 | | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) 40 years ago would be 1965. Are you saying the decade of free love, rock 'n' roll, and rampant drug use is more moral than today. In the 1940's, America had invented a weapon that could kill 100,000 people in one blast, while perfecting (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Well, if you don't like the term, that's fine with me. I object to it because it's not usefully descriptive. However, I have the sense that your beef is with the underlying idea represented by this so-called "hybrid man," rather than with the (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) No point. I was just wondering why the change of heart - so I asked a question, which you haven't answered. What happened to you staying out of OTD? Change your mind? (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Small edit--there should have been a smiley on that reply, since my early post was replying to (so you proably weren't sitting out!) Dave! (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) As a matter of fact, I do think it's pointless. I briefly addressed (URL) this very point> a while back (admittedly, while you were sort of sitting-out from ot.debate). Dave! (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Much more worrisome than cross dressing!
|
|
(URL) is the best part: - start - Lisa Graves, the American Civil Liberties Union's senior counsel for legislative strategy, said the lack of a documented case of abuse doesn't mean the law doesn't violate civil liberties. She said the Justice (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) FOUL!!! This has everything to do with this nonsensical, idiotic term! That is what I'm talking about! (...) Perhaps we could discuss a specific example of an industrialized culture? (...) I would take issue with your pejorative "regressive", (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) So I assume you believe that separate bathrooms for men and women is sexist and wrong? JOHN (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) I think that's exactly the ideological goal. I think some believe this to be the ultimate expression of humanity. (...) WHICH "stereotypical roles"??? Fatherhood? Husband? Any individual can do whatever they want, but holding up such a silly (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Except for the part that I'm of Irish descent. (...) I agree wholeheartedly, which is why I asked in the first place. JOHN (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) I guess what I don't understand is why this is suddenly apparent--or why it's a problem--now, of all times? I don't comprehend the term "hybrid men," so I won't use it here. However, I will point out that the foiling of gender-related (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) In other words, they can be (URL) Separate But Equal.> I see... Dave! (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Verrrrry Scottish of you, your readers expect better of you. I think things flow better when one is more explicit about what points one is making. (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Teach them well, and they'll make reasonable choices. They may even follow in your footsteps. Whatever they do, I at least hope you'll respect their choices, even if they choose to put on a pink shirt. Besides, I don't think androgyny is the (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Certainly, but I also see it as an important part of western culture, don't you? ROSCO (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Every step forward takes turns that make SOME people uncomfortable. How do you think people in the front of the bus felt when Rosa Parks refused to move??? Or how do you think men felt when Paulina Davis fought to allow wives to maintain (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Why would anyone want someone to explain something they already understood? Janey "Red Brick" (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) There are many aspects of it that most certainly are decadent, wouldn't you say? JOHN (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) And your parents probably saw rock 'n' roll as decadent too. ROSCO (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Be my guest. (...) And maybe not. Maybe I want my kids and the next generation to eschew such silly ideas that men should look and act more like women and women should look and act more like men. What if men looked and acted like men, and (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Christianity is a religion. Protestantism is a branch of Christianity. It is a broad term that is useless in this context. (...) I didn't say I didn't "get" the point, I wanted him to spell it out. JOHN (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Seriously? It's at the heart of the equality issue. The Left thinks that in order for women to become equal with men, they must imitate men. It is the Left who is uncomfortable with distinct male/female roles. They have hopelessly confused (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) "We are watching the birth of a hybrid man. ... Why not put on a pink-flowered shirt and try out a partner-swapping club?" asked Le Louet, stressing that the study had focused on men aged between 20 and 35. It is a complete and utter load of (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Oh oh oh!!!! I wanna play!! I have to ask and trust me, I know I will probably regret this, I really did trying to stay out of this (well not really) but what exactly do ~YOU~ mean by "Protestantism" is NOT a "religion". I would hate to (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) This has nothing to do with "allowing" anything. I'm not advocating banning or allowing anything. I'm talking about cultural shifts with which I strongly disagree. This is yet another example of those who would want to blur the lines between (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Okaay. Thanks for that. (...) I never mentioned "politics"; in fact, I specifically mentioned culture. (...) That would be another discussion, and knock yourself out, but one word of warning-- "Protestantism" is NOT a "religion". (...) What is (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Suicide for the Democratic Party
|
|
