Page 13 of 24 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 237

Thread: Marine recruiting station under attack... again

  1. #121
    User Stryker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-09-09 @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39

    Re: Marine recruiting station under attack... again

    Quote Originally Posted by SkyCore View Post
    Hell no I didn't read the whole thing...even if you wanted to your enlistment would be over by the time you finished. It's like a metro phonebook for NYC, LA, Tokyo, and Russia all wrapped in one.
    Maybe they did it differently when you enlisted. I enlisted in 04, my contract was 8 pages.

    Quote Originally Posted by SkyCore View Post
    My recruiter told me about the IRR but the way he explained it was this:

    If more troops were to be needed then our current enlistments would not be extended because the Military would call up the IRRs that came before us. I believed it cause I was so wet behind the ears I needed scuba gear to brush my teeth. Now, as to your point about it "being in the contract." That is true but not wholly because it's not a static part. The IRR is static, period. The stop loss can be started and stopped at any time. That may also be in the contract. But it still doesn't change the fact if you sign up for five years of active duty and they force another two years that slavery has not occurred.
    Thats pretty much how it was explained to me as well. The whole point of IRR is to be called back or extended when necessary. They dont do it to personally screw you over, they do it because they have a demand on them they cant meet with the current size of the branch. Technically youre still in the military, youre just a reservist who doesnt go to drill, or whatever it is reservists do.


    Quote Originally Posted by SkyCore View Post
    The 8 years you're referencing is not "8 years of active duty." I'm sure there are some idiots who would sign up for 8 straight and miss out on re-enlistment bonuses but rarely does anyone sign up for 8 straight. Saying "it's in the contract" is no less silly than when slaveowners justified having slaves and serfs by pointing to a "contract." It's not called a "back-door draft" for nothing.
    Im pretty sure the maximum enlistment is 6 years which is often discouraged for the very reason you stated but its a non issue. Of course its not 8 years of active duty, no one is saying that. But from the time you ETS, to the time your 8 year commitment is complete, you still belong to the military, and they can call you back if they need the numbers. Yeah it sucks, and yeah I disapprove of the practice, but its still not slavery.

  2. #122
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Last Seen
    04-12-09 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    342

    Re: Marine recruiting station under attack... again

    Okay, for some reason I see part of one of my posts at the top of the page regarding the UN. I stated the UN never authorized unilateral action and some genius who has yet to learn not to depend on CNN or Fox for info claimed Res 1441 makes the authorization. Our own Ambassador to UN (at the time) clearly stated otherwise:

    "As we have said on numerous occasions to Council members, this Resolution contains no “hidden triggers” and no “automaticity” with respect to the use of force. If there is a further Iraqi breach, reported to the Council by UNMOVIC, the IAEA, or a member state, the matter will return to the Council for discussions as required in paragraph 12."
    http://www.globalpolicy.org/security...1108usstat.htm

    On top of pointing out there is no authorization for unilateral actioan he even says the Resolution mandates UN approval to move further!

  3. #123
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Marine recruiting station under attack... again

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Yes, I understand sovereignity far better than you can.

