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 / *24526 (-20)
  Taking the bait (was Re: Fair use and allusion?)
 
(...) Let's review: In post 24440 (ie, the post-at-hand) you rattled off a litany of negative descriptors, identifying Moore as a "waste of food and total twit" who is "without shame," who "is mostly wrong about stuff," and whose "approach to his (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Fair use and allusion?
 
(...) True, they very well might, as the law is written. But it's beside the point. 'd have more respect for them if they came out against the law instead of using it against their opponents. Just as I said I'd have more respect for Clinton if he (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: UN Gets it Right!
 
(...) I trust you do not mean that war crimes are constitutional? ;) (...) I'm sure many others would say Bush heading it would also be a "farce". After all, it is Bush's record on human rights which stopped him getting the ICC exemption extended. (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Fair use and allusion?
 
(...) I think they have a case. How would a commercial promoting a movie that criticizes a political candidate differ in kind from a commercial criticizing a political candidate paid for by a political opponent? And besides, the group is only (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Fair use and allusion?
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote: (snip)... because there's no need to repeat it, especially if it goes unanswered by Dave!(1) But, tangentially related, here's a story (URL) which some conservative group apparently wants to block (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: UN Gets It Right!
 
(...) Yes. (...) Yes. (...) Yes, and ride on with our trusty sidekick Britain. (...) This is not possible and unconstitutional. (...) It is a farce, as exemplified by Sudan heading the human rights advisory council. One world order is a pipe dream (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Yahoo Blocks Trillian Users
 
(...) Why not just say "we, Yahoo, want everyone to use our client so we can send them ads and popups and keep users from thinking about using other IM services" instead of giving some gafla about spim. They can say whatever they want, if it's true, (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: UN Gets It Right!
 
(...) Cool. I think our one-sided participation in the "world community" is messed up. We should either withdraw from the UN, strap on the six-guns, and do our thing. Or pay our dues, submit to things like world courts, and go along to get along. (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
 
(...) Cool! There's a lot of this kind of research and development coming out of Denmark. At least, much of the stuff I've previously found points back that way. Chris (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
 
(...) Oops. My bad. I guess I didn't read what was written...and now it's spawned off a stray conversation. Oh well. Now I wonder if I should go back and disagree with your actually point. :-) Chris (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  UN Gets It Right!
 
(...) That is a big "(URL)". But it looks like Bush will not get his way on this: (URL) War crimes immunity bid fails>-"For the past two years, I have spoken quite strongly against the exemption and I think it would be unfortunate for one to press (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
 
(...) It is a minor point, but I thought he was succinct: "Don't get me wrong, government is critically important (like say, a decent sewerage system), but its highest achievement is to be just a tool." It was CW's response which shaped things. If (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
 
(...) OK, thanks for clearing that up. I do hope you can see why we all misinterpreted your original wording though. (...) Neither. I think a government is *capable* of acting in ways that would make me feel patriotic, and in fact the US government (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
 
(...) Have a look at (URL). (...) Very worthy. (...) I'm not surprised. I expect you select a contractor based on a mixture of price, connivance & personal recommendation. Everything else is based on trust. In the same way, most people just flush (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Serendipity & IBM
 
(...) Put your flag away. By chance, I read (URL) this> is my newspaper yesterday about IBM: Gypsies win right to sue IBM over role in Holocaust - In 1936 IBM set up its European "headquarters" in Geneva. The appeals court ruling said: "It does not (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
 
(...) As per my reply to Chris I wasn't actually saying that governments should run sewerage, only that government is critically important, like sewerage is critically important. (...) I think we've got a large area of agreement on this, looking at (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
 
(...) That's wonderful. The point (in case I was not abundantly clear) is not that governments should run sewerage systems, but that governments are important, like sewerage systems are important. Richard Still baldly going... (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
 
(...) Me either. At least not the idea of it, and the time was about right, or if anything. My issues are with the execution of it. Too many compromises for it to achieve the promised cost reductions that would have driven vastly greater usage.. (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: We're here to go
 
(...) It's not just the challenge of the order of magnitude increase in velocity that's required, but significant issues in handling rentry and hypersonic flight in general. I don't believe SS1 has a thermal protection system that's anywhere close (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: We're here to go
 
(...) The prize does not pay for the cost of development. SS1 is not going to go into any kind of orbit. Both those are from a friend of mine who works on the project (I literally asked him those very questions a few weeks ago). -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, 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