviour and thus sends out
>> > signals to whoever I socialize with.
>>
>> Alpha is about dominance and power.
>
>To you maybe, to me only secondarily. As it seems to me, it's a purely
>instinctive matter that I could only make very little rational use of.
>
Funny how he knows what "Alpha is about..." but he's not studying behavior
because its not part of Wildlife Biology and hes not a wolf, or were :O)
~Prince SNuhwolf~
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<3de8f666...@news.cis.dfn.de>:
>Once upon a time alt.horror.werewolves was in decline. On a
>storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
>light across the burning sky when §ñühwØLf <snuhwo...@hotmail.com>
>sent the sign, reflecting all divine.
>
>>Are you saying its too expensive?
>
>Yes, I was charged c. $13 to put down an animal weighing about 3oz.
>
Thats cheap.Tell grandma how much you plan to spend on her funeral as
well :O)
>>>>I agree...that was inhumane...he should have been given heroin on
>>demand by his
>>>>physician.Didja know.....that in Iran its given freely to the
>>terninally ill by
>>>>their government? And we think _they'r_ backwards...
>>>
>>>In holland it's allowed, it was allowed for a time in australia, but
>>>they chickend out in the end.
>>>
>>It should be reinstated.
>
>It won't be, Austraila has gone all racist and rightwing.
>
The land of "Oz" isnt! Who knew? MAybe the crock huntah is a boong
slapper afterall ;O)
~Prince SNuhwolf~
Raab
> CyberLegend aka Jure Sah <jure...@guest.arnes.si> scribbled
> illegibly<3DE8D1F9...@guest.arnes.si>:
>
> >Raab wrote:
> >> > Oh how conveninent. And in all this time, what have you kept being to
> >> > the dogs, may I ask?
> >>
> >> The dogs are all mostly dead now. They don't live very long, as you
know.
> >
> >Well of course, but that's not what I meant. Anyway, nevermind.
> >
> Fascinating how he claims to care for wild dogs and yet dosent care for
wild
> dogs...simultaneously!!!
Snuh, you are an idiot. At least Jure can respond politely.
Raab
"CyberLegend aka Jure Sah" <jure...@guest.arnes.si> wrote in message
news:3DE8D1F9...@guest.arnes.si...
> Raab wrote:
> Oh how conveninent. And in all this time, what have you kept being to
> the dogs, may I ask?
I was never an alpha or even part of their pack. I just watched them.
> =/ You give the impression that you didn't get my point about that some
> of my good friends are computers, but not that that's particulary
> relevant (other than the fact that they're as great as Betas sometimes).
Ah, okay. That's because I see computers as tools, so I didn't even think
that you could mean that.
> I do. Which is not an answer to my question BTW, but nevermind.
Okay.
> Hm, actualy we did change roles a number of times, I nearly always used
> to be Beta at start. It's just that now whenever I mention I was feeling
> Betaish to my packmates they go like "Uh-oh! Not again!" (citing Howler'
> actualy), so I don't quite have a choice, I've got to stay Alpha and,
> amazingly, my instinct appears to be following this abstract logic. The
> Alpha female in my pack however, always appeared to be willing to mate
> with whoever happened to be Alpha.
Is everyone in your pack all betas except you and the alpha female or are
there people lower than that?
Raab
> Raab wrote:
> > > Dunno...if he's "Alpha", then sex is majorly about domination and
> > > power, just as it is for some other human men. No kind of castration,
> > > chemical or physical, will stop such a person's sexual activity.
> > > Moonwolf
> >
> > It would hopefully stop reproduction though.
>
> Die a hard death you immoral, genetic-defficient, intentionaly
> self-entoxicating, subintelligent, imperialist. And make it quick.
>
> Thanx in advance.
Your welcome.
I was actually just stating what the other person's point was.
Raab
> Raab <spamless...@nospam.chartermi.net> scribbled
> illegibly<uug244f...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
> >
> >"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:as8c2j$ohncr$1...@ID-137945.news.dfncis.de...
> >> Raab <spamless...@nospam.chartermi.net> scribbled
> >> illegibly<uucpmc1...@corp.supernews.com>:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >
> >> >> Then explain why exit polls sometimes predict the wrong outcomes of
> >> >elections
> >> >
> >> >Sometimes. Usually they are accurate.