    Sovereignity is a right of the individual. Thug dictators that deny their citizens their due sovereignity do not themselves deserve to have any recognition of sovereignity themselves.
    You have only proven you have zero idea what soveriegnty means. We aren't the sovereigns of Iraq, thus we have no rightful say. Now I know you're having problems reading, I'll go slow. Not having a rightful say does not mean you can't do anything. You seem to be confused here. When I say we have no rightful say in the Iraq government, just because we did something to set the Ba'athist party up originally doesn't mean we did so through just means. It was unjust intervention on our part.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    No. One guy is all I'm wasting time on. You can make your own list if you want.
    No, if you're going to get Americans killed I damned well expect actual information. One guy being in a place is coincidence, you have to establish that it's being used as a hideout for a larger number than 1 else you don't get to risk the lives of Americans.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Why? I don't recall saying Hussein was exporting terrorism, merely that he harbored them.
    You used plural, you only proved singular.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    You mean outside of the Baathist party?
    Maybe that should be a lesson to us to quit messing in other people's business. We helped that party get in charge, Saddam came out of that. That's what happens when you monkey in things we have no business monkeying in.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Abu Nidal proves terrorists were in Iraq, disproves your contention.
    No, it proves 1 terrorist was in Iraq at some point, that's it. Not that there is a national policy of hiding terrorists (plural). You don't know what you're talking about.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    I'm under no obligation to chase your goal posts.
    Apparently you're under no obligation to provide proof before getting American soldiers killed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Bad data justifies actions. Hindsight is always better. That's why I let the ladies through the door first.
    Bad data justifies restructuring and review of policy and chain of command. Actions taken on bad data are mistakes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    I didn't.
    Aye, you did. You said that Saddam violated UN sanction and that was a justification, but then you claim the UN is useless and we have to enforce their mandates. One way or the other, waffling to get your way isn't the intellectually honest way to make a point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    The US should be different from all the other countries trying to tear us down?
    We shouldn't be involved in other people's business if it doesn't concern us. We're no different than any other sovereign state.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    IMO the UN should be moved to Dubhai, under that fake ski slope of theirs, and the US should get out of the UN. Since it's there, however, we should certainly use it only when it suits us.
    The UN has no real power and no sovereignty, it's a pointless organization and isn't run in any manner which could be a functioning government.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    What part of national sovereignity do you not understand?
    Well more than you

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Temporarily. It's the nature of what happens when a government is destroyed. The destroyers become the baby-sitters.
    We had no rightful reason to destroy, and now we occupy for how long? How much longer? That government we created is not going to last in the image in which we crafted it for long.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    You mean we gave the Iraqis the opportunity to elect their own government, which they've done.
    Under our direction and "guidance", yes. Saddam also allowed the Iraqi people to vote...voting itself doesn't indicate rightful and free government.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Temporarily and on a continually decreasing basis, as everyone knows. That's because Bush succeeded in his goal of establishing a self-sufficient Iraq, much to you people's chagrin.
    Oh? We've succeeded (past tense) in establishing a self sufficient Iraq? So you're saying we can pull out in total or that you have no idea what self-sufficient means.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Nope. Not imperialist. You really need to drop your robot ROM cartridge and buy a plain old-fashioned dictionary instead.
    It's half assed imperialism. We're trying to make ourselves a little state that'll do our bidding without making it seem that's what we're doing. And we're piss poor at it. Which is fine, I don't want us to be good at imperialism.
    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post

    Sure. We had no business being in Iraq. That's what I said at the time. Since I'm not an immature little socialist ass-wipe, as soon as the troops were committed to battle, I stopped that line of argument and argued for clear, decisive victory using any and all means necessary.
    I think you disproved the immature part. You're not socialist for sure, I'll give you that. I would put you more up the fascist branch.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Because that's what the realities of the situation demanded the real Americans do.

    People that kept whining about how we shouldn't be there....aren't real Americans, they're whiny brats.
    Ohhhhhh....real Americans. If you're not with us, you're against us! You want to be a real American don't you! Please appeal to emotion more; it's funny.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    That's a distinction without a difference.
    That's semantics. You wanted to say that I said we put in Saddam, I didn't. And that somehow saying we put in Saddam negates that we didn't have rightful cause to set up the government or leaders...which is absurd. It's just a part of a long list of the West's monkeying in the Middle East and pissing people off.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Legitimate governments do.

    Not "all governments".

    There's a distinction, with a difference, there.
    fair enough, but it's still not our problem.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Nope, they're not both true. The logical flow you derive from this error is flawed and not relevant.

    Then again, it's plain silly, anyway.
    So you have nothing to add and this is all you can say. K.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Yes. Clearly you have no clue what things are like when socialists get the totalitarian power they're always demanding.
    It's the same as if your kind got in charge, socialism and fascism in practice end in the same place. It's still not my problem.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Yeah?

    How?

