 | | Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego
|
|
(...) USA. (...) This is got to be the funniest or at least the most pathetic statement I have read yet in this never ending debate. The USA has done nothing in 211 years about racism? Yes, tere are problems, but I think it will get better over (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego
|
|
(...) Wow, this is a stupendous day for Lugnet! Tim, John, and I are agreeing on a heated topic! How did this happen?! Dave! (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego
|
|
"John DiRienzo" <ig88888888@stlnet.com> wrote in message news:G0xz8F.Fon@lugnet.com... (...) into (...) I (...) replies, (...) States, (...) type (...) me (...) After reading through this post of yours, even though you did bring up a touchy subject, (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | John -- please reply (was: Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego)
|
|
(...) John, I tried writing you a reply by e-mail and it bounced: ===...=== ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- <ig88888888@stlnet.com> ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to mail.postnet.com.: (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego
|
|
I put this in lugnet.general because I don't know where it started. We ain't what we oughta be We ain't what we wanta be We ain't what we gonna be But thank God we ain't what we was. -MLK Perhaps some people will be mad at me for bringing this (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: New Chrome Castle Sets
|
|
If you had called me a jerk, Richard, I would not mind, as I look back and I think I was. But calling Lar a jerk. C'mon dude. Extreme? Yes. Intense? Yes. Well mannered? Yes. Right about a lot of things? Yes. A jerk? No. I still like you, but I did (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
Land from what altitude? I doubt if you'd be able to glide all the way in while staying beneath radar... unless these planes have phenomenally good glide characteristics. ~M (24 years ago, 11-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) aviation craft can land from an altitude with engine turned off, just as a glider, by the help of high lift to weight ratio and very low stall velocity, and of course with an able pilot on controls. I think this could be the ultimate silence. (...) (24 years ago, 11-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) 17 tones (metric) normally, 22 tones during wartime, and up to 30 tones max. (requires special order). They are from the TOs (IIRC), so should not be unique to TAF. They were quite good at STOL (without any external boosters or something), (...) (24 years ago, 11-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) A helicopter wouldn't really make much more noise than an OV-10 Bronco, and you get vertical flight too. If it's good enough for the SEALS, it's good enough for me. ;^) Personally, I think the V-22 Osprey is cool as heck, but I wouldn't want (...) (24 years ago, 8-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
