 | | Re: Canceled Lego Theme...?
|
|
(...) started (...) the (...) What am I missing here? What is the link between Dann's pic, Scott's comment & "official USA doctrine"? Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Canceled Lego Theme...?
|
|
(...) That's more or less what I was saying too. (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Scariness (was Re: Conflict in the Middle East)
|
|
(...) Maybe because what James said happens to be true-- you need to think about history to appreciate its wisdom. I will go on record as to saying that Richard's post in question was probably the most disturbing I've ever read in this forum as (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Canceled Lego Theme...?
|
|
(...) Now that I think of it, there's another interpretation of Scott's post that I don't believe has been considered. Maybe Scott's point can be paraphrased as "Wow. As commentary-in-LEGO, that ranks..." I absolutely don't presume to put words in (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Canceled Lego Theme...?
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:Guq6vs.DKE@lugnet.com... (...) Lego bricks (...) that any (...) offensive (...) Lego(r) (...) of (...) inappropriate (...) picking a (...) they (...) satire. (...) a (...) as (...) (...) (22 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
