 | | Cheating (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
|
|
(...) The way to combat this is to not check for cheating at all during the courses of study. When it comes time to graduate, put the student through a three-day comprehensive essay exam (during which you do verify identification) and if their (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
I'm not really sure what this has to do with licensing, but it seemed fun... (...) Does the question mark mean that you are unsure if this is the American way of handling it? I'd have to say that it is not. Now, I wouldn't convict someone were I (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Palestine
|
|
I really should stay out of this one, but I'm weak. I don't think that many of our wars have been against a group of people, but rather violent usurpers who somehow manage to gather dedicated supporters. If we could simply walk in and take out the (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
(...) Or more likely, they were blessed with beneficial circumstances. (...) And here's the only problem with laissez faire. OF COURSE it isn't fair that those who are cleverer have more than those who are not. What deep misunderstanding of the (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Palestine
|
|
(...) Two articles I recall off the top of my head, one in "Time" and one in "Newsweek," as well as a lengthy documentary on the History Channel. On the web, here's a historian who has done extensive research on the matter. You actually have to take (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Standard of debate
|
|
Standard of debate I will be the first to admit that at times the standard of debate around here is very poor. My own personal dislike is subjectivity dressed up as objectivity. Others point out that the petty name calling is childish – I agree, but (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | This really is a low form of debate
|
|
(...) Larry, I can't believe you are calling be a liar again. This really is a low form of debate. Give an example of were I have lied. I challenge you. Do it or apologise. If I have lied, I will apologise. Once you have done that, answer these: Re: (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba is a terrorist state (was Re: Any truth in this one - Cuba as a terrostist state.
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GL6rMI.4nw@lugnet.com... (...) Or perhaps you could also ask the question how many sympathisers to thier cause do you need in the US government? Or how many votes might be lost if (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba is a terrorist state (was Re: Any truth in this one - Cuba as a terrostist state.
|
|
<Snip> Here is the US government reasoning for who is on the list and who is off. Note that this material well predates 911. (URL) is a section of (URL) found the list of FTOs interesting. (URL) how intertwined they all seem to be. The site alleges (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Palestine
|
|
(...) Do you have a cite for that? (...) Surrender to the Russians would have been unacceptable. We had set goals for this war and it is important to set goals and stick to them. Our current little war is somewhat lacking in concrete measurable (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba is a terrorist state (was Re: Any truth in this one - Cuba as a terrostist state.
|
|
(...) That's fine... here's a question though: How many years have to go by before you're off the hook, if there has been no change in regime and no repudiation or reparation? Where I am going with this is, suppose (hypothetically) it has been (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba is a terrorist state (was Re: Any truth in this one - Cuba as a terrostist state.
|
|
(...) Cuban advisors and troops were all over the place, but regardless of how you slice it, it wasn't terrorism. For some reason people are quick to denounce terrorism, and then they can't quite define it--what's military action, and what's (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We are letting the terrorists win
|
|
(...) My wife dropped some folks off at an AMtrak station yesterday and noticed that Amtrak is requiring photo id to board a train now. AFAIK, you only needed it if you were picking up tickets that you ordered online or over the phone. -chris (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
(...) this is a major problem at the university that I attend. Last year when I was a teaching assistant for a large intro class, we had the following protocol for preventing cheating in this form: 1. students may only enter from the back/top (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba is a terrorist state (was Re: Any truth in this one - Cuba as a terrostist state.
