| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
(...) OK, why did this stutter? Web interface was fixed to prevent char for char dups, I thought. Sorry about that peeps. (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Not Cricket (was Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
(...) Not ever even playing you... now that *in itself* proves our superiority. BTW you set FUT wrong... the very IDEA of Cricket is laughable so this is FUT .fun ++Lar (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
|
| | The value of environmental assets (was Re: not sure what to call this)
|
|
(...) I think it's both actually: (...) Yes, this is exactly the problem. It was solved in Antarctica by dividing up among nations that were close or had 'discovered' it and this has worked mainly because they also all agreed to leave the natural (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
(...) I'm certainly not *happy* to see it, but the alternatives are less just, in the specific instance and in the long term effects on society. (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
(...) I'm certainly not *happy* to see it, but the alternatives are less just, in the specific instance and in the long term effects on society. (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | The value of environmental assets (was Re: not sure what to call this)
|
|
(...) I think it's both actually: (...) Yes, this is exactly the problem. It was solved in Antarctica by dividing up among nations that were close or had 'discovered' it and this has worked mainly because they also all agreed to leave the natural (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) You know what, Scott? You are absolutely right. That text IS worth the read and anyone who is wondering if the Guardian harbors fools or fellow travelers or not ought to go read it and carefully think about the bile that this author spews. (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GL3vzG.1zB@lugnet.com... (...) There is no way that the US can be considered better than the UK. Name me one time ever you beat us at Cricket. lawrence (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) And introduced several *other* bills designed to help root it out as well. From this vantage, those other bills, what I know of them (which is little), may well be MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE measures. I freely admit I cannot quote chapter and verse (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GL3uJ3.L3D@lugnet.com... (...) Even though you are happy to see the son suffer for the sins of his father? lawrence (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
Snipped everything I agree with, and the comments on the remaining should be viewed somewhat lightheartedly... (...) Well of course you do. You DID see my humility score, right? The US IS the best country in the world, but not to worry, the UK is (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
(...) Excellent point. Without wanting to appear like I am cavilling I wish people would stand back and think about how they would think had they not been so fortunate to be born in their native land. I see a hint of arrogance in Larry's assertion (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
(...) Yeh, I can't get with that scorn. It's not like the British legal system is some paragon of virtue and morality--tort law alone does not the entire US justice system make! (...) <ramble> There *is* a culture-specific reason why the (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: We are letting the terrorists win
|
|
(...) I will be getting on planes this Autumn - several of them. But I admit to being a little bit nervous flying out of Baltimore. james (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) First, that doesn't mean that we owe Bush and his administration blind obedience. Thank God we still have a republic. I'm glad that there are dissenters in the audience (1), even if I disagree with them, because it prevents gestapoism (2). (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
(...) Agreed. (...) Agreed again. (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
(...) I will offer that if apologies are to made over colonial history, then we really do owe the Canadians an apology for the sacking of York (Toronto) during the War of 1812. (1) Up until that time (as I understand it) there was much sentiment on (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: I've lost a fan! LOL! ;-)
|
|
(...) I'm laughing off my ass ... you have my sympathy, Mladen. I am so happy this guy apparently did not discover my own little website. After all, I release boring new 'Mechs in WEEKLY intervals, and they all look the same ... ;) Primus BuS LEGO (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | We are letting the terrorists win
|
|
This weeks headlines Cancelled events Cancelled sporting events Sportspeople reluctant to travel People reluctant to attend events Insurers refusing to cover the Soccer World Cup Insurance rates soaring People reluctant to travel Consumers not (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) Hmmm... I believe Bush said something to the effect of "you will be our ally and help us root out terrorism or you side with terrorism and are the enemy" Not a direct quote, this is the crux of it. Paul has voted against a bill designed to (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
(...) I don't send Christmas cards, I'm not christian. But you won't be getting a Winter Solstice card either, no. (...) Charitably, we even extend that right to foreigners (speaking on American soil, which this venue is an outpost of) such as (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Liberterian comes through for the Bill of Rights (was a slur
|
|
(...) On the grounds that it may well be a flawed bill. I haven't found an article that cites which bill it is so it could be any of these: (from (URL) Bills from the 107th Congress ranked by relevance on"money laundering ". 42 bills containing your (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
(...) Larry: I'm glad that you spoke to Scott's comments. As soon as I read them yesterday, I tried to draft a reply that wasn't full of anger, but realized that I couldn't at the time, so I dropped it. I suppose that the jist of my reply to his (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
In a whispered tone : {Pst A quiet word in your ear. Be careful Larry. With all this fuss and noise people might think you have something to hide. They might think you are trying to hide that fact that you are failing to answer my points and that (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
(...) I see. (...) Do you agree with my words? lol. You make it sound like I've been trying to burn the thing since it was penned! (...) Tell that to the communists and Japanese Americans who per periscuted in the name of freedom in your fair land. (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | More on Airport security.
|
|
In (URL) makes the case some of us here have been making, starting with the example of two airlines, one "gun free" and the other "armed pilots and marshals" and suggesting that most rational passengers are going to choose the latter, given a (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
|
|
In: (URL) Arthur derides the US constitution with these words: (...) Well that "centuries old piece of paper" (parchment, actually) has kept us free, despite his scorn for it. Freer than he is, in fact, although he'll never admit it. He prefers to (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Mudslingers come through for the Big Lie (was: a slur
|
|
(...) You would know I suppose: (URL) A (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) Nope. Scott A (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Liberterian comes through for the Bill of Rights (was a slur
|
|
(...) On what grounds? (...) You are being silly. (...) I'm not saying that. I don't want to speak for Ed, but I don't think he is either. (...) 1. You are lacking logic. If Lego did not list those items but just give some $$ with no fuss, how would (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Mudslingers come through for the Big Lie (was: a slur
|
|
(...) LOL! I did indeed. james (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Mudslingers come through for the Big Lie (was: a slur
|
|
(...) Hit send too fast. This of course was a Typo Pounce(tm) as I am sure James meant to say "why not..." but it was too good to pass up. (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) Yes it *is* too much, without probable cause. You forget what we are fighting for. (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Mudslingers come through for the Big Lie (was: a slur
|
|
(...) Why indeed? Slinging mud first is so much easier and more fun. (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Liberterian comes through for the Bill of Rights (was a slur
|
|
(...) No. In fact we had a dustup in the past about whether he was or not and I was saying he was. (...) Yes I do dispute that. And even if it does help, which I dispute, it's not necessarily a good idea. We *could* pass a law requiring all airline (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
Sometimes sacrifices have to be made Larry. Innocent people are being sacrificed in Afghanistan right now as we speak. Our armed forces are already risking their lives, and some special ops guys (& gals?) *may* already have died. If this converts to (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) "coming through for them" and dissenting against a bill that you feel is not appropriate or effective for X reasons. Ed, do you know why he voted against that bill? Why do some homework before slinging mud? james (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Liberterian comes through for the Bill of Rights (was a slur
|
|
(...) I'm not sure about that. It looks like the guy is a liiberterian (do you dispute that?) and that this bill may help catch the bad guys (do you dispute that?). Scott A (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Liberterian comes through for the Bill of Rights (was a slur
|
|
Oh, and another thing, before you accuse others of calling names, you might want to avoid doing the same yourself, your subject line is a deliberate slur... unbacked by any fact (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) flows" doesn't mean it's a GOOD bill, or even that cutting money flows is what is going to be done. We have seen a LOT of 97-0 and 426-1 kind of votes lately, after rather little or no debate. Personally, John Ashcroft scares the jeepers out (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|