Jury Duty

[RightWingSpirit]

No, genius... I hate Gloria Alread. Nor do I ever lie... although you like repeating lies, I've noticed. You also fail to grasp the simplest concepts or follow through. Rather, you change subjects when beaten....

But do keep trying. You might learn to argue properly one day.

jillian owns donistons gonads.

 

[doniston]

No, genius... I hate Gloria Alread. Nor do I ever lie... although you like repeating lies, I've noticed. You also fail to grasp the simplest concepts or follow through. Rather, you change subjects when beaten....

Speaking of which, when you say people shouldn't be allowed to file "frivolous suits", that presupposes someone judges in advance that they are frivolous. I stand by what I said. I also stand by what I said about you being permanently excused from jury service. A juror is supposed to make up their own mind and be independent. That would be a valued trait if the person weren't a complete nutter.

But do keep trying. You might learn to argue properly one day.

As for me being a lawyer, not a shyster, dearie.... I'm quite good at what I do. But thanks for your concern.

Cheers...

Speaking of lies,
1.Post even a single lie that I have stated or repeated.

2. Post any statement where I have said that frivolous lawsuits should not be allowed. that is a flat lie and simply your imagination. and then you continue to argue your own lie "presupposes what???"

No, I don't change subjects, I just refuse to follow your leads with your strawmen.

A juror is supposed to make up their own mind and be independent. [/quote} if you had paid attention, you might have noted that this was one of my main points You lose.

But do keep trying. You might learn to argue properly one day.

As for me being a lawyer, not a shyster, dearie.... I'm quite good at what I do. But thanks for your concern.

1. I argue quite propery thank you. I speak the truth without diversion. you don't. sometimes that is proper for an attorney, other times it makes you a lying shyster

2. I don't consider your method of arguing to be anything PROPER. ---No matter,

3. Good and bad is oft times a comparative thing. If you are good, you must have had some VERY bad opposition.

4. In this situation if you and I were opposed "In Court" you would already have lost. and that is basically why I have no faith or trust in attorneys.

 

[jillian]

Blah, blah, blah, blah.... I understand you're feeling surly given you've not had an answer for any question I've raised on any thread.

Again, WHAT BETTER SYSTEM HAVE YOU SEEN THAN THE JURY SYSTEM? You are capable of focusing on a question long enough to answer it, aren't you? Well, maybe you're not.

As for being "good" being comparitive, no, actually, I've had some of the best adversaries. Nice try though. Given I've kicked your butt all around the block, I find it amusing that you would say that, not that I need validation from a wackadoodle who can't be trusted ever to be on a jury.

By the by, if I were you, I'd go back and read the stuff you wrote. You have this truly bizarre habit of making statements, then denying you made them. Pretty odd... you should at least try to retain some memory of what you said. Unless of course you're just spewing words and those words have no meaning.

Hmmmmmmmmmm.... by george, I think I've got it... RAFLMAO!

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Blah, blah, blah, blah.... I understand you're feeling surly given you've not had an answer for any question I've raised on any thread.

Again, WHAT BETTER SYSTEM HAVE YOU SEEN THAN THE JURY SYSTEM? You are capable of focusing on a question long enough to answer it, aren't you? Well, maybe you're not.

As for being "good" being comparitive, no, actually, I've had some of the best adversaries. Nice try though. Given I've kicked your butt all around the block, I find it amusing that you would say that, not that I need validation from a wackadoodle who can't be trusted ever to be on a jury.

By the by, if I were you, I'd go back and read the stuff you wrote. You have this truly bizarre habit of making statements, then denying you made them. Pretty odd... you should at least try to retain some memory of what you said. Unless of course you're just spewing words and those words have no meaning.

Hmmmmmmmmmm.... by george, I think I've got it... RAFLMAO!

Old age can lead to all kind of memory and thinking problems. Ask him about how he has evidence the Japanese were gonna surrender BEFORE we dropped nukes and the Soviets Invaded Manchuria.

 

[doniston]

Blah, blah, blah, blah.... I understand you're feeling surly given you've not had an answer for any question I've raised on any thread.

Again, WHAT BETTER SYSTEM HAVE YOU SEEN THAN THE JURY SYSTEM? You are capable of focusing on a question long enough to answer it, aren't you? Well, maybe you're not.

As for being "good" being comparitive, no, actually, I've had some of the best adversaries. Nice try though. Given I've kicked your butt all around the block, I find it amusing that you would say that, not that I need validation from a wackadoodle who can't be trusted ever to be on a jury.

By the by, if I were you, I'd go back and read the stuff you wrote. You have this truly bizarre habit of making statements, then denying you made them. Pretty odd... you should at least try to retain some memory of what you said. Unless of course you're just spewing words and those words have no meaning.

Hmmmmmmmmmm.... by george, I think I've got it... RAFLMAO!

Are we back to repeat mode?

I will only respond to one portion of your rant, and that is with a question. How many times do I have to answer this before you pay attention?

WHAT BETTER SYSTEM HAVE YOU SEEN THAN THE JURY SYSTEM? Go back and pay attention. I have answered this twice. Apparently you didn't like my answer Shyster.

 

[doniston]

Old age can lead to all kind of memory and thinking problems. Ask him about how he has evidence the Japanese were gonna surrender BEFORE we dropped nukes and the Soviets Invaded Manchuria.

lately, out of your very own links, that you don't seem to be able to undersand, and much earlier when I first heard of their desire to surrender. Don't blame me of your don't know how to read, or understand what you read.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

lately, out of your very own links, that you don't seem to be able to undersand, and much earlier when I first heard of their desire to surrender. Don't blame me of your don't know how to read, or understand what you read.

Moron, the link I provide is quite clear that the Japanese were only interested in stopping the war by THEIR demands of keeping their military, keeping their Government, keeping their Prewar territory and any they still held.

Further MORON, my link proves that even AFTER 2 atomic bombs and a Soviet Invasion it took the PERSONAL intervention of the Emperor to make the Government surrender and even then there was an attempted Coup to prevent it. But do keep claiming otherwise.

 

[doniston]

Moron, the link I provide is quite clear that the Japanese were only interested in stopping the war by THEIR demands of keeping their military, keeping their Government, keeping their Prewar territory and any they still held.

Further MORON, my link proves that even AFTER 2 atomic bombs and a Soviet Invasion it took the PERSONAL intervention of the Emperor to make the Government surrender and even then there was an attempted Coup to prevent it. But do keep claiming otherwise.

Thank you, I will RetardedGySgt I realize that in your mealy mind, you see it that way. I don't. and I read it too. you and I will never agree upon this, and I recognize it. don't you? -- or do you want to keep beating a dead horse?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Thank you, I will RetardedGySgt I realize that in your mealy mind, you see it that way. I don't. and I read it too. you and I will never agree upon this, and I recognize it. don't you? -- or do you want to keep beating a dead horse?

It isn't an opinion, it is a HISTORICAL FACT. The link I gave provides links to SOURCE documents that say EXACTLY what I just said. You on the other hand either are incapable of independent thought or think we should have just allowed Japan to make the terms for their ending, not surrendering, in the war.

 

[doniston]

It isn't an opinion, it is a HISTORICAL FACT. The link I gave provides links to SOURCE documents that say EXACTLY what I just said. You on the other hand either are incapable of independent thought or think we should have just allowed Japan to make the terms for their ending, not surrendering, in the war.

No, they say exactly what they say. but not what you apparently think they say. anyhow. this is getting us nowhere, we will continue to disagree. I don't like dead horses.