As they say, it's always those who are the loudest that get heard, or is it that shoot their mouths off first? (URL) -Avery (19 years ago, 8-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Maybe we should all convert to Islam. Then that sort of thing would never be allowed. But seriously, what exactly are you frightened of? Nothing in there is suggesting that you give up your idea of what a man is. If you are feeling threatened (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Always nice to be informed on what the malnutritioned MALE will be wearing this fall, tho! On another level, this whole discussion does say a lot about the political climate/freedoms we do enjoy, regardless what side of the fence you sit on, (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Matters on what you define as "manliness." Some forms of masculinity are rebuffed by the Left - such as not allowing women into the army (the manly-man should never have to rely on women to fight wars). You could say that the Politically (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) In general. Both the conventional Right and conventional Left (in the US anyway) want to restrict choices... I think you're right, the right may be a bit more nervous about gender bending but that's small potatoes really. The quote I cited to (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) With respect to a cultural shift towards unmanliness, or in general? I mean, I haven't actually seen evidence that the Left cares one way or another in regards to the decline of masculinity, but I have seen a tendancy on the Right of general (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Guys, guys. I think John is just sickened by that terrible outfit: (URL) model for Davidelfin> This is purely a "he's wearing what?" situation not a "he's afirming his choice to what?" situation. ~Kevoh tongue -> cheek (19 years ago, 8-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Would that one of the Right or Left actually DID want to allow people choice. Neither conventional end of the conventional spectrum acts like it does want that. (19 years ago, 8-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) There's a lot of babble, gafla, marketspeak, posery etc, in there but is this the part you want to go to war with?? (...) If so color me scared. THAT's actually a valid notion. (19 years ago, 8-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) So, what's that got to do with the Left per se? I mean, as far as I can tell, the only difference is that the Left would want to allow such a shift, whereas the Right would want to disallow it. I don't think the Left is actually *encouraging* (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Yeah ok whatever. That is bad fashion yaya-crappola. And I really doubt this stuff has any political value to it whatever, so I seriously dislike you categorizing the 'Left' as supporting this stuff. I could point to extreme far rightists who (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(URL) is why I fear the Left. This is cultural war. JOHN (19 years ago, 8-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supreme Court Rules Agains State Rights
|
|
(...) Civil disobedience is next, it looks like. (URL) been tried before and didn't work very well. But she has more character than those that deny they ever did it (43) or claim they didn't inhale(42). ++Lar (19 years ago, 6-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what is ALE?
|
|
(...) Hi JoJo! (...) Respondez Sil Vous Plait (1) HTH! ++Lar (can we pick one FUT? I think .people but what do I know?) 1 - IIRC(2)... it's French or something for "get back to me whether you are coming to my party or not because I need to know how (...) (19 years ago, 6-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: what is ALE?
|
|
Hello! (...) I say "eta" (That's a terror organization in the Spanish Basque region.) or E-T-A (meaning "estimated time of arrival"), R-S-V-P (what the heck is it?) and U-S-A. But I say "afol" and "mock" and "burp" because: (...) Or does anybody say (...) (19 years ago, 6-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Supreme Court Rules Agains State Rights
|
|
(...) May I present Justices (URL), (URL) Moore>, and (URL) Brown>. Dave! (19 years ago, 6-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Supreme Court Rules Agains State Rights
|
|
(...) Reason this month had an interesting series of articles about the Supremes. Stuff analysing their work, and asking people to predect who MIGHT be nominated and who the person asked liked, as well as favorite past justices... fascinating stuff. (...) (19 years ago, 6-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Supreme Court Rules Agains State Rights
|
|
(...) Well, we already knew that, didn't we? Despite his putative support of states' rights, he's never missed the chance to curtail them. Man oh man is this a stupid ruling. Shame on the SCOTUS. Dave! (19 years ago, 6-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Supreme Court Rules Agains State Rights
|
|
(URL) Stevens said there are other legal options for patients, "but perhaps even (...) But apparently democratic processes in the states aren't important... Frank (19 years ago, 6-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what is ALE? (was Re: Brickshelf going away???)
|
|
(...) (URL) lol> I'm trying to push "neoilluminati" but it isn't taking:-( Maybe "Legoluminati"? Just trying to help. JOHN (19 years ago, 3-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: what is ALE? (was Re: Brickshelf going away???)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote: (snip) (...) (snip) Whenever I read "IMO" I pronounce it in my noggin as "ih-my-oh" all fluidlike, one word. Ihmyoh. The "ih" is like the beginning of "idiot", the "my" is just like the word, and the (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: what is ALE?
|
|
(...) I've often had to descibe myself and what I do in my class to school administrators, and I always use "Adult LEGO Fan", which I suppose would be ALF but I know you guys don't wanna be ALFs! Usually when I describe the community (especially the (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: what is ALE?
|
|
(...) Huh-- I almost never say "fan of Lego" or "AFOL" to people who aren't in the hobby, because it just doesn't give them a good frame of reference. I think I've always said "Lego Hobbyist" because that's what people understand. Usually "fan" is (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: what is ALE?
|
|
(...) Holy moley, them's fightin' words! (...) I don't know. I can think of all kinds of abbreviations that don't snuggle into the ear all that pleasantly. The Society for Creative Anachronisms (The SCA, which sounds like ESS-YAY) is one such (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: what is ALE?
|
|
(...) Ahem, Joe, but they were mocking your hobby choice, not your title! :-) (...) I've always preferred "lush", but "wine taster" isn't much better. (...) Don't be surprised if they still laugh:-) (...) Joe, terms like "AFOL" are "in-house", part (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: what is ALE?
|
|
(...) So, you like it better because there was little thought behind it? Next you'll be saying you voted for Bush. :) (...) Some people spell it out, but even that isn't very euphonic -- unlike the other initialisms you mention, AFOL when spelled (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: what is ALE? (was Re: Brickshelf going away???)
|
|
(...) To purists, I barely qualify as an "AFOL," but even I agree that that term is preferable to "ALE." AFOL has history behind it, and its creation was organic, rather than deliberate, and it therefore has greater aesthetic appeal to me on those (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
OK. I shall use mime then: Gotcha! Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) I always found quoting MP was the ultimate retort, you vacuous, coffee-nosed, maloderous, pervert!!! WMMV JOHN (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Translation: "I know you are, but what am I?" -->Bruce<-- No, don't bother to respond, I'm not listening, lalalalalalalalala....... :-) (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
You’ve certainly raised your level of debate. ;) Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
I know you are, but what am I? I'm not listening! Lalalalala.... I'm rubber and you're glue, whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you. ...and, the ultimate retort: Nyahh, nyahh, nyahh. Sorry, I just was trying to raise the level of (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) And on that point we wholeheartedly agree. I just see that as a short-sighted hospital policy that has nothing to do with government. (...) Ha, that must have been some sort of Freudian slip:-) I don't really want to slog through the issue of (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) The basic freedom of being with your spouse in the hospital. Maybe not consitutional, but I would consider this a basic freedom. (...) Thanks for actually admitting it. (...) Very funny. The Right is much better at hounding people for the (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Yeah. Sure. What does a few thousand dead matter. (...) **yawn** (...) Actually John, I was highlighting your rank hypocrisy. Morally, I don’t believe it is correct for you to accuse others of murdering civilians without looking in your own (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) It's all a guessing game. We played it safe and took him out for good-- something that should have occured in '91. (...) No doubt we weren't talking about them. Start a new thread. (...) To help Israel so that they wouldn't be forced to defend (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) OK; so you can't list any then. (...) So you're guessing now? (...) No doubt the Uzbeks say the same about the USA. (...) So basically, you spent billions and killed tens of thousands to help Israel hold on to illegally obtained land? (...) (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) What do you think should be the platforms of the Democratic Party? (...) My evidence of nothing? Better, where is the evidence of wrongdoing? (...) I disagree. These people fought against US forces. They are enemies of the state. (...) They (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) That's my point: we'll never know--one way or the other! So the conspiracy theorists joyfully foam at the mouth without any prove whatsoever. (...) Proof? Potential for abuse is not a "smoking gun". JOHN (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) <snipping> (...) Yes. Point? <snip> (...) Who knows? I know he aided and abetted terrorists. Whether they were the actually ones involved in terrorism against the US is anyone's guess. The point is that he was a friend of terrorism and an (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) We provide plenty of details. It's just you'd rather believe detainees lying from a playbook rather than your government. Again I give the standard "we aren't perfect", but we do a good job; better than any other. (...) You are changing the (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) While almost half of the American population agrees with you, a little more than half felt otherwise. And, here soon, someone else will have to handle this mess. And, you are correct, this is a mess. What would really go far in cleaning it up (...) (19 years ago, 29-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) Actually it is grossly rigged, just not the way most folks think of it. It is rigged in to a brain fried, corporate sponsored 2 party system. If you're part of any other party , you might as well pucker up, because your going to end up kissing (...) (19 years ago, 28-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) What is beyond reason is blindly believing a government that refuses to divulge details of the confinements. (...) Gay Marriage? Go ahead, tell me you support it. If you do, then you've been lying for a long time. (...) Gay Marriage. (...) No (...) (19 years ago, 28-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) ...based on a case made by the USA. (...) Bush trusted him, why don't you? (...) No John. It is a question directed at you. I shall try again: Can you list any terror acts against the USA which SH sponsored? (...) What is the difference (...) (19 years ago, 28-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) On the contrary--the problem facing the Democratic party is that it has too long embraced a policy of placating the Republicans in the hope of catching some right-leaning moderates. As a result, the party has compromised its identity. (...) On (...) (19 years ago, 28-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) How would you know? The Diebold machines can make up whatever results they're programmed to make up, and there is no paper trail of validated vote receipts to audit... recounts consist of checking the same files again to see if they have the (...) (19 years ago, 28-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) That's my whole point, Tom! The election wasn't rigged, for pete's sake! Why is it that every time the Dems loose it must be due to fraud? Deal with reality! Dems should be more worried that their party has been hijacked by Lefty wackos like (...) (19 years ago, 28-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) So in other words you have no problem with a voting system that is rigged? Something that