Keith Schiffner - No records found

<> in part<> But okay (since your argument has come up "short"), I've
got a .44 magnum and a bunch of medals and awards won with it during
years of competitive shooting. And I've not only shot targets; decades
of big-game [1] hunting experience as well that posturing, bragging
little poseurs of your ilk secretly pray they had.<>road Glider Don<>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
they're getiing more and more info out of Don. (I'd be careful)! I'm
just looking and reading......roaming along.....

‹›‘Ride.When.ya.Can’›››BJAY›››

 

<> in part<> But okay (since your argument has come up "short"), I've
got a .44 magnum and a bunch of medals and awards won with it during
years of competitive shooting. And I've not only shot targets; decades
of big-game [1] hunting experience as well that posturing, bragging
little poseurs of your ilk secretly pray they had.<>road Glider Don<>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
they're getiing more and more info out of Don. (I'd be careful)! I'm
just looking and reading......roaming along.....

<>'Ride.When.ya.Can'>>>BJAY>>>

ssssshhhhh.. Bjay.. Since he's coming down to Texas later this summer,
anyway.. all that personal info isn't necessary.. The "Showboat" knows that
it's too damn cold up there for a shore'nuff Texas boy to want anything in
that place, bad enuff to make a trip like that.. Sheesh.. once is all I need
to recognize a place I'll stay away from..

That ol' "top of the food chain" boy don't need any enemies, he's the worst
one he's got..LOL..

Your friend in Irving
Bill Walker

 

At the rate we're working on old Road Plow, within a few days he'll be
saying YOU made him hit that poor overweight native woman pedestrian!

I told you in the very beginning that if this dude was the top of the food
chain up there, that's not giving the rest of them any credit! Actually, I
believe in equal opportunity....Canuck Don is just as stupid!

 

(Road Glidin' Don) wrote in @news.individual.net:

Oh jeeze... You guys *ARE* going to be swapin' spit after all, eh?

 

(Road Glidin' Don) wrote in @news.individual.net:

Yah... The folks that did that are still alive today, aren't they?

 

Well, well. I guess that, once the Jewish numbers have rebounded to
pre-WWII levels, the holocaust will also be an exaggeration of
historians too, then!

--
Instead of swerving, I should have been reloading
(remove _NO_SPAM_ to reply)

98 FLTRI
83 Nighthawk

Share yourself: http://xidos.ca/XManager/ReekyLogin.asp
To register: http://xidos.ca/OrgUserEdit.asp?OrgCode=REEKY_MOTO
Home page: http://xidos.ca/scripts/Personal/
Alaska trip: http://xidos.ca/scripts/Personal/Alaska/

 

Since when did I call you an anti-Semite? I'm simply demonstrating
the obvious weakness of an argument that supposes, since the numbers
of a people who were allegedly devastated are now higher than they
were prior to the alleged incident, it proves nothing.

The genocide (and that probably is an apt label for it) occurred well
over a hundred years ago, so there's been lots of time for their
numbers to increase since then. Since it's probably quite reasonable
to suppose that, given the same amount of time, the Jewish population
will also have fully rebounded, what the **** kind of proof is that?

In fact, it smacks more of garden-variety denial and excuse-making,
saying it's not so bad what was done back then because now the natives
have more technology and better medicine available to them. Shit,
that should make it all alright, then!

--
Instead of swerving, I should have been reloading
(remove _NO_SPAM_ to reply)

98 FLTRI
83 Nighthawk

Share yourself: http://xidos.ca/XManager/ReekyLogin.asp
To register: http://xidos.ca/OrgUserEdit.asp?OrgCode=REEKY_MOTO
Home page: http://xidos.ca/scripts/Personal/
Alaska trip: http://xidos.ca/scripts/Personal/Alaska/

 

Well, the 2000 USA census had 4.1 million respondents claiming to be
Native, or partly so. The 1997 Canadian census shows 800,000 aboriginal
people. That's less than 5 million by the most liberal estimate. The
most conservative estimate I've been able to find about the precolumbian
population is 1.15 million north of Mexico; other estimates go as high
as 18 million. The 1.15 million number was arrived at early in the 20th
century, and a more modern day conservative estimate is 3.79 million.
Using that estimate, the Whitney Library exhibit is correct. Note,
however, that the Native population north of the Rio Grande circa 1900
was ~400,000. In the four hundred years after the arrival of Europeans,
the population had fallen by 90%.

http://nambnativeministries.org/demographic_2000.html
http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/naind/html/na_030500_precontactto.htm

--
Al Brennan

"Great googa mooga, can't you hear me talkin' to ya?"

'98 FLTRI - Laser Red Pearl
'98 T409 EN - British Racing Green
'83 GR650 - Krylon Red
'57 6T - Black owl tuna at hot mail dot com
http://www.xmission.com/motorbike/NART/nart.html