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GL1qAq.MvA@lugnet.com... (...) A UK Minister has now called for Cuba to be taken off the list of terrorist states (URL) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Palestine
|
|
(...) I think Horst may have been talking about this one (URL) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Palestine
|
|
(...) Perhaps the proper weapon WAS used but WHOM it targeted is the issue here. It was the wrong thing to do. Eisenhower thought the same too. (...) Actually, it IS an historical fact that the Japanese were tapped out and were in the process of (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
(...) Hmm, Larry, I think you fired that off without thinking about it, or you're being obtuse. My circumstances have a great deal to do with how hard I work, yes. That applies, in a relative degree, to virtually everyone on the planet (work (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
I agree with the basic point (since it's in support of mine) but must offer this correction... (...) Currently a voluntary forfeiture. At times in our history it was involuntary, since we had conscription. Libertarians oppose conscription, of (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ed Jones writes: <snip> (...) This is not a good example. In the U.S. military, any "freedom" allotted, is merely a luxury. This from my own personnal experiance in the U.S. Navy for four years. Life in the service is (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
(...) there (...) I'd re-word that "...competence at making a reasonable product and marketing it well," (...) Again, I'd say reasonable, not necessarily superior. Depends what features you're comparing, what you need to do. And they're (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
(...) Hmm. I'd agree with your ratios, but I'd nudge them around until there was room to add "25% over-estimating the efficiency (and under-estimating the cost) of e-business" A lot of the crash was due to assumptions about what costs were involved (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Palestine
|
|
(...) Can you give me a link? I can't find it at the mo. But I am not sure there is much more to say. Using the proper weapon for the job against a determined, and ultimately evil, adversary is *not* terrorism. The world would have been a much (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
(...) Paid for by whom? Government sets up systems but should not be providing goods. What is the value of a life, by the way? Don't answer infinite, that's the wrong answer and will give you silly results. The proper functions of goverment in a (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
(...) MS is not a monopoly. It has competitors, and effective ones at that. MS is dominant in certain market segments but since there are few or no barriers to entry other than MS competence at making good product, the net result of MS dominance (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We are letting the terrorists win
|
|
(...) Probably should be. See this article which makes the point that if anything, trains/buses are MORE vulnerable since you don't just have terminals and key points to protect, you have miles and miles and miles of track (or road) and there is a (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
(...) Can you elaborate a bit on government assistance for, say, Microsoft, then? I really don't see them. Or would you say Microsoft has no monopoly on PC operating systems? They start to fear Linux these days, but only due to *regulations*, not (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) Scott, I agree with Larry here. Yes, I'm prepared to make sacrifices. I'm not prepared to make unnecessary sacrifices, and your grocery bill example falls squarely in that category (unless, as Larry says, there's probable cause) ROSCO (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We are letting the terrorists win
|
|
(...) being (...) Interesting a lot of people are nervous (understandably) about flying in planes, but no-ones mentioned other mass-transit (buses, trains) which could be used with fair efficiency (even if maybe not quite so spectacular) for similar (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) Me too. What a great post. You and I perhaps differ about whether we can ameliorate terrorism by the course we're on now of taking the war to them and disassembling them and their regimes or not, but we agree 100% about the importance of our (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba is a terrorist state (was Re: Any truth in this one - Cuba as a terrostist state.
|
|
(...) I dunno about Larry's references, but I can confirm this. According to a cuban veteran I spoke to while in Cuba, he was in Angola in the early eighties. A number of people here who have had business there (Angola, not Cuba) by then reported (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
(...) But doesn't it take some sensible level of safety (as opposed to absolute safety) to ensure the value of the "life" part of your rights definition? (...) Don't get me wrong: As long as X is NOT a basic human right, I am OK with X being only (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) I strongly disagree. It is precisely this kind of knee-jerk, poorly thought out logic that leads us down the path of the destruction of our beloved republic. Protecting our civil rights, enumerated and unemurated in the U.S. Constitution and (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
|
|
(...) Violent crime involving robberies and non-domestic assaults are usually committed by people who are not likely to pick up and move to another state where concealed handguns are not allowed just so they can commit crime. You'd be very hard (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) Wow. That's something. He's even dead wrong on details; at least two of the hijackers *did* leave suicide notes, in the form of wills. Argue all you like about the justness of the US response and whether that's consistent with our message, but (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
(...) I do not have a cite for the bill numebr, but it is summarized here: (URL)Do you seriously want every bill that comes up that vaguely claims to be (...) Of course not, however, this bill is "terrorism" specific. (...) In actuality, the Money (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Palestine
|
|
Hello Larry, (...) I am anxiously awaiting your reaction to my historical analysis on this issue ... will you tell me, too, that there is no room for different interpretations? If you feel you discussed this issue enough, you could also point me to (...) (23 years ago, 11-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
|
|
Let me play a bit of advocatis diabolis here ... (...) So, you would admit that there is a problem with SOMETHING in the US mindset? But you are sure it has nothing to do with arms? (...) ... and at the same time fuel the violent crimes in places (...) (23 years ago, 11-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Palestine
|
|
(...) Which doesn't get you off the hook ;-) Here is my definition: "The enforcement of political goals through violence against unconcerned people is terrorism". Of course, with this definition, a violent attack targeting concerned people would (...) (23 years ago, 11-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Airport security.