> >> >
> >> Didnt watch the Bush Gore election much?
> >
> >The exit polls for most of the states (aside from Florida and a couple
> >others) predicated accurately how that state went.
> >
> Like I said: you didnt watch the election very closely...CNN announced
that
> Gore had won FloriDUH.
> HTH
LIKE I SAID: Aside from Florida. You must have the reading comprehension
of a fifth grader.
> >People can go back and read my post. If they are even following this,
they
> >will know that I wasn't "post editting" just to make myself look better.
>
> Denial is your only option at this point I see...
Nice dodge.
>
> >You said that saying "raised in the wild" is using an oxymoron, then you
use
> >it anyway. That's all I was pointing out right there.
> >
>
> Now you're attributing your text as _mine_?
> Wow...you're not just a Liar, you're a compulsive Liar :O)
Go back and look at your post. You used the phrase "raised in the wild."
Jeez, you're not just a liar, you're a compulsive liar.
Here is the original text from the post
news:as5jbe$nttt7$1...@ID-137945.news.dfncis.de
---------
"Raised in the wild" now if thats not an oxymoron...
>I didn't bother predicting how dogs in extreme
>circumstances would react because that's not what was in question.
Id say being raised in the wild is an extreme circumstance.
---------
So you're saying that the text outside of the > was mine?
> How original to borrow my lames.But hey...youre already attributing your
text
> as mine so why not make it a double?
See above, idiot. I was attributing your text as yours. Anyway, you knew
what the point of that was anyway. You pointed out a supposed error of mine
which you were wrong about. If you are going to be a grammar/spelling nazi,
I can be one too.
> You implied that you are not were and specifically stated that you are
here not
> for spiritual discussions of therianthropy but for the horror movie and
fiction
> aspect of the NG.
> HTH
You ASSume too much. I said right out that I was not wolf. Now if I was
claiming not to be a were, wouldn't I have just said "I am not were" instead
of saying "I am not wolf."
> >> >> > Usually they would find other dogs and try to get those dogs to
> >> >> >join them.
> >> >>
> >> >> You have no clue as to how heirarchies work do you?
> >> >
> >> >I have a fairly good idea how some hierarchies work. These dogs would
> >come
> >> >to our yard quite often, trying to get out dogs to dig out of the
fence.
> >> >When they did, the wild dogs did not kill them. They just took off
and
> >then
> >> >our dogs showed back up a while later.
> >> >
> >> Hows that prove dominance and submissiveness? Sounds like dogs playing.
> >
> >The first sentence is independent of the rest of the paragraph. That was
> >simply a reply to your comment, then the rest of the paragraph was a
> >clarification on the sentence which you were responding to.
> >
>
> Still cant answer my questions: same old same old.
> Dogs just playing it is then :O)
Because the question was not relevant. I was not saying that the dogs
"playing" was proving dominance and submission. Try reading up above in the
Halloween: The Truth is Out There thread. Someone, I think Wanderer,
posted some links that had some good stuff about dogs and their societal
structure. You might get a clue.
> >> >There are plenty of other animals out in the state forest. The dogs
also
> >> >were known to occasionally tear into trash left by the road for
pickup.
> >> >
> >> So if the 'wild-dogs' were eating wild animals why wern't they eating
your
> >tame
> >> dogs? Since they are killing things.
> >> Hmmm...
> >
> >Because the 'tame dogs' are part of the same species. Obviously, they
eat
> >prey animals.
> >
>
> And so now you're saying that dogs wont kill & eat each other?
> You are an idiot.
No, just that it isn't as common as you made it sound. (that they kill and
eat every dog they come across) Else how come when dogs get loose and form
a pack out in the woods or wherever, the pack grows as more dogs come in.
If things were like you said, it would be three dogs at most and a bunch of
dog corpses.
> Still cant explain how dead dogs could come back could you?
> Feel free to dodge & weave some more :O)
What the hell? Dead dogs don't come back, just like I said. Have you
watched Night of the Living Dead a few too many times?
> Then why would we know beforehand?
You wouldn't.
