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 / 10476
    Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts —Larry Pieniazek
   (...) single question asked of me... I am not going to reopen that particular thread except to say that I am satisfied, based on my life long intake of news, opinion, propaganda and falsehood, rather than based on any particular site, that my (...) (23 years ago, 14-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts —Scott Arthur
     (...) :-O (...) But you could not justify it any way! (...) I did not sentance them Larry - you did. (...) This is all out of context. You were asked a question. You came up with possible answers. One of which contradicts your libertarian viewpoint. (...) (23 years ago, 14-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts —Daniel Jassim
   (...) A "correct" opinion based on lies, falsehoods, generalization, and sheepish acceptance of the Zionist media model. Not a learned, open minded or fact based opinion gleaned from comparative analysis. Thus, in a world ethics perspective, (...) (23 years ago, 14-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts —Scott Arthur
   (...) How wrong you are: "Israel has gotten, and continues to get, a raw deal in the world media, I have no idea why." (URL) A (...) (23 years ago, 14-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts —Daniel Jassim
     (...) Dan (23 years ago, 14-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts —Scott Arthur
     (...) I was being rather sarcastic. Nobody is really wrong - we all have our opinions. Scott A (23 years ago, 14-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts —Larry Pieniazek
   (...) So it's OK for you to quote out of context, then? (...) out of context, I would have chosen this one... (...) Since you never effectively answered it. (although you did post, what, 4 responses to it?... Why so many? Couldn't compose your (...) (23 years ago, 14-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts —Scott Arthur
   (...) No, and that is not what I did. (...) I think I did. I _still_ think you are wrong. I do not feel that Israel "administers justice fairly" or respects the "rule of law". Eric Olsen agreed with me on this: (URL) chose to muddy the waters with (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR