your opening statement was, again "The oath against using the OP as a weapon should have prevented Elaida or any captive Aes Sedai from showing the Seanchan Travelling."
If what you meant was "oh why did it have to be Elaida" that is not what that statement means.
It means you think that she should not have been able to do so.
Do you have some sort of reading comprehension disability??
Maybe you have a reading disability bitch.
"It just shouldnt have been an Aes Sedai to do it."
Not an Aes Sedai, meaning not Elaida - an Aes Sedai.
Don't flame me because you disagree, I will gladly flame you back. Just disagree.
Elaida, oh no you didn't!
- 04/12/2010 06:38:22 AM
2127 Views
The weave will not directly result in death
- 04/12/2010 06:54:20 AM
1038 Views
Re: The weave will not directly result in death
- 04/12/2010 07:08:50 AM
940 Views
Wrong for two reasons
- 04/12/2010 09:10:03 AM
1103 Views
Re: Wrong for two reasons
- 05/12/2010 08:39:02 AM
851 Views
you're forgetting she was collared.
- 05/12/2010 09:01:27 AM
733 Views
Re: you're forgetting she was collared.
- 05/12/2010 09:08:30 AM
822 Views
uhm, no that's not all you're saying.
- 05/12/2010 09:14:47 AM
834 Views
Yeah I am
- 05/12/2010 09:17:48 AM
763 Views
no. dude i gave you a direct quote from your own statement. that is not what you said
- 05/12/2010 09:20:14 AM
891 Views
Go dude yourself brother.
- 05/12/2010 09:27:33 AM
751 Views
wow i just...wow.
- 05/12/2010 09:33:41 AM
845 Views
Re: wow i just...wow.
- 05/12/2010 09:45:47 AM
835 Views
yes well you genuinely seem to be having a problem comprehending your own statements.
- 05/12/2010 09:51:18 AM
697 Views
Well you genuinely seem to be retarded.
- 05/12/2010 09:59:19 AM
764 Views
I judge this based off your own reactions to other's statements
- 05/12/2010 10:05:58 AM
861 Views
I judge you based on your own statements towards me
- 05/12/2010 10:16:18 AM
786 Views
if all you did was disagree with me, we would not be having this discussion.
- 05/12/2010 10:25:36 AM
732 Views
Seconded "This"^ *NM*
- 04/12/2010 07:09:17 PM
368 Views
the oath is very literal and does not forbid indirectly causing death
- 04/12/2010 02:55:13 PM
773 Views
Re: the oath is very literal and does not forbid indirectly causing death
- 05/12/2010 08:43:48 AM
825 Views
just because they didn't want to doesn't mean they weren't able.
- 05/12/2010 09:07:08 AM
778 Views
Re: just because they didn't want to doesn't mean they weren't able.
- 05/12/2010 09:11:28 AM
805 Views
well that would explain how santa is able to make his rounds in one night! *NM*
- 05/12/2010 09:13:42 AM
364 Views
well that would explain how santa is able to make his rounds in one night! *NM*
- 05/12/2010 09:13:43 AM
310 Views
Re: the oath is very literal and does not forbid indirectly causing death
- 06/12/2010 03:44:33 PM
743 Views
This is ridiculous. You can teach any weave, including Balefire. You just can't always use it. *NM*
- 05/12/2010 06:37:16 AM
324 Views
You can teach a weave so long as YOU believe that the weave won't be a weapon. Elaida knows better *NM*
- 05/12/2010 09:13:57 AM
366 Views
This is false, we've seen battle weaves taught since the start of the series.
- 05/12/2010 01:49:13 PM
722 Views
Right? and every AS seems to know how to make a fireball and call lightning
- 05/12/2010 02:44:45 PM
722 Views
There's another way she could have avoided it
- 05/12/2010 11:37:09 AM
721 Views
Re: There's another way she could have avoided it
- 05/12/2010 01:51:06 PM
1092 Views

*NM*
*NM*