> >It isn't a part of Wildlife Biology, though usually the courses in
Wildlife
> >Ecology are put into the WB curriculum because they are closely related.
> >Just like how when you take Biology they typically make you take some
> >Chemistry courses too. That doesn't mean that Biology = Chemistry.
> >
>
> And this explains why behavior isn't a part of Wildlife Biology how?
Because the actual class Wildlife Biology is not the same class as Wildlife
Ecology. I don't understand why everything has to be spelled out for you.
Are you just totally incapable of grasping the obvious?
> To survive???
> Please try and keep up or we'll have to make you stand in the
corner...again.
Yeah, especially considering that the owner probably has a gun or is quite
larger than the dog. Sure, that makes sense. Look, another straw man just
fell.
> >> >It will still run off whenever it gets the chance. Especially
> >considering
> >> >how a wild dog will be more accustomed to a pack structure and so it
the
> >> >owner of the house is not acting like an alpha, but still trying to be
> >the
> >> >boss, then the dog will have some problems.
> >> >
> >> Because its trying to kill its owner?
> >
> >Your statement doesn't make sense in this context. If a person catches a
> >wild dog and tries to keep it as a pet AND does not give it a proper
> >hierarchal
>
> WTF does "heirarchal" mean? I think you ment pack-order status.Are you
sure
> your studying _any_ sort of biology????
I said hierarchal.
Heirarchal. adj. Of or relating to a hierarchy
Hierarchy. n. Categorization of a group of people according to ability or
status.
Understand now?
> >then obviously that dog will be aggressive. It will either end
> >up biting someone or running off.
> >
>
> Which is exactly what I stated before hand.
> You're drool cup is full.
No you didn't. You said the dog WOULD NOT run off, stupid. You said that
the dog won't leave because it is being fed by the owners.
> You provided no solution to the problem of the wild dogs existence.
> Therefore you are "callous and uncareing".
Why did there need to be a solution? They were doing just fine.
> Perhaps...but you appear to be a liar on this NG :O)
> BTW, you also just contradicted yourself.You said above that you did
nothing
> for the wild dogs: now you say you would do something for a wild dog.
> Which is it?
That is not a contradiction. I was saying that I only watched the wild
dogs. They needed nothing. However, if I was to hit one with my car, I
would try to help it. There is no contradiction there.
> >Try checking dictionary.com, it should tell a little about each word and
the
> >usage. You'll see that I'm right.
> >
> DYOFDW. Still a liar I see, liar.
Okay, so since I used the word correctly, I am a liar. Nice dodge. So you
couldn't admit that you were mistaken?
> I was making a point about your statement that minority dosent count in
this
> country.I used the house & senate as examples.
> Try again.
Nope. I said that the minority can effect very little change. Then you
turned it into an ethnicity issue, which it wasn't. I was discussing
political groups which can only win anything by getting a majority vote.
(actually having more votes than the others. Rarely do they get a majority
vote, but more like 45% when they win)
> Really? The voting roles clearly showed that some "deceased" people
managed to
> vote in FloriDUH.
Are you sure? I never saw that on the news. If so then I was wrong about
that particular thing.
> >I was clearly referring to minority *interest* groups, which one could
> >easily see by the context in which it was used. There are some political
> >groups out there which are based on ethnicity, but most are based solely
on
> >political ideals. Groups with a large amount of the vote and a lot of
> >support are usually in the majority. Groups that get very little support
> >are minority interest groups. Understand now?
> >
>
> So you agree with me that minority _does_ count in America?
> Fine...I'm glad you see it my way :O)
That wasn't your point. You were talking some crap about ethnicities, which
is not what I was talking about. I was discussing political groups.
Understand that yet? "Political group" is not a synonym for "ethnic group."
> >I did not say "This is what *I* think makes one a were." I said all
along
> >that I was using logic from another person and applying it to that
person.
> >
>
> Damn! We finally have a certified Mind Reader in our fine NG!
> Alert the press...
Where did I say I read someone's mind? Like I stated REPEATEDLY: I read
someone's post, they said some stuff, I used the stuff they said and applied
it to them. Reading text does not require any psychic abilities.
