Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, you're wrong about that. It was the Basque. They are responsible for all the world's ills. Them and the Ainu, although the Ainu's evil influence is more limited in scope. It has also been hypothesized that the Inuit have taken part in this global conspiracy as well. Although factually unclear, I'd bet the farm that they are most certainly a part of the unholy Basque/Ainu alliance bent on brainwashing the world into thinking that people are just people, rather than always finding a "them," as clearly, it's supposed to be.
Ridicule is neither effective nor praiseworthy. But apparently you can offer nothing of substance to refute the claim.
There are two mutually exclusive scenarios for survival:
[] solitary rural refuge - that escapes a pandemic or other similar catastrophe, or
[] fortified community - that cooperates in supporting each other in the midst of an economic collapse, civil unrest, etc.
My personal preference is for a cooperative group, but it may turn out that the solo survivalists will have the last laugh.
There are two mutually exclusive scenarios for survival:
[] solitary rural refuge - that escapes a pandemic or other similar catastrophe, or
[] fortified community - that cooperates in supporting each other in the midst of an economic collapse, civil unrest, etc.
My personal preference is for a cooperative group, but it may turn out that the solo survivalists will have the last laugh.
Not necessarily.
You could say: have your quite little place on 80 acres, off the grid, with an orchard etc... That some of the guys you were in Iraq with, family etc knew to rally up on if the need ever presented itself.
In the meantime you get to enjoy the life you want.
That's a claim, not a citation. A citation means name of the work, edition, and page number.
No it's not a citation, it's the original source. A citation would require someone else saying Jefferson said it. I don't need the citation because the original source is in existence, and it contains the actual statement.
Indeed my posting on this is a citation, since it references the original source, which is what a citation is. Therefore with much aplomb... if you insist on the citation I cite post #283 284, and 285 as my citation.
No it's not a citation, it's the original source. A citation would require someone else saying Jefferson said it. I don't need the citation because the original source is in existence, and it contains the actual statement.
Indeed my posting on this is a citation, since it references the original source, which is what a citation is. Therefore with much aplomb... if you insist on the citation I cite post #283 284, and 285 as my citation.
Therefore, your assertion cannot be proved. So by the standards of logic it's false. Try to figure out how I knew you had never seen the document or its publication. Obviously if I thought there was any chance you had I wouldn't have challenged you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
