 | | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
|
(...) Is that the thing where Israel have shot dead a bunch of kids, bombed homes and carried out assasinations? How does that show the PLO is "far worse"? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok, why such anti-American sentiment? (Was Re: the metric system)
|
|
(...) Point taken. Of course, Australia has never been in a position to establish world-wide military and economic hegemony. I'm not saying it has been wrong of the US to do so, but while the moral and political questions are similar the global (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
|
(...) And....? I believe intifadah means "uprising" so what are the Palistinians rising up against? Still wondering how the PLO is "far worse" than the Israeli government? Here's some food for thought: (URL) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
|
Lar, I read your post about what a terrorist is: "I would tend to say it's a person or group using violence against bystanders as a way to make a political point or get a political outcome." By your definition, here's a list of "terrorists" for you: (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) *Now* we're getting somewhere, and you may be surprised to learn that on this point you and I are in complete agreement! A non-guvmint-funded club is absolutely free to accept or reject members as it sees fit; it can refuse membership on basis (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
|
(...) The intifadah. ++Lar (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
|
(...) Good question. I gave my definition in this post: (URL) about the second or third para down. To your point about soldier==terrorist and vice versa, I agree that the perception sometimes runs that way. But that's at least in part an effect of a (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
I am trying to let this all slide by, because, by my read of the traffic in .michlug, there is a consensus among the MICHLUG members that have spoken up on the specific issue. That consensus is exactly what I hoped it would be... It is not (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) That is right. However, I have seen at least 3 people post saying that they are not 100% about MichLUG _as a club_ doing this show. This is not limiting your options, go form Mich_Cath_LUG if you really want to, that would acchive the same (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
Okay Dave, Now let’s talk about freedom. Clubs in the United States are FREE to do what they wish. If the club is a private club then it should be FREE to endorse what ever it chooses. If the club wants to reject members it has every right to do so. (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) James far as i'm concerned you hit the nail on the head about this whole subject.We just want to have fun and show off our bricks. (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) Then you undeniably don't realize what I'm debating, either. Once again, I couldn't care less about MICHLUG per se; I'm discussing the problem of implicit endorsement by a club, not all of whose members share the same attitudes, interests, or (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
|
(...) Those have long been a problem. I can agree with respect to "UK" not being the common usage; however, the official usage dates from that period, and in the records it's standard from 1800 even when the records are informal (although the (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Inter-racial, Inter-religious, Inter-national relationships
|
|
(...) There is no reason why any of the above are wrong. All humans are compatible, given the right circumstances. Personally, i doubt that i'd marry someone who was not already of my faith before we met because the particular sort of compatibility (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
I've been trying to resist chiming in on this topic, but I wanted to add my two cents and share a recent experience with a local church. A few months back there was a post in the LUGNET local Atlanta Georgia (USA) newsgroup from a person looking to (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok, why such anti-American sentiment? (Was Re: the metric system)
|
|
(...) America should not have invaded Vietnam. My question involving Australia's involvement in Vietnam was rhetorical. My point was that America isn't the only nation to have gone to war in modern times for reasons that are not for clear- cut (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: MichLUG Items in Debate not Appropriate
|
|
To all, I don’t think Scott needs to apologize for anything. If the local food store (Meijer in my case) would give food to the Catholic Church to feed poor people. Would that mean Meijer is endorsing the Catholic Church? What it means is that (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| |
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
|
(...) I thought this was supposed to be hypothetical, not rhetorical... =oP Plus I plead the 5th, or maybe the 9th -- whatever gets me out of the trouble of having to answer this one... (...) Did he really write this? Was this the motivation behind (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
|
(...) All of this depends on our definition of "terrorist". The best example I can give us is George Washington. We see him as an American hero, a general who led soldiers against an oppressive British monarchy. Now, the British saw him as a (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
|
(...) Please define "terrorist". Dan (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