|
|
I see a severe problem with his terms for armed passengers. He said a passenger should have a CCW permit. Great for states that easily allow *lawful citizens* to get them, but not so great for the many states that make it near impossible for *lawful (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: eBay's Auction for America
|
|
I did not notice John had set FUT OTD. I still think it belongs in LD. But, it is here now. :-/ Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
|
Why am I not surprised: "Under White House prodding, a House panel on Thursday approved legislation to further expand the government's ability to cut money flows to terrorist networks. A parallel bill is part of Bush's sweeping anti-terrorism (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Put up - or shut up.
|
|
(...) What, no answer? (...) Well, have you seen the light? (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | What, no answer?
|
|
(...) What, no answer? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: eBay's Auction for America
|
|
(...) That is not my main point. My point is that by giving a little they will also gain. I did not view it as a 100% altruistic effort on their part. Further, if you take a look at the auctions you will see that I have bid on them (~$850 so far). (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: PA censoring journalists again, but repudiating bin Laden...
|
|
(...) I have no idea. I hope not. (...) I'm also surprised. Do you agree with it? Scott A (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: ScottFroth(tm) answered
|
|
(...) Did I ever tell you a little story I heard about Tom? It goes like this ... :) Scott A (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba is a terrorist state (was Re: Any truth in this one - Cuba as a terrostist state.
|
|
(...) Do you have a reference for this? (...) The interesting thing about Libya is the hassle it got for the Pam-Am bombing over my fair land. It turns out that one of the accused was innocent and the second is appealing his conviction. I wonder if (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Ok, show me where I have lied? Or apologise.
|
|
(...) Larry you are going to have to answer this one, or withdraw your comment and apologise unreservedly to me on this forum. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Airport security.
|
|
(...) Rather than comparing it to coal plants, how about keeping it within the realm of transport? Most reasonable people accept that roads should be policed to ensure that they are safe where driver/owner safety considerations are concerned. Why (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Malcolm Forbes
|
|
(...) Your mind perhaps. "Education's purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one." (...) If that is the case, feel free to provide the location of your answer. (...) ROFL. This is a SQUIRM. Is this really the best you can do? Have you no (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Airport security.
|
|
(...) Larry, this is a stark example of how your Libertarianism takes ideas out of context. You have some idea that rights and risks adhere to individuals. But that is no longer the essential principle in our present context. Rights have already (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something slightly lighter?
|
|
I must admit, I was laughing out loud at this! Whew! I hope nobody picks on Dino Ignacio, the guy who initially made the doctored photo of Bin Ladin with Bert when he was running his "Evil Bert" website years ago. I still think it was a funny idea (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Airport security.
|
|
(...) would (...) choose (...) Then why did Klick make a point of it? The current service being provided (air travel) benefits the passengers and is already paid for by them (generally). The proposed service (enhanced security) does not only benefit (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Airport security.
|
|
(...) Doesn't matter who benefits. What matters is who is RESPONSIBLE. And that is the airlines. If they're not flying, no potential weapons... So the airlines should pay, or the passengers deriving benefit from travel and thus causing the risk to (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Airport security.
|
|
(...) is difficult to justify a situation in which fliers and non-fliers alike would be taxed to provide a service that primarily benefits the first group." Umm, how many of the victims were actually on the planes? How do you[1] choose who benefits (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
(...) OK, thanks for that correction. I stand corrected. (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | More on Airport security.
|
|
This seems apropos. It questions the current federalization proposal from a different angle, the angle of who it is that ought to pay for it. (URL) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
(...) Note that we're talking about drivers licenses here. I have seen LOTS of studies (and you could go dig them up if you wanted to, try starting at cato.org) about other sorts of licenses... all different kinds of licenses, showing inefficacy, (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
|
(...) Well I COULD assert in all cases but it's not very provable, is it? (...) I'm suspecting not, since I don't know of any jurisdiction (similar enough to make meaningful comparisions, Botswana (if they didn't require them) doesn't count) that (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
