 | | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant) —John Neal
|
| | | (...) Pot? Kettle. JOHN (20 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) ....do you care to expand that, or is it just more ugly unjustified name calling? Scott A (...) (20 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant) —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) No. (...) On your part? Yes. JOHN (20 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) **sigh** Scott A (...) (20 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant) —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) Sorry to disappoint-- but we've already beaten that corpse to China and back. :-) JOHN (20 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) Do you care to give us all a link to this alleged beating? Scott A (...) (20 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant) —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) Just one? What are you, like Dory from "Finding Nemo"? JOHN (20 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | Let's forget Finding Nemo and face facts john. You got a little annoyed about what I said with regard to Israel. However, as I was telling the truth, all you could do was engage in pointless and unjustified name calling. GET A LIFE. Scott A (20 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant) —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) Fine, fair friend. (...) Not said. "Say". (...) <hands over ears> LA LA LA LA LA LA LA! (...) It wasn't pointless. (...) Now you seem annoyed. Let's call it even. JOHN (20 years ago, 7-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant) —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | (...) Unjustified, maybe, but certainly not pointless... ROSCO (20 years ago, 7-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant) —Richard Parsons
|
| | | | (...) Now there is an argument, and close to the best possible riposte under all the circumstances, I think. Seems to sum up Larry and John perfectly in this case. Richard Still baldly going... (20 years ago, 7-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
