Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


Off-Topic / Debate / Search Results: all rights are property rights

Results 4681 – 4700 of about 12000.

Search took 0.02 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Who is going to take the fall?
Let's place some bets-- I say it's Cheney: (URL) troubles me is not that single episode, but the broader pattern of dishonesty and delusion that helped get us into the Iraq mess -- and that created the false expectations undermining our occupation (...) (21 years ago, 15-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) As usual, John -- not too much information, have you? We wouldn't want to sully your political perspective with anything like facts or meaningful conjecture... Something like $80 - $100 million were spent on the Clinton Whitewater and "Oval (...) (21 years ago, 15-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) Look, I don't claim to understand everything that is going on in Saudi Arabia. Do they sponsor terrorism? Maybe, but then why is OBL persona non grata in the Kingdom? Perhaps the right sheik doesn't know what the left sheik is sponsoring. I (...) (21 years ago, 15-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) And yet the Saudi government has done nothing. (...) Yeah cause dictatorships are a "way of life" we actually care about protecting. (...) So what is the basis of your disagreement. (...) Yeah its only been cited practiclly every time the (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: Core of weapons case crumbling
(...) The best bit: " President Bush and Prime Minister Blair will be meeting in Washington later this week when they will discuss their strategy to justify the claims. " Justify their claims, not discern the truth, not to find out what went wrong, (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) Clearly all false... But I'm not sure he actually CLAIMED those things (what he did claim was bad enough in the lying department, though...), Dave! (...) I'm still in the "maybe" camp on that one, Dave! (...) As usual when discussing (...) (21 years ago, 11-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) It is -- thanks for recognizing that. Too bad some of the rest of you are so mentally challenged. (...) Where is the QUESTION? A declarative statement is not a question. You stated: "I believe that the perceived threat was never from the Iraqi (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) My reply to what? You snipped the context thankyouverymuch. Bad form. (...) Then pray tell why did you even reply to this post? (...) What a silly thing to say! As if providing "cites" bestows merit on a particular post. (...) Sorry, Richard, (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Costello wrote: <snip> , that does not (...) But after all that wonderful astuteness, Scott, by what right did your president have to invade a foreign country? His reasons as he listed in every speech and in every (...) (21 years ago, 11-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) That's your reply? It is absolutely a waste of time to discuss anything with you -- a person that does nothing but reiterate the nonsensical and empty platitudes of his favorite party. If you could but once come here with a cite from anyone (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) Well that is about the only thing we have accomplished thus far, except for the "world freely" part. (...) Right so after Afganistan, Saudi Arabia was the only country that we can actually prove did that. (...) Well given that there are more (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) So then how does that differ from how we reacted after 9-11? There wasn't any country responsible for that attack. Whom or what would you wipe off the planet? (...) No, Mike, I mean as in protecting oil fields so that they may be marketed to (...) (21 years ago, 13-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) I love how you minimize AMERICANS DYING on foreign soil and WAR in general as mere partisan politics! Yeah, we're all just little partisan pawns to move about to and fro on your Xtian "apocalypse" game board, John. For the upteenth time, and (...) (21 years ago, 11-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) So instead of having an honest justification -- since you have never been able to provide even a single bit of evidence to connect SH, AQ, and/or OBL -- you'd rather just invade countries within the world of Islam? Yeah, that's not anything (...) (21 years ago, 12-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) Gad, you are obtuse. I love how you minimize 1,000s OF AMERICANS who died on OUR soil! There is a very real threat out there, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not. We may never know the results of the pre-emptive deposing of SH, but I'd (...) (21 years ago, 12-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) Correct, but I'm pretty sure that you would have to go pretty far down the pike in order to get to a Democrat, which is really what this whole thing is all about (partisan politics). JOHN (21 years ago, 11-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) Or become a scofflaw and ignore it. Or rationalize rewriting the law for yourself (sometimes known as pushing the limit to see if it really is a limit): all posted speed limits are really five MPH faster than listed, or heck, this road is a (...) (21 years ago, 11-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: The Hidden Costs (was Re: It's All About Control)
(...) It was either getting all the formatting right so that my reply looked reasonably good, or just convert it to Plain... Lessee here... FTX away-- (2 URLs) Sparky's Space--Where Sparky has his Space... Oops, now it's almost on-topic! ;) (21 years ago, 26-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) I'm not clear why this is unrelated -- it seems very related to me, and also an obvious example of the U.S.' very poor foreign policy as a whole. The other issue is shelf-life: it is my understanding that most of this stuff has lost its (...) (21 years ago, 11-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.288)

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) First you must demonstrate that it's obvious. Then you must demonstrate that it's biased. Then you must demonstrate that it's a source. (also riffing on that previous joke (for those joining us late)) (...) I confess that I'll miss him, (...) (21 years ago, 11-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.288)

More: Next Page >>