> >By what people here have said being a were is. Course if you go by the
> >common myths, a were is not what people here consider it to be, but
ignoring
> >that, if you check what most people around here or anywhere else online
say,
> >they will say that a were is a person who has the instincts of their
> >phenotype either instead of or in conjunction with their human ones.
> >
>
> Nicely g00gled & unattributed...so how do _you_ know what it means to be a
> were?Not what Joe or Bubba knows.
Like I said, the only way I know what people here consider a 'were' is by
what people here have described it to be. Here. Didn't really need google
for that, since it's been posted here quite a few times while I was lurking.
> >
> >Yeah, and I told you that I was using the outline that he posted.
> >
> So _you_ dont know what it means to be a were; but you think you
understand
> because you read some stuff that Joe & Bubba wrote?
> Wow...so you think you know that Jure isnt were after reading some text.
> Brilliant...pure Genius!
I didn't say I KNOW he isn't. I just stated I was not fully convinced. Go
read the second post in response to Jure. That is what I said.
> >I never said "I am not a were." Provide a link to the post where I said
> >this.
> >
> Its been implied all along.And DYOFDW...
Not really. Like I said above, if I was claiming not to be a were, I would
have said "I am not were" instead of saying "I am not wolf." Which implies
that I am a were but of a different phenotype - at least to anyone who
thinks logically.
> the burden of proof is on someone "who
> dosent know what it means to be a were, but read some stuff about it on
the
> net".
Well where did you learn about it? Oh, from the net. Wow.
@hotmail.com Shadow Walker
> Actually, The same people charged me c. $13 or Ł10, to put down a
> Gerbil with a tumour, and given that it weighed about 3oz, I think
> that's rather excessive.
>
> >fact that not all vets will put a dog to sleep.
>
> Why not,
> They'd rather have it suffer?
>
I know it seems like much for such a small animal but it was still better
than letting the tumor do the work. Some vets would rather give medication
to say an older dog to ease it's pain than to putt it too sleep. To let it
die naturally.
I had a horse that had cancer on his nostril. It had started out as a small
summer sore that would not completely heal. It would come and go for years.
This was not uncommon were I live. Some horses seemed to be prone to them.
Well anyway, his turned nasty and could not be removed. It was on his nose
and so kemo was the only other choice. I could not afford it and so had to
make the decision. To let him go. If not his cancer would rip through his
body taking his ability to stand, see or eat then his eventual painful
death. I took that horrible walk and never left his side. I have been told I
am stronger than others for having done this. I do not see it as being
strong. I see it as one of my many duties of someone who has an animal
companion to stand by my friend until the very end, even if it means to rip
my heart out to do it.
$275 to the vet.
Total cost......still paying with my broken heart.
Moonwolf
In college majoring in wildlife science, we had an Intro to Wildlife
science, then a lot of specialized courses in the studies of water
environments (fresh and salt), forests, plains; the studies of
different groups of animals (mammals, reptiles and amphibians,
insects, birds, etc.); ecology; ethology...but never a course called
simply wildlife biology. The field is so massive, I don't see how
there could be such a course, unless it was an Intro. Was this a high
school course, perhaps?
I remember the report about the deceased vote in Florida; here in
Missouri we had the dead vote as well! I suspect there may be more
states that had that happen than we know at this point.
Reading the FAQ, don't forget that one is warned that if you ask 10
weres what a were is, you will get 11 different answers. I would not
rely on what is posted here about what a were is as the final and
definitive answer for myself.
Moonwolf
SONICIDE
I myself have have seen Jure respond in a much ruder manner , to me
anyway, but then I guess I really get under his skin.
WF
WF
SONICIDE
> > Alpha female in my pack however, always appeared to be willing to mate
> > with whoever happened to be Alpha.
ikky poo
>
> Is everyone in your pack all betas except you and the alpha female or are
> there people lower than that?
his fleas
>
> > > > Otherwise, the status of Alpha as I consider relevant, is a
> biochemical
> > > > situation in my body that modifies my behaviour and thus sends out
> > > > signals to whoever I socialize with.
> > >
> > > Alpha is about dominance and power.
> >
> > To you maybe, to me only secondarily. As it seems to me, it's a purely
> > instinctive matter that I could only make very little rational use of.
eeegads mo wonder his lil pack is disbanded
SONICIDE
also.