    You really don't have a clue what you're talking about here, do you?
    By any means possible. But if they aren't willing to stand up and die for their freedom and liberty, I don't think any American should stand up and die for their freedom and liberty. The People have got to want it first and have got to fight for it themselves, things given are easily taken. I don't want to waste American life on things which are not for American interest and liberty. Iraq and its government was none of our business nor are we charged with making it our business. It doesn't matter how bad it is until it affects the sovereignty of the United States, until that point it's not our problem and not worth American life.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Sure we do. The government that existed in Iraq wasn't legit...and you claim we created it...therefore who else should be tasked with the problem of fixing our error?
    The Iraqi people are tasked with fixing the our error. Sorry, we'll try not to f' with other governments in the future, but messing with governments got us into that mess initially so keeping it up probably ain't gonna lead to a good solution. It's their government, their country, their problem. They have to do something, not us. If they start something and ask for our help, that's different than what happened. I don't see why Americans should die for the freedom of others when those others were unwilling to lay down their lives for their freedom.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Wrong. You already stated that we helped set it up.
    This is where reading comprehension comes in. We have no rightful say in it, we took unjust measures and injected ourselves into the middle of it. Just because we can physically make a say doesn't mean it's a just say. We're not the governed, we have no rightful say in the style and direction of the Iraqi government. It doesn't matter if you wish to call it illegitimate. Maybe it is, but it's not our call. If the Iraqi people don't care enough to fight back, then that's their problem. They'll work with that government and be governed by that government.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Again, how?
    The same way anyone else ever did in the history of mankind, take arms against the government. It's happened many times before by well more repressed people. They must have the resolve to do it and the fortitude to see it through. Otherwise their government they set up won't last.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Sure it was. You said it was our responsibility that it was set up, didn't you?
    We interfered via unjust involvement when it wasn't our say. You really need to learn to read better...damn, are our public schools really this bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Try showing my comment was wrong. You just said Saddam had the support of the people, didn't you?
    No, burden of proof is upon you. You made the comment, prove it. I also didn't say Saddam had the people's support, the Iraqi government had the people's consent since they did nothing to change it or overturn it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Oh. So you're saying it's OKAY to install a political party against the supposed consent of the Iraqis, but not okay to install a political party AND it's dictator against the consent of the people who, according to you, didn't dissent, and therefore provided consent to that dictator. Since you're so busy contradicting yourself, I hope you don't get upset because I'm merely pointing those contradictions out.
    you're not pointing out contradictions, you've lied about what I said, misrepresented what I've written, and tried to spin it in that manner. But that's due to your inability to comprehend the English language and your seemingly infinite penchant for intellectual dishonesty. I'm not saying it was ok to install the Ba'athist party, I'm saying that's what we did. You keep misrepresenting and lying about what I said to spin things into something you can dismiss and make hyperbole about because you have no logical, debatable refute.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Someone might otherwise miss the full depths of humor your posts represent.
    I'm sure.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  4. #124
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Marine recruiting station under attack... again

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    You mean he's not?

    I'm sorry. I'll guess you have the Trotskies, next time.
    Would you like to prove that one, or are you eventually going to admit you're lying and misrepresenting character to try to pass an argument that isn't logically sound because you have nothing else to contribute other than snide remarks trying to say I'm a communist when you have no proof of such and accusation? No? Still want to continue with your intellectual dishonesty? K, noted.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Really?

    What's your stand on Socialist Security? Welfare? Nationalized Health Care? The minimum wage? Public Education? Obama?

    I bet you're all for saving people from themselves, just not when it coincides with what's truly good for the United States.
    I bet you're really good at jumping to conclusions and making assumptions as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    You just mentioned it.

