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 / *14606 (-20)
  Airbus (Was Re: Bad News! Plane down in NYC)
 
(...) It's an American Airlines Airbus A300. Supposedly an engine or engines crashed in a separate area. That's about all the news is reporting at the moment. ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bad News! Plane down in NYC
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Erik Olson writes: <he's OK> Yaay. But our hearts surely go out to those who are not. The major news sites are doing better at handling load than during 911 but just in case people can't get to them, here's a short (...) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.people)
 
  Re: Bad News! Plane down in NYC
 
Hi folks, I think you know more about this than I do. I'm in Manhattan. My home is in Kew Gardens, a short distance from JFK airport. -Erik (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.people)
 
  Re: Bad News! Plane down in NYC
 
(...) I have been to Eriks house & it is not to close to where the plane went down. I don't have his number with me. I will drop him an email. I live in Queens as well & know the area. Jonathan (...) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.people)
 
  Re: Bad News! Plane down in NYC
 
"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:GMoz9A.MHE@lugnet.com... (...) from (...) day. (...) Ick. I tried getting ahold of Erik Olson by his home number and his cell and no answer on either one - but it also looks like its (...) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.people)
 
  Bad News! Plane down in NYC
 
Hi all, It looks like a 767 just went down in Queens New York about five miles from JFK. No one knows anything yet, but I bet this'll be our big news for the day. Hopefully it's a random fluke rather than just the first. Chris (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) I think that a security company would typically charge a fee for their services. And their services could include defense against missile attack. So it's just a matter of people feeling properly motivated. Some people are willing to work in (...) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) Maybe I'm still not following you here, but I would tend to say yes, the things that are a RESULT of the building's existance ought to be borne by the building users (...) This doesn't follow. Just because some fair thing is hard to do is not (...) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: New Site
 
"Mr L F Braun" <braunli1@pilot.msu.edu> wrote in message news:GMJvx9.1G0@lugnet.com... (...) Uh-huh. It's when people start taking anything seriously it starts to get old, really quickly. Whenever this happens, I highly recommend sticking on some (...) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: New Site
 
"Mr L F Braun" <braunli1@pilot.msu.edu> wrote in message news:GMJw8t.29z@lugnet.com... (...) need (...) College.... (...) Yes, that was a true hassling. I hope you consider yourselves hassled, or else more hasslement will ensue. I am over it. (...) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  More scary stuff
 
(URL) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) to (...) When I lose mine, I generally find them a couple of months later, all mashed up down the back of the couch 8?) (...) And buildings exist for the convenience of companies to house their workers. They're not necessary, but they're (...) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Moral Relativism
 
(...) Those who don't get their news from entertainment channels know better. You said this not all that long ago: "My beef with them [sanctions] is that they're not impoverishing the *right things* (...) *enough*, and that they give foamers like (...) (23 years ago, 11-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Wanted
 
(...) That is not the point. The point is that the community is not 100% with the way you contribute. Nobody doubts your intend, only the manner. Read Eric's words again: "Please understand that while you may have sufficient logic and a decent head (...) (23 years ago, 11-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Wanted
 
Best to ignore them, or else they see the smallest portion of attention and then break into epics of bad teenage angst poetry. Santosh (...) (23 years ago, 11-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) Can you be more specific? If passengers didn't want to travel by air there would be no problem, would there? There'd be no airlines! Why shouldn't airlines shoulder the whole cost? (note that in a free market there is no difference between (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Moral Relativism
 
(...) Under duress? Not great. Voluntarily? Really bad. (insofar as a system of morals can have feelings... :-) ) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) Why shouldn't we? Why should someone who rarely or never flies pay so that folks like Larry can fly once a week or more (not sure how often Larry flies, but he's a good example of a very frequent flyer here)? If aircraft are truly that (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) Sorry if this is a repost. I lost my cookies somewhere. Anywho... I don't think we got to closure on this (or much of anything else, lately) so don't be sorry. I am not sure I follow this argument. You are going to have to elaborate. I will (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation
 
(...) Just as our government would not allow the demise of Ansett airlines - especially just before a federal election! Be interesting to see what our PM does now he's been re-elected... (URL) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-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