Re: ACLU transcripts

shane wrote:
> Glenn wrote:
>
>> shane wrote:
>>
>>> Bob wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 07:56:37 +1000, shane
>>>> <remarcsdNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Bob wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 17:41:58 +1000, shane
>>>>>> <remarcsdNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bob wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 13:26:45 +1000, shane
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> again, you seem to think that the events in tokyo bay were
>>>>>>>> identical to what happened in vietnam.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope, never saw any embassy staff scrambling for a helicopter
on
>>>>>>> the roof of the embassy building in Tokyo. Nor a tank crash
>>>>>>> through the gates of a little bit of a foreign country like in
>>>>>>> Vietnam.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> you know, i GOTTA quit getting sucked into these off topic
>>>>>> discussions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Somewhat ironic as you started this particular sub-thread.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> nope. i responded to someone who said the 2nd was meant to
>>
>> guarantee
>>
>>>> american freedom. did you read clyde and glen's assertions?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes I read Cyde's, but no post of Glen's is in the direct path
>>
>> between
>>
>>> here and the original post. This sub-thread took off from your
>>> response to Cyde.
>>>
>>
>> What the hell does "direct path" mean, exactly? Clyde
>
> I think the word you are squeezing to get out is Cyde, ....
>> and I were the
>> first posters Bob responded to.
>>
>
> I know it will a very difficult concept for you to understand, given
> your apparent limitations in this area, but bear with me and I will
> endeavour to explain;
>
> I made a comment in response to Bob that said "you started this
> particular sub-thread."
>
> Bob responded "did you read clyde and glen's assertions?" Apparently
> he has the same problem as you in correctly reading names, as he got
> yours wrong as well.
>
> This brings us to my comment "Yes I read Cyde's, but no post of
Glen's
> is in the direct path between here and the original post." And just
to
> head off the spelling flame, I wrote "Glen's" deliberately in
response
> to Bob's use of the name.
>
> So my point was, that I had not read any of your posts on this
thread
> as they were not in a direct line in the thread to what I was
posting.
> Starting with your post that I am here responding to, I will name
who
> posted the previous post that is being responded to.
>
> Glenn
> Shane
> Bob
> Shane
> Bob
> Shane
> Bob
> Shane
> Bob
> Shane
> Dick C
> Shane
> Bob
> Richard Forrest
> Bob
> Martin Hutton
> Bob
> Cyde Weys
> John Harshman
> Cyde Weys
> Alexander - the originating post titled "ACLU transcripts."
>
> HTH, but suspecting it won't.
>
> Shane
> The truth will set you free.

Not always, apparently. Bob replied to your claim that he had started
the "sub-thread" about the "US never losing a war" by saying "i
responded to someone who said the 2nd was meant to guarantee american
freedom." That is precisely what he was responding to, and what both
"Clyde" and "Glen" and everyone else were arguing. Had his claim about
the US never losing a war never been challenged, it never would have
been a sub-thread. We've established that an original post is not a
"thread", and likewise, an original claim in a thread does not
constitute a sub-thread.

Frankly, my view is that it was silly to challenge the claim that the
US has never lost a war and create a sub-thread arguing over subjects
such as Vietnam and the US civil war, since whether ever losing or not
is not relevant to why citizens have rights, in this particular
thread, the right to bear arms. And also for the reason that the US is
arguably, the sole superpower in the world. What has or has not
happened in the past with wars is not particularly relevant to whether
the reasons for the right to bear arms is "outdated".



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: ACLU transcripts
    ... >> shane wrote: ... >>> Bob ... >> about the US never losing a war never been challenged, ... >> does not constitute a sub-thread. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Update from Vegas
    ... Who is this "Bob" everyone keeps referring to? ... Wei table because you have to see the shot of the match by Shane. ... Shane had a solid in the top left corner pocket and Dennis sunk it ...
    (rec.sport.billiard)
  • Re: SVB in CO
    ... Bob got to play Shane in the $1500 added bar box event on Saturday. ... (I was watching my friends Chris O and Chisolm play Chris Bartrum and ... racks on a bar table is scary. ...
    (rec.sport.billiard)
  • Re: Update from Vegas
    ... Nice going Bob. ... Enjoy the Masters next year with Bowman et al. I'm sure you'll do well there too. ... Wei table because you have to see the shot of the match by Shane. ...
    (rec.sport.billiard)
  • Re: Is Everybody OK?
    ... Bob wants to debate this on the board, but he accidently asked me two ... response so that Bob can now reply publicly... ... The real question you need to ask yourself is; why did he attack an already ... To take control of the Iraq oil supply ...
    (rec.outdoors.fishing.bass)