General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Back Pain...why?!??

Started by Google Beta User · 13 August 2007 · Last activity 18 August 2007 · 103 posts · 2,124 views

← Back to General fitness, health and nutrition

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postBack Pain...why?!??Google Beta User · 13 Aug 2007 02 / This pagePosts 81–100Page 5 of 6 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #105Trent Woodruff · 18 Aug 2007

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section: General fitness, health and nutrition
Published: 13 August 2007
Last activity: 18 August 2007
Original author: Google Beta User
Posts: 103
Discussion status: Public discussion
Total views: 2,124
Views / 30 days: 0
Topics: Bike fit for back issues Cycling and age Lance Armstrong

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

David Loewe, Jr.
Archived post

17 August 2007, 13:42 UTC #83

Trent Woodruff said:
Quoted message said:
Kevin said:
"Michelle Steiner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> "David Loewe, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> What if they don't want to give up on the mission?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
If the command structure tell them to come home, they'll come home.
Quoted message said:
I think I would rather they come home victorious than losers and things seem
better lately.
Even if they're brought home, they're not losers in any fashion.
Tell it to the Vietnam Veterans, Trent...
Quoted message said:
You however...you are reprehensible, sir.

--
"1a) Never throw [censored] at an armed man.
1b) Never stand next to someone who is throwing [censored] at
an armed man."
-Laurence VanCott Niven

Report
Email address hidden
Archived post

17 August 2007, 14:34 UTC #84

Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
On Aug 16, 11:02 pm, [email hidden] wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> And this jerkoff has "alwaysaloser fondofmyassitis"
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Well, you DID pretty much nail that won.
Quoted message said:
I've nailed LOTS of them.
Gay guys? No surprise there. NTTAWWT.
Yes but I was on top, so I'm not gay.
--
_________________
Alric Knebel
http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html
http://www.ironeyefortress.com

Report
Email address hidden
Archived post

17 August 2007, 14:40 UTC #85

Jr. said:
"1a) Never throw [censored] at an armed man.
1b) Never stand next to someone who is throwing [censored] at
an armed man."
It seems more logical to not stand next to the guy who is getting [censored]
thrown at him, less ye be splattered.

Report
David Loewe, Jr.
Archived post

17 August 2007, 15:44 UTC #86

Quoted message said:
On Aug 17, 9:42 am, "David Loewe, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
"1a) Never throw [censored] at an armed man.
1b) Never stand next to someone who is throwing [censored] at
an armed man."

It seems more logical to not stand next to the guy who is getting [censored]
thrown at him, less ye be splattered.
And, when the ARMED man who is having [censored] thrown at him fires his
riot gun?
Note: This is Niven's First Law. It is taken from observation at the
1968 Democratic National Convention.
--
"There is a time and a place for tact (and there are times
when tact is entirely misplaced)."
-Laurence VanCott Niven

Report
Michelle
Archived post

17 August 2007, 16:25 UTC #87

In article <[email hidden]>,
runsrealfast said:
Quoted message said:
He was fighting in a war against a nation that attacked us. Iraq
never attacked us.
Be careful with that statement, a little internet research will show
that Iraq planned attacks on 'Western Targets' before we invaded.
(check the Washington Post)
The fact remains that Iraq never attacked us.

Report
runsrealfast
Archived post

17 August 2007, 19:09 UTC #88

Michelle said:
In article <[email hidden]>,
runsrealfast said:
Quoted message said:
He was fighting in a war against a nation that attacked us. Iraq
never attacked us.
Quoted message said:
Be careful with that statement, a little internet research will show
that Iraq planned attacks on 'Western Targets' before we invaded.
(check the Washington Post)
The fact remains that Iraq never attacked us.
No your right they didn't, which is a result of invading Iraq.

Report
Email address hidden
Archived post

17 August 2007, 20:03 UTC #89

runsrealfast said:
No your right they didn't, which is a result of invading Iraq.
Nor were there any plans by them to attack us either.

Report
Michelle
Archived post

17 August 2007, 20:51 UTC #90

In article <[email hidden]>,
runsrealfast said:
Quoted message said:
The fact remains that Iraq never attacked us.
No your right they didn't, which is a result of invading Iraq.
Just like garlic keeps the vampires away from me.
--
Crossing the starting line is 90%.
Crossing the finish line is the other 90%.

Report
rich hammett
Archived post

17 August 2007, 20:57 UTC #91

In rec.sport.football.college David Loewe, Jr. <[email hidden]> sanoi, hitaasti kuin hämähäkki:
Quoted message said:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:40:18 -0000, [email hidden] wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
On Aug 17, 9:42 am, "David Loewe, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
"1a) Never throw [censored] at an armed man.
1b) Never stand next to someone who is throwing [censored] at
an armed man."