Remember he HAS to be alpha around here ,his instinct dictated it too
him.
INSTINCT: Jure take this down...
JURE: Ready when you are GQ!
INSTINCT: You are to go to AHWW and make a name for yourself. You must
go and act like a total rude asshole.
JURE: But GQ?!
INSTINCT: Jure you have your orders!
How can you be an alpha when you are in a position of being controlled
by your instincts. It doesn't make sense. The head of the group is
always the
'thinker'. Whether you are talking about wolf packs, tribes of apes,
herd animals.
They are experienced ,they know how to keep their group out of trouble
how to find food. The young animals go around helter skelter on the
instincts they were born with and the intelligent experienced adults
have to teach them how to use their
instincts. Jures 'presumed' pack needs the guidance of a real alpha
adult. All credit to Loner Wolf, at least he had the incite to see that
things were amiss and stand up about it, belonging much more in the
alpha role than Jure definitely.
WF
SONICIDE
better luck debating astrophysics with a rock.
WF
D. Saunders
storytellers night I felt the breeze of life, and I saw the rays of
sign, reflecting all divine.
>theres no sence in trying to debate an issue with snuh. You'd have
>better luck debating astrophysics with a rock.
those Are Spankin Words.
---
Close to eternity
I spread my wings and fly
Like from a distant age
I rule and you obey
Kings will be kings
Pawns will be pawns
Aeons of tears
Wild and severe
Blessed be the young
Strong enough to bear
What before long
Will come, Will be, Will never disappear
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah
> > Fascinating how he claims to care for wild dogs and yet dosent care for
> > wild dogs...simultaneously!!!
>
> Snuh, you are an idiot. At least Jure can respond politely.
Everybody is entitled to his own oppinion. However, you have to admit
his is funny (when not joking on your account at least)!
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<uuid3qi...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
>"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:asb645$otvo2$1...@ID-137945.news.dfncis.de...
>> Raab <spamless...@nospam.chartermi.net> scribbled
>> illegibly<uug244f...@corp.supernews.com>:
>>
>> >
>> >"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:as8c2j$ohncr$1...@ID-137945.news.dfncis.de...
>> >> Raab <spamless...@nospam.chartermi.net> scribbled
>> >> illegibly<uucpmc1...@corp.supernews.com>:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"§ñühwØLf" <snuhwo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> >
>> >> >> Then explain why exit polls sometimes predict the wrong outcomes of
>> >> >elections
>> >> >
>> >> >Sometimes. Usually they are accurate.
>> >> >
>> >> Didnt watch the Bush Gore election much?
>> >
>> >The exit polls for most of the states (aside from Florida and a couple
>> >others) predicated accurately how that state went.
>> >
>> Like I said: you didnt watch the election very closely...CNN announced
>that
>> Gore had won FloriDUH.
>> HTH
>
>LIKE I SAID: Aside from Florida. You must have the reading comprehension
>of a fifth grader.
>
Nicely dodged....then you agree with me that exit polls can be wrong?
TIA
>> >People can go back and read my post. If they are even following this,
>they
>> >will know that I wasn't "post editting" just to make myself look better.
>>
>> Denial is your only option at this point I see...
>
>Nice dodge.
>
Nice PKB :O)
>>
>> >You said that saying "raised in the wild" is using an oxymoron, then you
>use
>> >it anyway. That's all I was pointing out right there.
>> >
>>
>> Now you're attributing your text as _mine_?
>> Wow...you're not just a Liar, you're a compulsive Liar :O)
>
>Go back and look at your post. You used the phrase "raised in the wild."
>Jeez, you're not just a liar, you're a compulsive liar.
>Here is the original text from the post
>news:as5jbe$nttt7$1...@ID-137945.news.dfncis.de
>
>---------
>"Raised in the wild" now if thats not an oxymoron...
>
Grep for me some more OWNED ONE :O)
BTW, you still didnt answer my question.
>
>>I didn't bother predicting how dogs in extreme
>>circumstances would react because that's not what was in question.
>
>Id say being raised in the wild is an extreme circumstance.
>---------
>
>So you're saying that the text outside of the > was mine?
>
So you've decided to continue with the creative post-editing lames?
Gee...I'd never have guessed that.
