Passenger killed by air marshall

Grammatron said:
3) You know you are wrong and refuse to admit it.
Click to expand...
ARTHUR: Look, you stupid bastard. You've got no arms left.
BLACK KNIGHT: Yes, I have.
ARTHUR: Look!
BLACK KNIGHT: Just a flesh wound. [kick]
ARTHUR: Look, stop that.
BLACK KNIGHT: Chicken! [kick] Chickennn!
ARTHUR: Look, I'll have your leg. [kick] Right! [whop] [ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's right leg off]
04_kn-3.jpg

BLACK KNIGHT: Right. I'll do you for that!
ARTHUR: You'll what?
BLACK KNIGHT: Come here!
ARTHUR: What are you going to do, bleed on me?
 
Freakshow said:
ARTHUR: Look, you stupid bastard. You've got no arms left.
BLACK KNIGHT: Yes, I have.
ARTHUR: Look!
BLACK KNIGHT: Just a flesh wound. [kick]
ARTHUR: Look, stop that.
BLACK KNIGHT: Chicken! [kick] Chickennn!
ARTHUR: Look, I'll have your leg. [kick] Right! [whop] [ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's right leg off]
04_kn-3.jpg

BLACK KNIGHT: Right. I'll do you for that!
ARTHUR: You'll what?
BLACK KNIGHT: Come here!
ARTHUR: What are you going to do, bleed on me?
Click to expand...

Scooped me, dammit.

So, if the DOI has no legal standing, what is the discussion about? Has anyone discerned a contention on Claus' part yet, aside from argument, I mean?

I also not that the Tripoli document which is a legal docuemnt, has gotton no comment.
 
Upchurch said:
Oookay. So do you think that the rights described in the DoI means something or has any authority?
Click to expand...

According to you, how many times does a person have to make his views clear, before you will recognize it?

1? 2? 5? 10? 100?

If you acknowledge that I agree, why do you argue the opposite?

Show me the evidence that I have argued that the DoI has legal value.
 
CFLarsen said:
No.

All you have to do is show me the evidence that I have argued that the DoI has legal value.
Click to expand...

By arguing that rights of Americans are "coming from" or "endowed by" the DoI you are arguing it has legal value.

This is why I provided those three views and source.
 
CFLarsen said:
Wrong.

Show me the evidence that I have argued that the DoI has legal value.
Click to expand...

I will repeat myself:

By arguing that rights of Americans are "coming from" or "endowed by" the DoI you are arguing it has legal value.

It's as simple as that, you can't claim you are not arguing it has legal value when you keep insisting that this is where rights in the USA are "coming from".
 
CFLarsen said:
Wrong.

Show me the evidence that I have argued that the DoI has legal value.
Click to expand...

He just did, and you're being deliberately obtuse.

Don't be such a sore loser, Claus. You're becoming an embarrassment now. Just let it go, the thread will slip to page 2, and no one will have to remember the 34-page "Claus' Folly" after that.
 
CFLarsen said:
According to you, how many times does a person have to make his views clear, before you will recognize it?

1? 2? 5? 10? 100?

If you acknowledge that I agree, why do you argue the opposite?

Show me the evidence that I have argued that the DoI has legal value.
Click to expand...
I'm trying to understand what you are trying to prove. You keep saying that "US rights" come from a supernatural entity, but the document you refer to does not have the authority to make such a proclamation, which you freely say you understand.

So, either you don't understand that US citizens do not have the rights described in the DoI or you don't really understand what the DoI is. I'm trying to figure out which.
 
Jocko said:
He just did, and you're being deliberately obtuse.
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced it is deliberate.

Don't be such a sore loser, Claus. You're becoming an embarrassment now.
Click to expand...
He was an embarrassment a LONG time ago.

Just let it go, the thread will slip to page 2, and no one will have to remember the 34-page "Claus' Folly" after that.
Click to expand...
I don't know...I might bump it now and then, just to stir things up a bit for fun. :D
 
Upchurch said:
I'm trying to understand what you are trying to prove. You keep saying that "US rights" come from a supernatural entity, but the document you refer to does not have the authority to make such a proclamation, which you freely say you understand.

So, either you don't understand that US citizens do not have the rights described in the DoI or you don't really understand what the DoI is. I'm trying to figure out which.
Click to expand...

According to you, how many times does a person have to make his views clear, before you will recognize it?

1? 2? 5? 10? 100?

If you acknowledge that I agree, why do you argue the opposite?

Show me the evidence that I have argued that the DoI has legal value.
 
Upchurch said:
Do you deny having said that US citizens have the rights defined in the DoI?
Click to expand...
According to you, how many times does a person have to make his views clear, before you will recognize it?

1? 2? 5? 10? 100?

If you acknowledge that I agree, why do you argue the opposite?

Show me the evidence that I have argued that the DoI has legal value.
 
CFLarsen said:
Show me the evidence that I have argued that the DoI has legal value.
Click to expand...
I'm trying to understand just what kind of value you think the DoI has. If not legal, then what possible basis is there to insist that US citizens have mystically endowed rights?
 
Upchurch said:
I'm trying to understand just what kind of value you think the DoI has. If not legal, then what possible basis is there to insist that US citizens have mystically endowed rights?
Click to expand...
According to you, how many times does a person have to make his views clear, before you will recognize it?

1? 2? 5? 10? 100?

If you acknowledge that I agree, why do you argue the opposite?

Show me the evidence that I have argued that the DoI has legal value.
 
CFLarsen said:
According to you, how many times does a person have to make his views clear, before you will recognize it?
Click to expand...
42

CFLarsen said:
If you acknowledge that I agree, why do you argue the opposite?
Click to expand...
Because you keep saying that US citizens have mystically endowed rights from the DoI. I see no other basis for arguing that.

CFLarsen said:
Show me the evidence that I have argued that the DoI has legal value.
Click to expand...
See above.
 
CFLarsen said:
That's not evidence. That's your opinion.
Click to expand...

Except of course everyone but you thinks of it as an opinion.

I understand and agree that you say that you don't view DoI as a legal document, but your continued efforts to show that rights come from DoI contradict your own claim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom