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 / *13951 (-40)
  Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is"
 
(...) What I mean is that rather than debate these issues, we get an argument that goes like this: "It's in the constitution, so we can't change it". I find that "ridiculous". Here is an example: (URL) Gore declared that "the Constitution is a (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is"
 
(...) That's a ridiculous statement. And it is so poorly supported by any meaningful argument as to be pointless to debate the matter. (...) No, that would be false. GWB might wish to errode my rights, but that would be what is so great about our (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  He still doesn't have the humility to admit when he's wrong.
 
Larry, that was not an apology - that was more insults. More mud. More of your low level of debate. I shall ask you again. Give an example of were I have lied. I challenge you. Do it, or apologise. Put up, or shut up. All I am asking is that you (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Palestine
 
(...) Me too. My impression of Turkey post WW I was more of a country struggling with internal issues and being kicked around by others, than a country that was a kicker. But this isn't my area of knowledge (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Reading comprehension problems.
 
(...) Satisfied or not, that's all the apology you get. (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: A N T H R A X - they aren't making this stuff in caves in Afghanistan
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes: (citing the Guardian) (...) Thanks for the cite. Does anyone know if this stuff keeps for 10 years in powder form? Bacteria are quite resilient but 10 years is an aw'fly long time. (of course that (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Palestine
 
(...) ---> while Turkey was getting ready to move into Africa (was Spain (...) I really wondered where you get this info from. Selçuk (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  A N T H R A X - they aren't making this stuff in caves in Afghanistan
 
(...) I'm not sure we do. Yesterday's Observer: "Iraq 'behind US anthrax outbreaks'" (URL) anthrax, on its own, isn't so difficult,' one senior US intelligence source said. 'But it only begins to become effective as a biological weapon if they can (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
 
(...) I would agree that *public* companies should be totally open (like thats ever gonna happen), but I see no reason why *private* companies should not be allowed total privacy. I see them as similar to families. ROSCO (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Airport security.
 
(...) I see that as almost inevitable. Maybe not in the next 20 years, maybe not in the next 50, but I think it will happen eventually. ROSCO (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Airport security.
 
(...) passengers (...) No, in this case it is necessary because terrorists are threatening to use the planes as bombs. Otherwise the extra security would've been put in place before Sep 11. (...) But that's what's being proposed! (...) I disagree. (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Airport security.
 
(...) If you buy goods from air users you will pay. If you pay tax you will pay for the policing? (...) I think you should act reasonably. (...) Some say they do already (tax). (...) Some do view air travel as "essential". I view it as a bore, but (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
 
(...) So we should give in? Or should we keep on using our failing methods? (...) I could not resist. (...) I don't follow? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Airport security.
 
(...) The enhanced security is only necessary BECAUSE they fly. Security would be enhanced even better if they didn't fly, but banning air traffic as a whole seems a bit too far fetched ... (...) We are not talking an extra service. We are talking (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Airport security.
 
(...) Yes, keeping it to traffic. I don't know how this works in the US, but here in Germany, and most of Europe ... ... people pay for the trafic-safe state of their cars themselves ... people pay for their liability insurance themselves ... (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Airport security.
 
(...) Which property of the airlines are you talking? Their god given right to fly above people? (...) The essential difference between these two is this: There IS a right to freedom of speech, but there is NO right to freedom of flight. (...) If (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: not sure what to call this
 
(...) I agree. (...) I agree. (...) I don't agree. Not that I have to offer a better system, but how can you prove it's impossible? (...) I agree on freedom, but then, isn't there also a price others in the world have to pay for our freedom? If so, (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
 
(...) Yes, it is. Not by itself, but because it won't help track down a single terrorist. We have had a number of similar disputes here in Germany, where some politicians and executives said they need this or that legislation to track down the (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
 
(...) Yeah, the simple logic of a simple cowboy president. Do you always believe what your president says? (...) I don't know how exactly you define privacy. According to my definition, privacy is something individuals should be able to enjoy. So, (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Israel and Palestine
 
(...) It seems the majority of Israeli voted an administration in place that is more part of the problem than part of the solution. So, how can you back this statement? :wq Horst (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Gotta love Oracle...
 
