But kobbie--I heard those kids were middle-eastern. God is great, eh?
Dead tiger bigger victim than dead man?
- Thread starter Turbo
- Start date
Of course!!!
Animal rights activists cannot fathom that maybe, just maybe, this tiger was out of control! The tiger did in fact threaten other people at the zoo that day and the tiger did in fact eat the arm off a zoo employee last December.
Read this quote carefully....
"In our heart of hearts, we all know something happened that day to provoke the tiger," San Francisco Deputy City Attorney Sean Connolly said in court"
TRANSLATION: We are going to make sure we exonerate this animal from any wrong doing and place all the blame on the evil, evil humans! Uh... they were drunk and they were taunting the tiger!!! How do we know? There was a bottle of alcohol in their car!! :doh:
C
cattyfan
Guest
How should the tiger behave around what it considers to be prey?
Again: the idiots who were drunk and throwing things at the animal were out of line...and the zoo is at fault for not having a safe enclosure. The animal behaved normally.
Every visitor to the zoo is prey for a tiger.
It will be interesting to see if there is actually any real evidence that shows these guys were trowing things at this tiger.
To me it sounds like animal rights nut-balls trying to smear these kids so the tiger looks like the innocent victim.
C
cattyfan
Guest
:chew:
C
cattyfan
Guest
something about that smilie's hamster-like cheeks reminds me of John McCain...
I will say this....
If it turns out that these tree guys actually helped the tiger out of it's cage, then they got what they deserved. HOWEVER, if it turns out that was not the case then clearly this is another instance of animal-nuts trying to make the animal look innocent and the humans look guilty (as usual).
If it turns out that these tree guys actually helped the tiger out of it's cage, then they got what they deserved. HOWEVER, if it turns out that was not the case then clearly this is another instance of animal-nuts trying to make the animal look innocent and the humans look guilty (as usual).
yeshuafreak76
New member
I'm not saying they got what they deserve, because no human being deserves to die(except pedophiles and rapists). However, keeping the second most dangerous land born predator in a cage and expecting it to act domesticated is irrational thinking.
I get real suspicious when I hear people say things like this....
"Jack Hanna said that since zoo tigers are well fed, it is unlikely the animal was looking for food when it got out. "Were they taunting the animal?" he said. "Were they throwing things that were making it angry?"
It sure seems to me that they are looking for a reason to blame to humans - those evil humans!!!! :madmad:
I wonder if Jack Hanna thinks the zoo-keeper was "taunting the tiger" when that same tiger ate a zoo-keepers arm off in December 2006. :think:
"Jack Hanna said that since zoo tigers are well fed, it is unlikely the animal was looking for food when it got out. "Were they taunting the animal?" he said. "Were they throwing things that were making it angry?"
It sure seems to me that they are looking for a reason to blame to humans - those evil humans!!!! :madmad:
I wonder if Jack Hanna thinks the zoo-keeper was "taunting the tiger" when that same tiger ate a zoo-keepers arm off in December 2006. :think:
Who knows what triggers a wild animal's provocation? That's why they call them wild. What triggered the provocation that injured the tiger-trainer on the stage in Las Vegas? My TRANSLATION is that wild animals get provoked.
Some people see this through a narrow context and claim that the animal is blameless and the human is at fault or else they claim the animal is at fault and the humans are blameless. Your "TRANSLATION" is no translation. It says more about your own agenda than it does about what the city attorney said (which, knowing the way wild animals are--it is the truth. Something happened and the tiger got provoked).
Other people see the tragedy through the context of people getting mauled by a tiger which is a beautiful animal that is on the endangerd species list. There is no "anti-human agenda here." That's a little silly, don't you agree? Maybe an "anti-ignorant" agenda, though!
Otherwise, the song could not apply to women.
Apparently you haven't met Jeff Foxworthy's gramma. :shocked:
yeshuafreak76
New member
I understand, but no one should be surprised when something like this happens. Animals, predators particularly, are violent. Animals like tigers, lions, bears and wolves should never be displayed for public amusement.
But kobbie--I heard those kids were middle-eastern. God is great, eh?
Well, sure. As long as they were moolims, or blacks, or liberals....
Did the tiger eat Sousa? No, it didn't.
It certainly looks like there is some evidence they may have.
Boy, now you really have me confused. I thought humans were evil, sinful creatures. Or do you know for a fact that Sousa and friends were in Christ? And if so, wouldn't you have to accept this as an act of God?
Here's the official version:
eveningsky339
New member
It's certainly unfortunate for the tiger, who was only acting on instinct, but there is no comparison with a human life.
Da poor kitty...
Da poor kitty...
Last edited:
Sure--everyone says that until they're the tiger.
I wonder what tiger tastes like... :chew:
If you give a gun to Doogie Talons, and Doogie Talons shoots somebody; do you blame Doogie Talons?? :think:
Last edited: