To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *11006 (-20)
  Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
 
(...) I think you need to read your own wording. "Since we all must share this one small world for the next billion years" Those are YOUR words. Do you seriously believe this? Can you be so pessimistic about our progress as to think we'll still be (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Libertarian Propaganda
 
(...) It is an interesting read. Thanks for the URL. (...) You have quite an attitude about this, don't you? Well, I don't have proof. What I have is hundreds of conversations on the matter and an overall impression that across demographics, most (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
 
(...) Maybe you should note the lack of capitalization in the word libertarian. As there is wide variety within the LP, there is even wider variety in the stances of those who could reasonably call themselves 'libertarian.' Thomas Jefferson approved (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Libertarian Propaganda
 
I have to dig into Matt's last post and this one in more depth... right now i have time only to say one thing... (...) This seems to be a GREAT site, thanks for digging it up, KoC (King of Cites.. er, maybe that's not the best acronym... how about (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
 
(...) I subscribe to Consumer Reports and I read it (ahem) religiously. More information is good. I tend to favor buying products that have more information on them. I think food labels ought to be accurate and complete. Any producer that puts a (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
 
(...) no definately not monolithic... we come in all shapes and sizes... :) (...) As an aside, if we as consumers wanted to have full disclosure on the ingredients of a product and/or the source of those ingredients, should the food producers (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
 
(...) Can you provide cites on this? (...) How successful are you at this Daniel? I try to as much as I can. I'm curious about your attempts. Reply offline if you would like. (...) I seriously thought about this when I learned LEGO was shutting down (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
 
(...) I don't know enough about the "veg" movement (if it is indeed monolithic, which I doubt) to say for sure. I'll say this much about my own personal feelings on the matter, which are partly derived from first principles (but not completely, (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
 
(...) that's a good policy.... (...) I'm curious if the "veg" movement and libertarianism are mutually exclusive? I believe you said in a previous thread that you tried to switch your diet once, so I don't think so... just wondering. -chris (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
 
(...) Might theoretically be simplest but I doubt it. Better: Drop the sanctions, drop restrictions on private individuals giving aid, and let his own people do it. What Bush I did to the Iraqi opposition, leading them on, then leaving them out to (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
 
(...) On the attack again, Daniel? Calling something a ridiculous notion is hardly an insult, it's just a characterization of the notion itself. The very idea that someone might find fault with something you say gets to you, doesn't it? Here I (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  McViegh is no Libertarian
 
Snipping all but one statement away to make a key point. (...) Judge outcomes not statements... This creature is no more libertarian than Scott Arthur is. Maybe he forgot the pledge he signed about not initiating the use of force? Maybe he didn't (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: McViegh, Libertarian, and Vegans (aka What a Party!)
 
Wow! Truly a surrealistic reading. Hard to agree with the words of a mass-murderer but, objectively speaking, there were some interesting points brought up. Thanks, Chris. Dan (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
 
(...) Ridiculous? What gives with the insults, Tom? Have I done something wrong to you? Mind your tone and read it again. "Everything that has ever happened or will ever happen with mankind" as in everything we do begins here on this planet. This is (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Libertarian Propaganda
 
Before reading this post in reply to Christopher Weeks reply to my reply to Larry Pieniazek's original post, please read my reply to Larry's reply to my reply to his original post here: (URL) . It will help solidify all of my post here. Warning, the (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Libertarian Propaganda (was incorrectly referred to as SPAM elsewhere in the thread)
 
Warning! I am replying to Larry Pieniazek here! Of course, that means lots of quoted text is included to keep the context clear, and this post is a doozy! You have been warned! (...) *sniff* I feel SO special *sob* (gently wipes small tear of (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  McViegh, Libertarian, and Vegans (aka What a Party!)
 
The following appears in the July 2001 issue of Harper's Magazine on page 20. It's McViegh's response to a guy from PETA who asked McViegh to make a political statement by having a vegan last meal. I thought it would be interesting to post here in (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
 
Yeah, let's do it RIGHT - drop the sanctions, and assassinate the bastard. That's the simplest fix ;-) (...) -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
 
(...) Where do you get this ridiculous notion from? Are you SERIOUSLY going to tell me you think we'll never get off this planet in the next billion years? I suppose you believe we haven't really been to the moon already? (...) That isn't going to (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
 
(...) Seems so, according to that one report and I don't doubt for a minute that Saddam wouldn't take the money from the so-called "oil-for-food" program to build palaces and let Iraqis suffer. Even if this report were 100% true, it doesn't change (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR