 | | Re: Good (!) editorial from Canada PLEASE READ (done)
|
| In lugnet.loc.pt, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes: (snipped) (...) Eh eh, I wrote just about the same concerning Airbus (I did not read your post until i posted mine...). There is a catch, though: The earthquake. It was 5 years after the writer's (...) (23 years ago, 12-Sep-01, to lugnet.loc.pt, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Good (!) editorial from Canada PLEASE READ (done)
|
| (...) Surely you realize that San Francisco has had earthquakes before 1989? Also, technically the 1989 quake wasn't centered in San Francisco, but in Loma Prieta, certainly close enough to be felt. (URL) could have been referring to the 1906 quake, (...) (23 years ago, 12-Sep-01, to lugnet.loc.pt, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Good (!) editorial from Canada PLEASE READ (done)
|
| (...) Sure, I realize that. And discarded that chance. In 1906 WHO ON EARTH could have responded to tha SF earthquake with help (in useful time, that is)??? If he was talking about that quake, he is far more innocent than I thought... Besides, was (...) (23 years ago, 12-Sep-01, to lugnet.loc.pt, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Good (!) editorial from Canada PLEASE READ (done)
|
| (...) Not a catch. He's referring to 1906--although, to be honest, that's not much different functionally from mentioning the Chicago Fire. That would definitely be one of those naive points. It's definitely a 1973 production, though. I found more (...) (23 years ago, 12-Sep-01, to lugnet.loc.pt, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Good (!) editorial from Canada PLEASE READ (done)
|
| (...) (snipped) (...) Amazing! I thought by that time (1973) knowledge of history was more widespread... the commentator should have known that NOONE might have helped back in 1906 (or the Chicago Fire for that matter, which I believe was around the (...) (23 years ago, 13-Sep-01, to lugnet.loc.pt, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