It seems more logical to not stand next to the guy who is getting [censored]
thrown at him, less ye be splattered.
Quoted message said:
And, when the ARMED man who is having [censored] thrown at him fires his
riot gun?
Quoted message said:
Note: This is Niven's First Law. It is taken from observation at the
1968 Democratic National Convention.
It seems to try to justify or make light of murdering people for doing
something gross. Is that how you feel?
rich
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ Barry Goldwater: "Every good Christian should line up
\ and kick Jerry Falwell's ass."

Report
David Loewe, Jr.
Archived post

17 August 2007, 21:35 UTC #92

rich hammett said:
In rec.sport.football.college David Loewe, Jr. <[email hidden]>
sanoi, hitaasti kuin hämähäkki:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
On Aug 17, 9:42 am, "David Loewe, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> "1a) Never throw [censored] at an armed man.
> 1b) Never stand next to someone who is throwing [censored] at
> an armed man."
>
It seems more logical to not stand next to the guy who is getting [censored]
thrown at him, less ye be splattered.
Quoted message said:
And, when the ARMED man who is having [censored] thrown at him fires his
riot gun?
Quoted message said:
Note: This is Niven's First Law. It is taken from observation at the
1968 Democratic National Convention.
It seems to try to justify or make light of murdering people for doing
something gross.
Huh?!?
Quoted message said:
Is that how you feel?
Huh?!?
How do you get EITHER of those conclusions (that it's what Niven meant
and that I feel that way) out of that?
--
"There is a time and a place for tact (and there are times
when tact is entirely misplaced)."
-Laurence VanCott Niven

Report
Kevin
Archived post

17 August 2007, 22:04 UTC #93

"runsrealfast" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Michelle said:
In article <[email hidden]>,
runsrealfast said:
> He was fighting in a war against a nation that attacked us. Iraq
> never attacked us.
Quoted message said:
Be careful with that statement, a little internet research will show
that Iraq planned attacks on 'Western Targets' before we invaded.
(check the Washington Post)
The fact remains that Iraq never attacked us.
No your right they didn't, which is a result of invading Iraq.
For that matter Korea, Germany, Italy, Vietnam and Iraq (Gulf War I) never
attacked us either.
Quoted message said:

Report
runsrealfast
Archived post

17 August 2007, 22:09 UTC #94

Kevin said:
"runsrealfast" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Michelle said:
In article <[email hidden]>,
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
runsrealfast <[email hidden]> wrote:
> > He was fighting in a war against a nation that attacked us. Iraq
> > never attacked us.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> Be careful with that statement, a little internet research will show
> that Iraq planned attacks on 'Western Targets' before we invaded.
> (check the Washington Post)
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
The fact remains that Iraq never attacked us.
Quoted message said:
No your right they didn't, which is a result of invading Iraq.
For that matter Korea, Germany, Italy, Vietnam and Iraq (Gulf War I) never
attacked us either.
All of those have been justified before, no need to re-hash those
wars.
John

Report
Kevin
Archived post

17 August 2007, 23:33 UTC #95

"runsrealfast" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Kevin said:
"runsrealfast" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
On Aug 17, 10:25 am, Michelle <[email hidden]> wrote:
> In article <[email hidden]>,
Quoted message said:
> runsrealfast <[email hidden]> wrote:
> > > He was fighting in a war against a nation that attacked us. Iraq
> > > never attacked us.
Quoted message said:
> > Be careful with that statement, a little internet research will show
> > that Iraq planned attacks on 'Western Targets' before we invaded.
> > (check the Washington Post)
Quoted message said:
> The fact remains that Iraq never attacked us.
Quoted message said:
No your right they didn't, which is a result of invading Iraq.
For that matter Korea, Germany, Italy, Vietnam and Iraq (Gulf War I)
never
attacked us either.
All of those have been justified before, no need to re-hash those
wars.
I think the point was that like Iraq, those countries didn't invade us so
that by itself is insufficient reason to condemn the Iraq war.
Quoted message said:

John

Report
Michelle
Archived post

17 August 2007, 23:34 UTC #96

In article <[email hidden]>,
Kevin said:
For that matter Korea, Germany, Italy, Vietnam and Iraq (Gulf War I)
never attacked us either.
Germany and Italy declared war on us. North Korea attacked our troops
that were stationed in South Korea. Kuwait asked for our help after
Iraq attacked it.
Iraq didn't declare war on us. Iraq didn't attack any of our troops.
No one asked for help against Iraq in 2003, because Iraq had not
attacked anyone.
--
Crossing the starting line is 90%.
Crossing the finish line is the other 90%.

