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 / *21276 (-10)
  Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
 
(...) Exactly why I called them "pro-gun wacko" sites. However I still can not find any "anit-gun wacko" sites to refute them. Somewhere in the middle lies the truth. (...) No it isn't, I simply made the mistake of assuming we all knew that as long (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  It's not you -- No, it *IS* you!!!
 
Poll shows errors in beliefs on Iraq, 9/11 (URL) A third of the American public believes U.S. forces found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, according to a recent poll, and 22 percent said Iraq actually used chemical or biological weapons. But no (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  How to start a fire.
 
Almost if not completely verbatim... I ran into an old friend the yesterday and really 'ruffled his feathers.' We got on the subject of the Iraq war and he made the comment: "Over 1000 Iraqi civilians were killed and we didn't even find anything." I (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
 
(...) Assuming that you don't infringe on other's rights (as I gather from your last comment). (...) Do you assert the right to have society pay to put you back together again, humpty dumpty? Just wondering. JOHN (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
 
(...) Here's one web reference that might be familiar to you: (URL) in that post I link to a site that specifically addresses the Australia problem. In particular, your citations (which in essence simply parrot the same statistics and might as well (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
 
(...) If you're being facetious, that's fine, but the issue is that you can't reasonably assume that X number of crimes are prevented by any particular factor, without additional evidence or criteria. (...) That may be so, but so what? The fact (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
 
(...) I see. Well... Taking on Larry's sentence some while ago, if all rights are property rights, can't you reduce common law to law against theft, and then extend it to all conflicts of interests where one party gets harmed? (I'm not saying it is (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
 
Just adding in this reference for new(er)comers to debate (yup, it's me referencing me, again): Re: Legal Education? (was: real conspiracies?) (URL) -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
 
(...) The term is perhaps a little "overloaded" with history, but in a criminal law context it basically means laws against theft, rape, and murder (and all of the usual lesser versions of those kinds of crimes). (...) True, but that has nothing to (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The term racist gets thrown aroun a little easily around here..
 
(...) We have laws. "Because he had overstayed his six-month visa, U.S. immigration officials said." (You forgot to include this quotation) Also I would add that "Muslim" is not a race; Arab is. Are you talking about religious persecution? [JOHN] (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, 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