>
>> How original to borrow my lames.But hey...youre already attributing your
>text
>> as mine so why not make it a double?
>
>See above, idiot. I was attributing your text as yours. Anyway, you knew
>what the point of that was anyway.
Honey, at this point even you don't understand what this is about.
> You pointed out a supposed error of mine
Which you'll of course deny...
>which you were wrong about. If you are going to be a grammar/spelling nazi,
>I can be one too.
>
Wow...I've been called a 'nazi' on Usenet...guess the point goes to me then by
default :O)
>> You implied that you are not were and specifically stated that you are
>here not
>> for spiritual discussions of therianthropy but for the horror movie and
>fiction
>> aspect of the NG.
>> HTH
>
>You ASSume too much. I said right out that I was not wolf. Now if I was
>claiming not to be a were, wouldn't I have just said "I am not were" instead
>of saying "I am not wolf."
>
You claim to know what it is for others "not to be were yet not be one
yourself". Because you read some stuff on a NG.
Kewl :O)
>> >> >> > Usually they would find other dogs and try to get those dogs to
>> >> >> >join them.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You have no clue as to how heirarchies work do you?
>> >> >
>> >> >I have a fairly good idea how some hierarchies work. These dogs would
>> >come
>> >> >to our yard quite often, trying to get out dogs to dig out of the
>fence.
>> >> >When they did, the wild dogs did not kill them. They just took off
>and
>> >then
>> >> >our dogs showed back up a while later.
>> >> >
>> >> Hows that prove dominance and submissiveness? Sounds like dogs playing.
>> >
>> >The first sentence is independent of the rest of the paragraph. That was
>> >simply a reply to your comment, then the rest of the paragraph was a
>> >clarification on the sentence which you were responding to.
>> >
>>
>> Still cant answer my questions: same old same old.
>> Dogs just playing it is then :O)
>
>Because the question was not relevant.
Translation: "I cant answer it so its not relevant".
HTH
> I was not saying that the dogs
>"playing" was proving dominance and submission. Try reading up above in the
>Halloween: The Truth is Out There thread. Someone, I think Wanderer,
>posted some links that had some good stuff about dogs and their societal
>structure. You might get a clue.
>
You claimed that wild dogs had heirarchies and that you understood them.All
this without your studying animal-behavior in school because its supposedly not
a part of the cirriculum.
Too funny.
>> >> >There are plenty of other animals out in the state forest. The dogs
>also
>> >> >were known to occasionally tear into trash left by the road for
>pickup.
>> >> >
>> >> So if the 'wild-dogs' were eating wild animals why wern't they eating
>your
>> >tame
>> >> dogs? Since they are killing things.
>> >> Hmmm...
>> >
>> >Because the 'tame dogs' are part of the same species. Obviously, they
>eat
>> >prey animals.
>> >
>>
>> And so now you're saying that dogs wont kill & eat each other?
>> You are an idiot.
>
>No, just that it isn't as common as you made it sound. (that they kill and
>eat every dog they come across)
Backpeddaling...
>> Else how come when dogs get loose and form
>a pack out in the woods or wherever, the pack grows as more dogs come in.
>If things were like you said, it would be three dogs at most and a bunch of
>dog corpses.
>
Argument by extremes.You said that wild dogs dont eat other dogs.Now you say
they do.
Which is it?
>> Still cant explain how dead dogs could come back could you?
>> Feel free to dodge & weave some more :O)
>
>What the hell? Dead dogs don't come back, just like I said. Have you
>watched Night of the Living Dead a few too many times?
>
You're the one who implied that they did.
Try again.
>> Then why would we know beforehand?
>
>You wouldn't.
>
So you can now read my mind as well as Jure's???
Wow...what are my lotto numbers for this week?
>> >It isn't a part of Wildlife Biology, though usually the courses in
>Wildlife
>> >Ecology are put into the WB curriculum because they are closely related.
>> >Just like how when you take Biology they typically make you take some
>> >Chemistry courses too. That doesn't mean that Biology = Chemistry.
>> >
>>
>> And this explains why behavior isn't a part of Wildlife Biology how?
>
>Because the actual class Wildlife Biology is not the same class as Wildlife
>Ecology. I don't understand why everything has to be spelled out for you.