Report
Trent Woodruff
Archived post

18 August 2007, 06:10 UTC #97

Quoted message said:
Kevin said:
"Trent Woodruff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
Quoted message said:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:52:16 -0600, "Kevin" <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
I think I would rather they come home victorious than losers and things
seem better lately.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Even if they're brought home, they're not losers in any fashion. You
however...you are reprehensible, sir.
Quoted message said:
You missed the point ...never mind.
No, I most certainly did not. You clearly have, though.
....Never think that a handful of committed people can't change the world. In fact, it's the thing that usually has.

Report
Trent Woodruff
Archived post

18 August 2007, 06:12 UTC #98

Quoted message said:
Jr. said:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 01:41:38 -0700, Trent Woodruff
Quoted message said:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:52:16 -0600, "Kevin" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>"Michelle Steiner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>> "David Loewe, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>>Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>> What if they don't want to give up on the mission?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> If the command structure tell them to come home, they'll come home.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
I think I would rather they come home victorious than losers and things seem
better lately.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Even if they're brought home, they're not losers in any fashion.
Quoted message said:
Tell it to the Vietnam Veterans, Trent...
Say what? Why should the Vietnam Veterans be considered "losers"?
This doesn't make any sense to me at all, David...and I'm VERY
surprised to hear it coming from you.
Others' perspectives of them has nothing to do with whether they are
"losers" or not. Those who use others' opinions to form their own are
the losers...apparently, you fall into that category?
....Never think that a handful of committed people can't change the world. In fact, it's the thing that usually has.

Report
David Loewe, Jr.
Archived post

18 August 2007, 13:25 UTC #99

Trent Woodruff said:
Quoted message said:
Jr. said:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 01:41:38 -0700, Trent Woodruff
>On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:52:16 -0600, "Kevin" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>"Michelle Steiner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>> "David Loewe, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>>>Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>> What if they don't want to give up on the mission?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>> If the command structure tell them to come home, they'll come home.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>I think I would rather they come home victorious than losers and things seem
>better lately.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Even if they're brought home, they're not losers in any fashion.
Quoted message said:
Tell it to the Vietnam Veterans, Trent...
Say what? Why should the Vietnam Veterans be considered "losers"?
This doesn't make any sense to me at all, David...and I'm VERY
surprised to hear it coming from you.
Others' perspectives of them has nothing to do with whether they are
"losers" or not. Those who use others' opinions to form their own are
the losers...apparently, you fall into that category?
The problem with what you are saying is that "Others' perspectives" is
exactly what is being bandied about here.
But, you knew that...
--
"Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed."
-Lazarus Long

Report
Kevin
Archived post

18 August 2007, 13:37 UTC #100

"Trent Woodruff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:
You missed the point ...never mind.
No, I most certainly did not. You clearly have, though.
No, you obviously did miss the point. Otherwise you would have restated it.
Quoted message said:
...Never think that a handful of committed people can't change the world.
In fact, it's the thing that usually has.

Report
Trent Woodruff
Archived post

18 August 2007, 18:30 UTC #101

Quoted message said:
Jr. said:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 23:12:18 -0700, Trent Woodruff
Quoted message said:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:42:46 -0500, "David Loewe, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote:
>On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 01:41:38 -0700, Trent Woodruff
>>On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:52:16 -0600, "Kevin" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>>"Michelle Steiner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>>> "David Loewe, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>>>>Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>>> What if they don't want to give up on the mission?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>> If the command structure tell them to come home, they'll come home.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>I think I would rather they come home victorious than losers and things seem
>>better lately.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>Even if they're brought home, they're not losers in any fashion.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Tell it to the Vietnam Veterans, Trent...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Say what? Why should the Vietnam Veterans be considered "losers"?
This doesn't make any sense to me at all, David...and I'm VERY
surprised to hear it coming from you.
Others' perspectives of them has nothing to do with whether they are
"losers" or not. Those who use others' opinions to form their own are
the losers...apparently, you fall into that category?
Quoted message said:
The problem with what you are saying is that "Others' perspectives" is
exactly what is being bandied about here.
No, it certainly isn't.
Quoted message said:
But, you knew that...
Only for those who allow others' opinions to form their own.
....Never think that a handful of committed people can't change the world. In fact, it's the thing that usually has.

Report
Trent Woodruff
Archived post

18 August 2007, 18:31 UTC #102

Quoted message said:
Kevin said:
"Trent Woodruff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
You missed the point ...never mind.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
No, I most certainly did not. You clearly have, though.
Quoted message said:
No, you obviously did miss the point. Otherwise you would have restated it.
There's no reason to restate the obvious point that you're an idiot
who doesn't think through what they're saying very clearly.
....Never think that a handful of committed people can't change the world. In fact, it's the thing that usually has.

Report

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.

Jump through the discussion

What we know about this thread

Continue through CyclingForums

Active in this thread