    How about if you raid that Constitution thingy and see if it if defines "declaration of war" for ya, okay?
    So you can't produce an official declaration of war from Congress. Ok, noted.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    If you're going to use the Constitution in your arguments, can you do those of us, like myself, who know what it says and what it means a favor and read the thing?
    I've read it, I probably understand it well more than you'll ever understand it. That's why I'm on the side of small government, and you're on the side of large, intrusive, militaristic government (BTW, those are all the hallmarks of fascism, so does that make your hero Mussolini? HAHAHHA)
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  5. #125
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Marine recruiting station under attack... again

    Quote Originally Posted by SkyCore View Post
    Hell no I didn't read the whole thing...even if you wanted to your enlistment would be over by the time you finished. It's like a metro phonebook for NYC, LA, Tokyo, and Russia all wrapped in one. My recruiter told me about the IRR but the way he explained it was this:

    If more troops were to be needed then our current enlistments would not be extended because the Military would call up the IRRs that came before us. I believed it cause I was so wet behind the ears I needed scuba gear to brush my teeth. Now, as to your point about it "being in the contract." That is true but not wholly because it's not a static part. The IRR is static, period. The stop loss can be started and stopped at any time. That may also be in the contract. But it still doesn't change the fact if you sign up for five years of active duty and they force another two years that slavery has not occurred.

    The 8 years you're referencing is not "8 years of active duty." I'm sure there are some idiots who would sign up for 8 straight and miss out on re-enlistment bonuses but rarely does anyone sign up for 8 straight. Saying "it's in the contract" is no less silly than when slaveowners justified having slaves and serfs by pointing to a "contract." It's not called a "back-door draft" for nothing.

    So I guess you didn't sign the sheet that says in effect "this contract is binding and supersedes all other agreements verbal and otherwise, entered into prior to signing this contract", also known as the "You got screwed by your recruiter too, clause"?

    For some reason, my recruiter never lied to me. I told him what I wanted...which happened to fill out the hardest to fill spot on his quota list, and I never had a problem.

  6. #126
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Marine recruiting station under attack... again

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Would you like to prove that one, or are you eventually going to admit you're lying and misrepresenting character to try to pass an argument that isn't logically sound because you have nothing else to contribute other than snide remarks trying to say I'm a communist when you have no proof of such and accusation? No? Still want to continue with your intellectual dishonesty? K, noted.
    Nope, the argument is logically sound. I don't give a crap who your hero is. It's not an American patriot, that's certain, and that's all that matters.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    So you can't produce an official declaration of war from Congress. Ok, noted.
    I could if I could recall the number of the resolution authorizing the president to use force to remove Hussein from Iraq.

    As I told you, the Constitution doesn't define what form a "declaration of war" has to take.

    You'll get over it. The Constitution is supposed to be read carefully.

    I do that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I've read it, I probably understand it well more than you'll ever understand it.
    Then you can explain why you can't understand that the Constitution doesn't specify the format of the declaration of war.

    You can do that, can't you?

    I could, if I was interested enough to bother.

    Needless to say, you've lost your argument because you don't have one anymore. It's been shot out from beneath you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    That's why I'm on the side of small government, and you're on the side of large, intrusive, militaristic government (BTW, those are all the hallmarks of fascism, so does that make your hero Mussolini? HAHAHHA)
    No, I don't like mussels, only lobsters and other arthropods.

  7. #127
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Marine recruiting station under attack... again

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    You have only proven you have zero idea what soveriegnty means. We aren't the sovereigns of Iraq, thus we have no rightful say.
    The sovereigns of Iraq weren't allowed to say anything.

    Get the point?


    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    No, if you're going to get Americans killed I damned well expect actual information. One guy being in a place is coincidence, you have to establish that it's being used as a hideout for a larger number than 1 else you don't get to risk the lives of Americans.
    Go ahead and expect all you want.

    What you see is all you're going to get.

    Never let your stomach get bigger than your eyes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Maybe that should be a lesson to us to quit messing in other people's business. We helped that party get in charge, Saddam came out of that. That's what happens when you monkey in things we have no business monkeying in.
    Hmmm....you don't see me disagreeing there.

    I'm all for terminating any and all forms of foreign aid, too, including those forms you support.

    Whatever they may be.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    No, it proves 1 terrorist was in Iraq at some point, that's it. Not that there is a national policy of hiding terrorists (plural). You don't know what you're talking about.
    You have the freedom in this country to believe anything you want to.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Apparently you're under no obligation to provide proof before getting American soldiers killed.
    You have proof. It's not like I made the decision to invade, lordy no. I'm merely arguing the case as it was presented in 2003.