>Are you just totally incapable of grasping the obvious?
>
Are you so incapable of telling the truth?
Oh yeah...my bad...you're a compulsive liar :O)
>> To survive???
>> Please try and keep up or we'll have to make you stand in the
>corner...again.
>
>Yeah, especially considering that the owner probably has a gun or is quite
>larger than the dog. Sure, that makes sense. Look, another straw man just
>fell.
>
Of your own construction :O)
>> >> >It will still run off whenever it gets the chance. Especially
>> >considering
>> >> >how a wild dog will be more accustomed to a pack structure and so it
>the
>> >> >owner of the house is not acting like an alpha, but still trying to be
>> >the
>> >> >boss, then the dog will have some problems.
>> >> >
>> >> Because its trying to kill its owner?
>> >
>> >Your statement doesn't make sense in this context. If a person catches a
>> >wild dog and tries to keep it as a pet AND does not give it a proper
>> >hierarchal
>>
>> WTF does "heirarchal" mean? I think you ment pack-order status.Are you
>sure
>> your studying _any_ sort of biology????
>
>I said hierarchal.
>Heirarchal. adj. Of or relating to a hierarchy
>Hierarchy. n. Categorization of a group of people according to ability or
>status.
>
>Understand now?
>
Iem amazed!!!! You actually bother'd to look up a word to lame me :O)
Dance for me some more.
>
>> >then obviously that dog will be aggressive. It will either end
>> >up biting someone or running off.
>> >
>>
>> Which is exactly what I stated before hand.
>> You're drool cup is full.
>
>No you didn't. You said the dog WOULD NOT run off, stupid. You said that
>the dog won't leave because it is being fed by the owners.
>
But you just said the owner has a gun and will kill any agressive dog.
Damn...do you ever make a solid stand on an issue?
BTW, the real issue is that the wild dogs are eating the tame ones.
FYI
HTH
>> You provided no solution to the problem of the wild dogs existence.
>> Therefore you are "callous and uncareing".
>
>Why did there need to be a solution? They were doing just fine.
>
But you tried to make us believe that wild dogs dont eat other dogs.What will
they eat then?
>> Perhaps...but you appear to be a liar on this NG :O)
>> BTW, you also just contradicted yourself.You said above that you did
>nothing
>> for the wild dogs: now you say you would do something for a wild dog.
>> Which is it?
>
>That is not a contradiction. I was saying that I only watched the wild
>dogs. They needed nothing.
How do you know? Read dog minds much? I bet you just intrinsically knew they
wern't hungry, right?
Cause you can read dog minds...
>However, if I was to hit one with my car, I
>would try to help it. There is no contradiction there.
>
Sure there is.If its wild and "needs nothing" why interfere in its free & wild
existence?
>> >Try checking dictionary.com, it should tell a little about each word and
>the
>> >usage. You'll see that I'm right.
>> >
>> DYOFDW. Still a liar I see, liar.
>
>Okay, so since I used the word correctly, I am a liar. Nice dodge. So you
>couldn't admit that you were mistaken?
>
No...since you cut out the relevant text and twist the words you are a liar.
HTH :O)
>> I was making a point about your statement that minority dosent count in
>this
>> country.I used the house & senate as examples.
>> Try again.
>
>Nope. I said that the minority can effect very little change.
Wrong: you said very clearly that "minority dosent count".
>Then you
>turned it into an ethnicity issue, which it wasn't.
Because you're not a minority and don't care...yeah...I believe that :O)
>I was discussing
>political groups which can only win anything by getting a majority vote.
>(actually having more votes than the others. Rarely do they get a majority
>vote, but more like 45% when they win)
>
Funny...you stated earlier that this isnt about politics...
Hmmmm...
>> Really? The voting roles clearly showed that some "deceased" people
>managed to
>> vote in FloriDUH.
>
>Are you sure? I never saw that on the news. If so then I was wrong about
>that particular thing.
>
They managed to write in from beyond!
>> >I was clearly referring to minority *interest* groups, which one could
>> >easily see by the context in which it was used. There are some political
>> >groups out there which are based on ethnicity, but most are based solely
>on
>> >political ideals. Groups with a large amount of the vote and a lot of
>> >support are usually in the majority. Groups that get very little support
>> >are minority interest groups. Understand now?
