 | | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) The sad thing is that Economic sanctions barely harm those that make the nations decisions. Any person in goverment or in a powerful position will still get their fine food, medical facilities and luxury goods. Thats a fact about such corrupt (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: New Brickbay promotion
|
|
(...) What if you're overcharged for a low-quality load of gypsum? 8^) (...) And here I was afraid you were trying to sneak in some Nazi propaganda! 8^) Anyway, I wasn't able to type the umlaut so it came through the same! You crystallized it for (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: New Brickbay promotion
|
|
(...) Dave, I *know* you're smarter than this. You know well the difference between the semantic load of "gypsum" (if there is one, outside of East Tawas, MI, where it indicates employment ;) ) and that of "gypping" (or "Gypsy"). (...) What's so (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Reply sent privately. Re: New Brickbay promotion
|
|
In lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, William R. Ward writes: <SNIP> Notice is given to all that a reply was sent in private. Paul Sinasohn LUGNET #115 (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) That's an entirely different subject. My point is to allow Iraq to function as country by lifting the sanctions that have destroyed the nations infrastructure and demoralized and destroyed the lives of so many innocent people. (...) There's an (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We may all be Lego collectors, but Lego isn't a Beanie-Baby style collectable
|
|
(...) 100% pure bullsh*t my friend, but you will think as you wish. By rephrasing it, you changed the meaning for your selfish purposes, not for the greater need of understanding. If you were intent on understanding, you wouldn't throw in the little (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Etymological Oddities (was Re: New Brickbay promotion)
|
|
(...) Maggie C. (who would be living testament to the notion that the memory is the first to go except that I've always been this way! Oh, wait, I hope I'm not offending anyone with my use of the word TESTAMENT!) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) American groups working for political or social change. What exactly they were advocating isn't important to my point. (...) No, I count noses in fest pictures. It may be an invalid inference from that to the makeup of lugnet as a whole but (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Since I share Bruce's misgivings on this subject, I'll mention a few thoughts, too. The validity or invalidity of the LP's views is, of course, wholly independent of the racial, cultural, age, or gender makeup of the party, but that's not what (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Ok, what is SCLC or AIM? (...) How do you know that we are more white - you only assume (as I do). That is not really the question (LUGNET does not attempt to represent the views of society). The question is : Why is the LP so "white"? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Ok, what is SCLC or AIM? (...) How do you know that we are more white - you only assume (as I do). Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Why? Was the message of the SCLC less valid because SCLC members were mostly black? Was the message of AIM less valid because AIM was mostly native american? I resent the implication that groups need to be "ethnically balanced" to have valid (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Well, heck--you've met pretty much the entire Party. (URL) Dave! (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Thanks for the pointer. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: New Brickbay promotion
|
|
(...) I imagine some will get similarly upset when I refer to gypsum. If people are willing to go to such preposterous etymological lengths to be offended, I'd like to point out that every time someone "testifies" in court or elswhere, that person (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
|
(...) So if a business, American or otherwise, trades with Iraq, selling food, tools, whatever, and they make lots of money -- is that bad or good? Are they economic imperialists? Are they exploiting the Iraqis? What about buying oil from Iraq? Does (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Etymological Oddities (was Re: New Brickbay promotion)
|
|
(...) I think it was taken fairly seriously--not as a veiled slur but as a matter of public embarrassment resulting in an offer of resignation by the "offending" party: (URL) In any case, I'm offended by your invocation of Hitler in your use of the (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Yes and no. "Coloured" (sic: colored <g>) is a really poor term that isn't particularly used in America. It carries the implication that europeans are "normal" and others are not. In the sense Larry meant it, I agree. But in the sense that you (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Avoiding the question I think. Interestingly, I searched for "militia libertarian racist" on google and it came up with this site: (URL) you search that page for occurrences of "libertarian" you will see that I was not all wrong. Scott A (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We may all be Lego collectors, but Lego isn't a Beanie-Baby style collectable
|
|
(...) Thanks for that clarification. Rephrasing it, what I see you saying is that you're never wrong about anything, or at least never willing to admit it, and that you never misstate anything, or at least never see any need to ever correct anything (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
