dorbie

Well Dorbie, I think I've been able to extract at least the general meaning of your point, which, most unfortunately, comes to nothing other than your average speculation and dull, and supposedly educated, guesses. The intrinsic mystery of the problem is really quite unfanthomable by modern means. Anyway, I've been developing another theory in regards to yourself, and your recent posts. It's essential for my thesis to be published you stae your sex; male or female. I'm guessing male - confirm please.

You are correct, but I see that as subtly different in that I assume the grommet contributed to the incident (closing loop grommet line snag?). If I couldn't dissuade her I would certainly have had nothing more to do with her. If she'd turned around and sued the pilot, the DZO, the rigger and everyone on the 4-way your attitude might have been different. If she'd sued you and Amy and tried to take away the financial stability you'd worked your lives to build for your family because you were standing around on the DZO that day, or maybe because Amy's resuscitation failed (assuming good Samaritan laws didn't shield) again your attitude would be different. These lawsuits are not victimless and the litigious are not always (almost never) the victims they paint themselves to be. I would have had considerable sympathy for this guy over his loss, now I have none, he's traded that for an opportunistic suit that will make innocent bystanders suffer. P.S. and I believe he knows this.

Sure it does.... Nonsense. It's absolutely clear independent of any forum that everyone is a potential victim of this crap. Go on tell me what about this forum makes it clearer to me that people I love could be the next victim of some self absorbed relative of a drunk who killed himself? If you're saying that being related makes one biased that doesn't say anything much, but I still disagree w.r.t. sue-happy associates, I would not approve of this is if was a relative or friend. I have one particular experience which informs that opinion. If you caught some guy in your home climbing out the window with your VCR, I doubt you'd have much sympathy if he used his son's corpse as an excuse, (I wouldn't). This asshole's crime is much more massive and more serious IMHO, that he uses a lawyer in a suit instead of a crowbar is only an additional affront.

No, the obnoxious modern phenomena is playing the legal blame game and trying to pin fault on people who are clearly innocent, even in the face of obviously culpable and atrocious conduct of the son. Like I said, he's a scumbag and his grief does not justify this bullshit. I've grieved for relatives in the past and seen the families of close friends who've suffered loss under far worse circumstances than this conduct their affairs with impressive dignity. This crap will go on as long as people excuse this kind of bullshit with the grief blanket. It's not OK and grief does not justify or excuse evil. You, I or anyone we know might be the next victim of this kind of vile opportunism. It doesn't take the internet to see that clearly.

- Every driver he passed on the road for not providing a safer target for a drunk to smash into.

But it's OK if it's left in a burning paper bag right? That's an American institution that must be protected.

You missed an option: it's already happened.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/baseball/mlb/05/24/hancock.lawsuit.ap/ Ready to blame anyone and everyone except where it belongs, all for the almighty dollar. The guys on the road who his drunken son smashed into are the victims in this, and how's a restaurant owner supposed to spot someone 2X the limit? He was an athlete, and it's not as if he was completely smashed.

How many times do we have to endure the same joke?

Stress response, and it's still an anecdote, and uncontrolled. You do not know nor have control over the totality of circumstances, nor a fair comparrison to draw. Moreover the witchdoctor may pick his victim carefully for no reason than to boost his reputation. People remember the cursees who die, but the little bastard may have issued a curse every week for a decade and finally got lucky. Finally, if there's one thing your brain has power over it's your body, this does not translate to external material factors except through more mundane processes like positive attitude affecting success in the conventional sense.

I would argue that Macbeth is an enemy and should be treated as such.

I'm led to believe that cities made extensive use of roads before the advent of the motor vehicle.

See what I mean, hillarious.

He wasn't replying to you, it's just not always about YOU. At least condescend appropriately and honestly.

Here's what you wrote w.r.t. their thoughts/beliefs: But if you'd rather forget you wrote that shit, I don't really blame you.

Bwahahahah. "All your base are belong to us." You're getting funnier by the post. It's been stated publicly by several US administrations why is that funny Their wording didn't exactly correspond to your version. LOL, I really wonder if you believe that shit.

Bwahahahah. "All your base are belong to us." You're getting funnier by the post.

Anything for a green card.

That'd be tricky. Sounds like a keylogger torjan, I hope you cleaned your system and were careful about which systems you used to log in in future.

I was thinking some more about this while I was flying, and came to the conclusion that for a lot of flying even with an accurate vario, you have no idea what your true AGL is. This isn't like most skydiving where you can look at your alti and know quite accurately how much altitude you have left relative to a fairly flat dropzone. This is particularly true I think in the "few hundreds of feet" zone where you're most likely to want to go to your reserve, even if you get familiar with a site you are likely to be flying all sorts of places where your judgement would be close to useless or at best subject to error, throw in the loss of altitude dealing with a collapse or spiral and there are just way too many unknowns to safely chop.

Looks like the charges are not directly related to his more grandiose lies about war crimes but directly to a falsified discharge document and benefits claims. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,274097,00.html I could think of a few more things I'd like to see him charged with, it's a pitty this is all they've got on him. All lies, he was booted out of the army after only 6 weeks.

Yea that was funny, the Beagle 2 wasn't even a rover.

The argument from polularity is a logical fallacy and it's not even true in this case. You're kind of anecdotal rhetoric is the reason some people object to free trade agreements, BUT only a self destructive fool would say no to a free trade agreement that delivered a $69 billion trade surplus. I guess some people just like debt, unemployment & poverty and the bounty they bestow. You've been struggling ever since you learned that Mexico turns a healthy ~$70billion trade surplus with the US. That pretty much devastates your earlier claims, now you're left railing against capitalism, without a viable alternative.

Yes the hard evidence was in a long time ago and you see it in all countries that enter into “free trade” agreements. A small part of the population win, foreign investors win and the majorities lose. So you're saying that in addition to a massive $200 billion PA trade and a mind boggling trade surplus, Mexico has also attracted foreign investment as a result of trade agreements. Thanks for pointing that out, that's an added bonus! Most contries are desperate for foreign investment because it generates jobs, growth, wealth & economic stability. You have to accept President John F. Kennedy's premise that a rising tide raises all boats and get over your hostility to a few big ships making a lot of money. If someone invests somewhere they expect and deserve a return, but there's enough personal benefit for everyone to make an agreement viable, like jobs vs. unemployment. For foreign investment this is doubly clear since investment brings in money & expertise that would simply go elsewhere.

This would be a sarcastic joke if not for the lack of sarcasm It's quite serious, if you claim as you did that Mexican farmers are being undercut on specific produce then there are downstream folks who consume the produce who are buying it cheaper elsewhere, and they benefit as a result. For every loser there's a winer and you need to look at the balance of trade to get a fair overview. You don't really know much about free trade do you? The U.S. runs a a $64billion trade deficit with Mexico. Now when you can explain how the flow of $64billion P.A. of trade dollars hurts the Mexican economy you'll have something to say. In addition to this there's an overall trade of around $200billion P.A. which generates Mexican jobs. This also ignores straight cash transfers from U.S. resident citizens which could push the deficit to $100 billion. You've really got a nerve saying anyone knows less than you about free trade as you ignore the hard evidence. Go on give us another bullshit anecdote to cover-up the mountainous trade benefit Mexico is reaping today.