 | | Re: blair's dossier (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
|
|
(...) This is the correct link: (URL) A (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace)
|
|
(...) My axe is pro-justice, not anti-US. (...) That is why I stick to fact, not opinion. I suggest you do the same. (...) My original point was why attack Iraq at the same time as supporting the misdeeds of others? (...) See above. (...) There is (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: red light cameras CAUSE accidents
|
|
(...) We don't have "cop cars", we have "police cars", "panda" cars and "jam sandwiches". ;) (...) Road signs (speed and distances) have always been in MPH. I have no idea why that was seen as being worth keeping. Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | blair's dossier (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
|
|
(...) ... and Blair has just published his "dossier": (URL) A (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
Some questions from down under... In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: <snip> (...) ...and do you therefore also have a duty to be part of a well regulated militia? (...) But couldn't they be seen also as a method of regulating the (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) It says "the security of a free state", not "the maintaining of a free state from internal tyrants" or even "securing a free state". It's a long reach to place your interpretation on the law as written. Bruce (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) Didn't we dispose of this red herring already? Really, it's rather tiresome going round and round and round with you, you're displaying the Scott Arthur nature here a bit... and it doesn't score you any points with the regulars, you may want (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) Where you looking? I truncated, I didn't remember the *exact* quote, and I didn't want to go looking for it, but my original posting was written as a response to the explicit 2nd, and I paraphrased last time--sorry 'bout that--but now that you (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) No, not close, in fact completely wrong. The 2nd says "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." [snip] (...) If you bother to read... (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace)
|
|
(...) interest (...) would (...) Kurds (...) (URL) Gee Brain I forgot the link. -Mike Petrucelli (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
