Erik Reuter wrote:
On Sat, Feb 21, 2004 at 10:06:18PM +, Richard Baker wrote:
And I am *shocked*, SHOCKED, *SHOCKED*, *SHOCKED!!!* that Erik didn't
write this! ...or did he?
Too easy.
And I am *shocked*, SHOCKED, *SHOCKED*, *SHOCKED!!!* that Erik didn't
respond in this thread with
On 22 Feb 2004, at 1:49 am, Julia Thompson wrote:
Erik Reuter wrote:
On Sat, Feb 21, 2004 at 10:06:18PM +, Richard Baker wrote:
And I am *shocked*, SHOCKED, *SHOCKED*, *SHOCKED!!!* that Erik didn't
write this! ...or did he?
Too easy.
And I am *shocked*, SHOCKED, *SHOCKED*, *SHOCKED!!!* that
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: Semicolon Saved San Francisco RE: BRin-L - are we
average?(wasRE: Hate_Amendment)
On 22 Feb 2004, at 1:49 am, Julia
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
My theory has always been that The Fool is Howard
Dean, actually...
And the boy-I'm-glad-I-wasn't-drinking-anything-when-I-read-that-post
award for the evening goes to Gautam.
Julia
___
From: The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Semicolon Saved San Francisco RE: BRin-L - are we average?
(wasRE: Hate_Amendment)
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 09:00:52 -0600
From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL
On Fri, Feb 20, 2004 at 11:17:57AM -0500, Jon Gabriel wrote:
From: The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Surely the kind of judicial ruling that let Treasonous Iran-Contra
Conspirator Poindexter go free is not good for a free society.
Surely such baiting and trolling attacks would be better launched
Surely such baiting and trolling attacks would be
better launched in
private.
Not for him, since he has an agenda and will use as
many opportunities as he can to push it forward, no
matter the relevance.
Damon.
=
Damon
From: Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Semicolon Saved San Francisco RE: BRin-L - are we
average?(wasRE: Hate_Amendment)
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 11:24:23 -0500
On Fri, Feb 20, 2004 at 11:17:57AM
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This
was a relevant counter-example
Actually, it was irrelevant Erik. I asked whether a particular
judicial ruling is good for a free society, and he brought up a
judicial ruling that is over a decade old, without ever
On Fri, Feb 20, 2004 at 06:44:56PM -, iaamoac wrote:
Actually, it was irrelevant Erik.
Hardly. It is a similar problem, but you treat it doesn't seem to offend
you, since it doesn't hamper your efforts to coerce others to follow
your whims.
--
Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/
10 matches
Mail list logo
