Re: Railways
- From: NM <never.opened@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 17:39:13 GMT
Brimstone wrote:
"NM" <never.opened@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:aH5Xh.10273$J64.6291@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNo, it was a richly deserved reaction to your stupid childish commentBrimstone wrote:"NM" <never.opened@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:WP4Xh.2674$Ca7.253@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxFOAD idiot.Brimstone wrote:I haven't made an assertion, apart from the fact that your statement is untrue. And you're still wrong."NM" <never.opened@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:wE4Xh.9126$M_3.2650@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNo, because I was right the first time, your assertion isn't 'truth'.Brimstone wrote:Wrong."NM" <never.opened@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:W43Xh.2271$V7.806@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxMarket forces.
Now they are a terminal basket case..Why?
Care to try again?
Go away and read some more.
So that's a "I'm not old enough to have learnt yet" is it?
.
- References:
- Railways
- From: Brian Robertson
- Re: Railways
- From: NM
- Re: Railways
- From: allan tracy
- Re: Railways
- From: Steve Firth
- Re: Railways
- From: Derek Geldard
- Re: Railways
- From: allan tracy
- Re: Railways
- From: Steve Firth
- Re: Railways
- From: allan tracy
- Re: Railways
- From: Brian Robertson
- Re: Railways
- From: NM
- Re: Railways
- From: Brian Robertson
- Re: Railways
- From: NM
- Re: Railways
- From: Brian Robertson
- Re: Railways
- From: NM
- Re: Railways
- From: Brimstone
- Re: Railways
- From: NM
- Re: Railways
- From: Brimstone
- Re: Railways
- From: NM
- Re: Railways
- From: Brimstone
- Re: Railways
- From: NM
- Re: Railways
- From: Brimstone
- Railways
- Prev by Date: Re: Railways
- Next by Date: Re: Railways
- Previous by thread: Re: Railways
- Next by thread: Re: Railways
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading