Andy9o8

Will this help? http://www.strongparachutes.com/docs/Emergency/L3910.pdf

It turns out that Hagel, himself, was twice awarded the "I Forgot To Duck Medal." And he wasn't even swift-boated. Well, not entirely.

I knew I could tweak someone. Thanks for playing, Bill.

That's twice now.

Yes, why would you possibly need those at a major event with thousands of participants and spectators? Large crowds never generate any waste. In London we had all our buns removed in public spaces and transport hubs as people kept putting bombs in them. Please tell me you meant "bins". The other image is just too horrible.

Saudi. Therefore.

Irrelevant; it won't be Kim Il-sung's birthday.

On the sports side of this, a record number of personal bests were set today.

Any brown person will do.

Not a chance. More likely Loyalist Terrorists but highly unlikely to be either. Where have you been all this morning? Hm?

From what I just read, it looks like the PD have urged race spectators to evacuate the race area.

Are you saying you're lying? But what if you're lying when you say that?

QFT

It's a republic. A democratic republic is a country that is both a republic and a democracy. It is one where ultimate authority and power is derived from the citizens. So everyone is right, and wrong at the same time. I know I'm showing my age, but I'm still trying to decide if Certs is a breath mint or a candy mint.

If it really worries you, take a life.

Not all of Mexico is unsafe. No one was murdered at the Cabo boogie last month, although I did murder a couple of brain cells. The Skydive Mex guys are getting a nice DZ rolling in Puerto Vallarta, maybe give them a call. I hear Cancun is to die for. http://news.yahoo.com/six-strangled-one-decapitated-mexican-resort-cancun-010430975.html

Interesting. So who would be an ultimate fuckwit?

Uh; yes I do; yes I have; and if you want to get all in-your-face aggressive, come on over to Speaker's Corner and join us.

Depends on what part of Mexico. But even in the better parts, just like any other 3rd-World country (which it is), if I got hurt I wouldn't want my medical treatment there.

Why isn't there an AAD with an adjustable C-string thong?

Then you still need a lot of practice mastering effective tracking, which is pretty normal for someone with only 40ish jumps. Nonetheless, it's a life-preserving skill that you must master if you're going to jump with groups. It's better that, as soon as possible, you quickly learn effective tracking of your body itself before you add the artificial assistance of, say, RW booties, tracking suits, etc. For example, if you find yourself freeflying with others while wearing just shorts, you'll still need to be able to track well at breakoff to keep yourself and everyone else alive.

OK, since you asked: What you did was: once again, you made shit up that was wrong because you never bothered to look it up, and you got caught at it and called out. I then predicted that, as in the past, you would probably respond to the debunking by (a) changing the subject and (b) trolling, i.e., deliberately baiting the callers-out by insulting them personally and trying to provoke them to responding in anger. You've been warned about it by the moderators; and gee, don't you think we know why you "disappeared" from here for a week? Social groups, even online ones, tend to be self-regulating. The more often a given person chronically misbehaves, the less and less tolerance the group has for him. Even some (well-respected!) people who virtually never dip their toe into Speakers Corner have done so for the purpose of calling you out on BS of yours; for example, your repeated and blatant thinly-veiled racism (in other threads). Even many of your fellow conservatives on here have openly shunned you as an embarrassment. Maybe you need to start realizing that your problem here is not other people, it's you.

With animation: http://gawker.com/5994026/this-is-the-face-vladimir-putin-made-when-he-was-confronted-by-a-topless-protestor The comments are as funny as the vid.

It is a poorly drafted law, because it leaves silent and unanswered the question: "After December, 2013, when someone lawfully (per the statute) receives an assault weapon via inheritance, (a) may he continue to keep it in his sole possession for the rest of his life, and (b) if not, what must he do with it?" On the one hand, one might think, as you seem to, that since the law makes no specific allowance for continued possession in that instance, that continued possession thus is effectively prohibited; and since it provides no other options, one is left with no practical choice other than to destroy it, render it permanently inoperable or surrender it. However, there is a principle of statutory construction that when a statute has specific provisions (as this one obviously does), the statute does not apply to whatever is not specifically covered by it. In the case of a statue of prohibition, like this one, that would mean: that which is not specifically prohibited by the statute (and is not prohibited otherwise) is permitted. It would also mean that since surrender or destruction is not specifically required in the event of inheritance, it is not effectively required, either. Thus, when this statute winds up in the MD courts (which is very likely unless the Legislature amends or clarifies it first), I'd say there's a good chance that, once all the appeals are exhausted, the MD courts will apply this principle of statutory construction and ultimately rule that since the statute does not specifically prohibit continued possession of the weapon by a lawful heir, that that possession is lawful for the heir's lifetime, who may thereafter lawfully pass it along to an heir of his own when he subsequently dies.