(...) It is even less fair (in a libertarian world) if a person who has more $$, can give their kids better access to healthcare and education. This makes it harder for poorer kids to succeed. We had a system like that in the UK before WW2. (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
 
(...) He is a she. The text was published the day after the notes were found. I expect it was written before (it was in the Saturday supplement - not the main paper). The response of Guardian readers to the text is here: (URL) (...) I have said (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
 
(...) The “grocery bill” comment was an attempt to trivialise the snooped material and focus on the snooping – not a hard argument. I am not proposing that “unnecessary sacrifices” should be made. The term is complete oxymoron in this context. The (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  "The Constitution is what the judges say it is"
 
(...) I have made this point before: (URL) (...) Then perhaps you do not understand that the document is holding you hostage to reason and change. The gun debate is a good example of that. The fact remains that (as I understand it) GWB can erode (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good
 
(...) I'm pretty sure they have, did the USA not have a good cricket system in the 1800's? Scott A (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  He doesn't have the humility to admit when he's wrong.
 
Larry, You are becoming a parody of yourself. The is typical of you, rather than answer the point you make a lot of noise and sling some mud. I shall ask you again. Give an example of were I have lied. I challenge you. Do it or apologise. If I have (...) (23 years ago, 15-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 mean a *formal repudiation*? I would say it takes an effective change in attitude. You can wait forever for a formal declaration... presentely, Cuba seems not to be sponsoring terrorism - therefore, it is reasonable to take them "off (...) (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.
 
(...) Huh... I did not explain myself properly: I wanted to confirm they were in Angola, not that what they were doing there was terrorism. It is true they were there as "advisors", even though some contingents DID enter in combat for the (...) (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.
 
(...) The corollary of Lawrence's question, of course, is: "how many votes might be lost if they *aren't* on the list?" I noticed the very small amount of text re: Cuba, and none that implies a state sponsorship--it appears to be more a matter of (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Gotta love Oracle...
 
(...) (snipped) (...) More freedom than whom? And we *also* love our own respective countries, we may even love *each other's* countries so much that we want to unite 'em all! :-) Anyway, we also have cons. And we have ID's. Is it so difficult to (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.loc.pt)
 
  Re: Gotta love Oracle...
 
(...) The issue of "immigration" is rather new to our society, only in the last 20 or so years there has been a significant immigration (mainly Africa, and now former USSR). Our country is more of the "emmigration" kind, at least historically - for (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.loc.pt)
 
  Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
 
(...) of (...) It's harder to kill someone with a knife than a gun...how many times do you hear of people killed via 43 stab wounds, vice a single bullet wound? Are you next going to say that if we limit access to guns, we should limit access to (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Gotta love Oracle...
 
(...) Well actually, I would have argued that we ought to have the right to drive. But since Richard pointed out that we do, the point is rather moot. (...) First of all, I don't know that it is. I just spent about a half hour trying to find those (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: This really is a low form of debate
 
(...) If lieing includes distorting the truth by omission, deliberately using pejorative terms to leave unfavorable impressions of situations and people, and in general playing fast and loose with the truth as it suits your whim, then I give you no (...) (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.
 
(...) Those were posed as rhetorical questions I assume, but they are nevertheless valid and I admit of no answer. (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
 
(...) NY (...) Ontario (...) Why do you folks obsess over the crime rate _with firearms_? Isn't the rate of crime what really matters? Or more specifically violent crime? Killed by a knife is just as dead as killed by a bullet, after all. (...) than (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
 
(...) I don't think you really hated point it out. Also, you're assertion, while certainly correct, supports Tom's stance better than your own once you look at the broader picture. The rate of violent crime is _greater_ in the UK than in the US. (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
 
(...) They are already. Guns are A) a hassle to get most places, B) expensive, and C) highly regulated as is. (...) It might, in fact, reduce the number of school shootings. I'm not convinced of this, but I'm willing to concede that it might. But I (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Gotta love Oracle...
 
(...) I don't know. They never seem to consult me when making these decisions. Please do not assume that because I live here, I support many actions of the government. I am fairly disenfranchised, if you haven't noticed. (...) Oh? What does it (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.loc.pt)
 
  Re: Gotta love Oracle...
 
(...) about (...) their (...) parentage (...) Even if people come from other nations? And racism is unheard of in Portugul? That rocks! So basically, instead of being concerned about those who might wish to keep their parentage private, what you are (...) (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.loc.pt)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more | 40 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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