>> >
>>
>> So you agree with me that minority _does_ count in America?
>> Fine...I'm glad you see it my way :O)
>
>That wasn't your point. You were talking some crap about ethnicities, which
>is not what I was talking about. I was discussing political groups.
>Understand that yet? "Political group" is not a synonym for "ethnic group."
>
Because "minority dosent count"? Yeah...thanks for the heads up white-power
boi....
Lets all go to the back of the bus befo massuh starts whuppin on us!
>> >I did not say "This is what *I* think makes one a were." I said all
>along
>> >that I was using logic from another person and applying it to that
>person.
>> >
>>
>> Damn! We finally have a certified Mind Reader in our fine NG!
>> Alert the press...
>
>Where did I say I read someone's mind? Like I stated REPEATEDLY: I read
>someone's post, they said some stuff, I used the stuff they said and applied
>it to them. Reading text does not require any psychic abilities.
>
So you believe everything you read on Usenet? And then extrapolate from there?
Heh...I have some prime swampland for you to buy.
But you still read dog-minds right?
>> >By what people here have said being a were is. Course if you go by the
>> >common myths, a were is not what people here consider it to be, but
>ignoring
>> >that, if you check what most people around here or anywhere else online
>say,
>> >they will say that a were is a person who has the instincts of their
>> >phenotype either instead of or in conjunction with their human ones.
>> >
>>
>> Nicely g00gled & unattributed...so how do _you_ know what it means to be a
>> were?Not what Joe or Bubba knows.
>
>Like I said, the only way I know what people here consider a 'were' is by
>what people here have described it to be. Here. Didn't really need google
>for that, since it's been posted here quite a few times while I was lurking.
>
So you're saying that just by reading text on a NG you can tell that Jure isn't
a were...even though you yourself havent declaired exactly what _your_ status
is...although you say something like, " I'm not a wolf..."
Hmmmm...and you havent studied any animal behavior in school either.
Yeah...you're PERFECTLY qualified to make those judgements :O)
>> >
>> >Yeah, and I told you that I was using the outline that he posted.
>> >
>> So _you_ dont know what it means to be a were; but you think you
>understand
>> because you read some stuff that Joe & Bubba wrote?
>> Wow...so you think you know that Jure isnt were after reading some text.
>> Brilliant...pure Genius!
>
>I didn't say I KNOW he isn't. I just stated I was not fully convinced. Go
>read the second post in response to Jure. That is what I said.
>
How does fully convinced now mean anything but; "I doubt"?
You used to advise Bill Clinton on the meaning of "is" huh?
>> >I never said "I am not a were." Provide a link to the post where I said
>> >this.
>> >
>> Its been implied all along.And DYOFDW...
>
>Not really. Like I said above, if I was claiming not to be a were, I would
>have said "I am not were" instead of saying "I am not wolf." Which implies
>that I am a were but of a different phenotype - at least to anyone who
>thinks logically.
>
Why all the secrecy then? Cant decide what designer phenotype you want to be
yet?
Gee...whats in fashion this season...
I think you're a liar....thats what _I_ think :O)
>> the burden of proof is on someone "who
>> dosent know what it means to be a were, but read some stuff about it on
>the
>> net".
>
>Well where did you learn about it? Oh, from the net. Wow.
>
PPOR.
CITE.
Wrong....as usual.My history here is well documented....
~Prince Snuhwolf~
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<uuiahqh...@corp.supernews.com>:
So only people who "respond politely" are telling the truth?
Wow...amazing!
Whats fido thinking now?
~Prince Snuhwolf~
§ñühwØLf
illegibly<3DEA1D1C...@sonicide.com>:
> I guess Jure is just as nasty to other people that don't agree with
him
> also.
> Remember he HAS to be alpha around here ,his instinct dictated it too
> him.
>
> INSTINCT: Jure take this down...
> JURE: Ready when you are GQ!
> INSTINCT: You are to go to AHWW and make a name for yourself. You
must
> go and act like a total rude asshole.
Kamatu is laughing his ass off at you right now I bet.
~Prince Snuhwolf~