 |
 |
| All Forums | Forum List | Register | Members List | Calendar | Bike Rack | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |  |
07-02-2004, 07:04 PM
| #41 (permalink) |
|
Posts: n/a
| Re: Clinchers versus Tubulars Werehatrack <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message news:<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>. .. > On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:12:34 -0400, "Churchill" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote: > > it is a unitary assembly > Is this sort of assembly legal? Isn't there something in the patriot act against this Andres PS: Sorry, I've been spending way too much time in the "misslead" thread |
 |
|
07-02-2004, 07:11 PM
| #42 (permalink) |
|
Posts: n/a
| Re: Clinchers versus Tubulars On 2 Jul 2004 20:04:08 -0700, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (andres muro) wrote: >Werehatrack <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message news:<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>. .. >> On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:12:34 -0400, "Churchill" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote: >> >> it is a unitary assembly > > > >Is this sort of assembly legal? Isn't there something in the patriot >act against this > >Andres > >PS: Sorry, I've been spending way too much time in the "misslead" >thread FWIW, I took one glance at it and ignored the thread. (Bush-bashing used to be fun, but it's too easy now; no challenge.) -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Surrealism is a pectinated ranzel. |
| |
|
07-02-2004, 07:11 PM
| #43 (permalink) |
|
Posts: n/a
| Re: Clinchers versus Tubulars On 2 Jul 2004 20:04:08 -0700, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (andres muro) wrote: >Werehatrack <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message news:<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>. .. >> On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:12:34 -0400, "Churchill" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote: >> >> it is a unitary assembly > > > >Is this sort of assembly legal? Isn't there something in the patriot >act against this > >Andres > >PS: Sorry, I've been spending way too much time in the "misslead" >thread FWIW, I took one glance at it and ignored the thread. (Bush-bashing used to be fun, but it's too easy now; no challenge.) -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Surrealism is a pectinated ranzel. |
| |
|
07-02-2004, 07:11 PM
| #44 (permalink) |
|
Posts: n/a
| Re: Clinchers versus Tubulars On 2 Jul 2004 20:04:08 -0700, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (andres muro) wrote: >Werehatrack <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message news:<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>. .. >> On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:12:34 -0400, "Churchill" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote: >> >> it is a unitary assembly > > > >Is this sort of assembly legal? Isn't there something in the patriot >act against this > >Andres > >PS: Sorry, I've been spending way too much time in the "misslead" >thread FWIW, I took one glance at it and ignored the thread. (Bush-bashing used to be fun, but it's too easy now; no challenge.) -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Surrealism is a pectinated ranzel. |
| |
|
07-02-2004, 07:11 PM
| #45 (permalink) |
|
Posts: n/a
| Re: Clinchers versus Tubulars On 2 Jul 2004 20:04:08 -0700, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (andres muro) wrote: >Werehatrack <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message news:<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>. .. >> On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:12:34 -0400, "Churchill" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote: >> >> it is a unitary assembly > > > >Is this sort of assembly legal? Isn't there something in the patriot >act against this > >Andres > >PS: Sorry, I've been spending way too much time in the "misslead" >thread FWIW, I took one glance at it and ignored the thread. (Bush-bashing used to be fun, but it's too easy now; no challenge.) -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Surrealism is a pectinated ranzel. |
| |
|
07-02-2004, 07:11 PM
| #46 (permalink) |
|
Posts: n/a
| Re: Clinchers versus Tubulars On 2 Jul 2004 20:04:08 -0700, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (andres muro) wrote: >Werehatrack <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message news:<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>. .. >> On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:12:34 -0400, "Churchill" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote: >> >> it is a unitary assembly > > > >Is this sort of assembly legal? Isn't there something in the patriot >act against this > >Andres > >PS: Sorry, I've been spending way too much time in the "misslead" >thread FWIW, I took one glance at it and ignored the thread. (Bush-bashing used to be fun, but it's too easy now; no challenge.) -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Surrealism is a pectinated ranzel. |
| |
|
07-03-2004, 07:27 AM
| #47 (permalink) |
|
Posts: n/a
| Re: Clinchers versus Tubulars On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 20:04:08 -0700, andres muro wrote: >> it is a unitary assembly > > > > Is this sort of assembly legal? Isn't there something in the patriot act > against this > > Andres You're confusing this with a "Unitarian Assembly", which is indeed a godless gaggle and a threat to democracy. "Unitarian Assemblies" are also notorious for an overabundance of small parts and their lack of included cement. |
| |
|
07-03-2004, 07:27 AM
| #48 (permalink) |
|
Posts: n/a
| Re: Clinchers versus Tubulars On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 20:04:08 -0700, andres muro wrote: >> it is a unitary assembly > > > > Is this sort of assembly legal? Isn't there something in the patriot act > against this > > Andres You're confusing this with a "Unitarian Assembly", which is indeed a godless gaggle and a threat to democracy. "Unitarian Assemblies" are also notorious for an overabundance of small parts and their lack of included cement. |
| |
|
07-03-2004, 07:27 AM
| #49 (permalink) |
|
Posts: n/a
| Re: Clinchers versus Tubulars On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 20:04:08 -0700, andres muro wrote: >> it is a unitary assembly > > > > Is this sort of assembly legal? Isn't there something in the patriot act > against this > > Andres You're confusing this with a "Unitarian Assembly", which is indeed a godless gaggle and a threat to democracy. "Unitarian Assemblies" are also notorious for an overabundance of small parts and their lack of included cement. |
| |
|
07-03-2004, 07:27 AM
| #50 (permalink) |
|
Posts: n/a
| Re: Clinchers versus Tubulars On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 20:04:08 -0700, andres muro wrote: >> it is a unitary assembly > > > > Is this sort of assembly legal? Isn't there something in the patriot act > against this > > Andres You're confusing this with a "Unitarian Assembly", which is indeed a godless gaggle and a threat to democracy. "Unitarian Assemblies" are also notorious for an overabundance of small parts and their lack of included cement. |
| |
 |
Add this thread to:
 Tag This Thread  Clesto  Digg  Reddit  Furl  Del.icio.us  Spurl |
| Thread Tools | |
| |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:13 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.1.0
Style Design by vBStyles.com
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.1.0
Style Design by vBStyles.com