this country is based upon? You've trumpeted in here many times before about our great democracy, and how the majority should rule, yet you have no (...) (19 years ago, 28-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) The ones the UN believed that he hadn't destroyed. (...) What about them? (...) Figures you'd cite someone like Woodward. <yawn> (...) If? That, again, is merely your uninformed opinion. (...) I don't care if he got them from Uranus, it (...) (19 years ago, 28-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) I haven't used the newsreader since the first years of LUGNET, and not since the advent of FTX, so it is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma to me as well. (...) As a feature of my fiendish plot, only those who have faith in the UN (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) Are you on a newsreader? I've only ever accessed LUGNET via browser, so the whole thing's a mystery to me. (...) You fool! You'll kill us all! One editorial note: When I use Bush's name in a general sense as in "Bush invaded Iraq," of course I (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) What WMD's???? But John, what about those poor Iraqis and their thirst for "Freedom"? (...) You need to read Plan of Attack. (...) Even if true, he still posed no threat to the USA(?) (...) Yep, and he got them from Washington. (...) What (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Good try John. As you (and Larry) well know, I said very much more than that. Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
(...) That fills me with (URL) skepticism> (...) (reverting to FTX:-) (...) He was a known entity when re-elected. You had your chance and muffed it. Wait until '08. (...) Specify, and include to whom we should apologize. (...) If you really (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Personally, I prefer pin-up (URL) nose art> It still offends, but has the added bonus of (presumably) tweaking feminists:-) JOHN (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Correct. Because then we would have been satisfied that he didn't have WMDs at his disposal to possibly provide to terrorists. <snip off-topic material> (...) No, Scott, it is not "clear" by any stretch of the imagination. That is your (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) As well you shouldn't-- looked natty to me. JOHN (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Newsweek (to touch on something I said in a n erlier post)
|
|
(...) Correction: Clinton was impeached specifically for lying under oath. He should have said "I refuse to answer, because it's none of your business" instead of lying. But he looks pretty small time compared to these guys (and I'm one of those (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) BIGOT! <okay, only kidding> (...) My point which I believe Lar picked up on is this: you expressed laments about continued support for the war. So, I asked, what should we do? Leave? You responded by saying we shouldn't have gone in the first (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Repost, for the benefit of those on newsreaders
|
|
Someone expressed frank misgivings about the formatting of this post: (URL) can I say? The FTX shows up just fine on my browser. But because I am a kind and generous soul, I am reposting in plain text -----repost begins here----- Here are a few (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Newsweek (to touch on something I said in a n erlier post)
|
|
And the Teflon Prez... (URL) it turns out that the FBI has documents showing that detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, complained about the mistreatment of the Koran and that many said they were severely beaten. The documents specifically include an (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Hey, I'm not playing to the cheap seats. Looks fine on the web. Dave! (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Wow, that's almost unreadable in a newsreader... Not sure how this looked in the original submission, or how it looks in the web view, but people might want to pay attention to their postings formatting... Frank (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Like (URL) this,> for example. Nice! Dave! (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) I thought their Nukes were French? Scott A (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Rubish! If it was agreed he had complied with 1441, he would have been able to stay in power. Anyhow, why start with him whilst training the (URL) Uzbek security forces> and bank-rolling (URL) Israeli belligerence>? (URL) Funded by Washington (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) I'm not sure I agree with any of your summary. However, think about this: If I catch you having sex with your cat; do I have to offer you an alternative in order to suggest you stop? Or is up to you to find an alternative? Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Whoops! 11. Do something about Israel. No, Israel's not 100% wrong in all things, and yes, Palestinians are not without blood on their hands, either. But if we had to pick one thing (other than cultural imperialism (as opposed to militaristic (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Here are a few thoughts--not sure how feasible they are, and some will require greater diplomacy than is currently available to the administration. 1. Get rid of Bush. His handling of this entire debacle has been nightmarishly inept and (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
Snipped bunches. Some I agree with (the venality of leaders everywhere, but certainly in the US) and some I don't (it's not just "about the oil!")... focusing on one bit. (...) What I'm not seeing the current participants in this debate providing is (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Mmmmm. This green light in your mind that allows you to do awful things with dubious grounds, and with scant care for human life. Not the green light of well thought out, systematically supported, equitable and respected authorisation I think, (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Is that a rhetorical question? We are actively engaged in the process of securing a sovereign nation's natural resources for our own benefit, and this is exacerbated by the fact that our hegemonic military presence in that country is intended (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Clinton didn't propose an unprovoked invasion in defiance of the UN, and he didn't endorse the removal of inspectors before their job was done, and he certainly didn't advocate the murder of 100,000 Iraqi civilians. If removing him was the (...) (19 years ago, 27-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