    IMO the failure of Hussein to abide by the cease-fire agreement was sufficient cause in our interests to remove him. I'm a zero-tolerance kind of guy when it comes to snipers and other cowardly acts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Bad data justifies restructuring and review of policy and chain of command. Actions taken on bad data are mistakes.
    Yeah. Look who won the last election. Reams of bad data, and a bad mistake now in the White House.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Aye, you did. You said that Saddam violated UN sanction and that was a justification, but then you claim the UN is useless and we have to enforce their mandates. One way or the other, waffling to get your way isn't the intellectually honest way to make a point.
    No. I said Iraq violate the cease-fire agreement, that wasn't a "UN sanction". I said nothing about any silly sanctions, those are stupid and never work and are only resorted to by fools and cowards unwilling to accept responsibility for really needs doing. Nor did I say the US had to enforce the UN "mandates". Far as I'm concerned, that cease-fire agreement, which was only being enforced by the US, was Iraq's agreement with US. The UN isn't a relevant political body. It's a toilet. A clogged toilet.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    We shouldn't be involved in other people's business if it doesn't concern us. We're no different than any other sovereign state.
    Hussein was making noises, his attacks on our aircraft concerned us, it was time to remove him.

    Let's not pretend Iraq was some innocent victim here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    The UN has no real power and no sovereignty, it's a pointless organization and isn't run in any manner which could be a functioning government.
    Then quit kissing it's butt.

    [QUOTE=Ikari;1057970836]
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    We had no rightful reason to destroy, and now we occupy for how long?
    I figure....been there for five years....another fifteen.

    That's one of the main reasons I opposed invading Iraq. I'm smart enough to look not only down the road, but over the cliff at the end of it, too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    How much longer? That government we created is not going to last in the image in which we crafted it for long.
    Depends. With people like you tearing it down, how could it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Under our direction and "guidance", yes. Saddam also allowed the Iraqi people to vote...voting itself doesn't indicate rightful and free government.
    Oh, that's rich. Creamy, too. You do stand-up in the evenings, don't you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Oh? We've succeeded (past tense) in establishing a self sufficient Iraq? So you're saying we can pull out in total or that you have no idea what self-sufficient means.
    They think they're self-sufficient. They could be, it's a hard thing to measure, isn't it. They're talking about asking us to leave. I'm all for leaving when they ask us to. You think we should stay past that time?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    It's half assed imperialism.
    Nope. Not allowed. You can't have half-assed imperialism until you can actually show it was an imperialist act. Since it wasn't imperialist, you can't show it to be so, and thus it can't be half-assed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    That's semantics.
    Yeah, it's what you get when you're caught talking out of both sides of your mouth.

  8. #128
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Marine recruiting station under attack... again

    Young prospective marine: So, like, is this where I can sign up to piss off these stupid Hippies outside?

    Marine Recruiter: Yes, son. Yes it is. Every time someone signs up, a dirty hippie loses it's stink.

    Young Newly Recruited Marine: Cool. I hate hippies.

    Recruiter: Welcome to the Marines.




    Just my own view of what this is doing.

  9. #129
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 05:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,260

    Re: Marine recruiting station under attack... again

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    So I guess you didn't sign the sheet that says in effect "this contract is binding and supersedes all other agreements verbal and otherwise, entered into prior to signing this contract", also known as the "You got screwed by your recruiter too, clause"?

    For some reason, my recruiter never lied to me. I told him what I wanted...which happened to fill out the hardest to fill spot on his quota list, and I never had a problem.




    +1



    I read the contract. the whole contract. I always do. The fact that he thinks they screwed him because he failed at due diligence is rather humorous.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  10. #130
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Last Seen
    04-12-09 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    342

    Re: Marine recruiting station under attack... again

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und View Post
    +1



    I read the contract. the whole contract. I always do. The fact that he thinks they screwed him because he failed at due diligence is rather humorous.

    Still lying about what others have said eh? Get a grip.

Page 13 of 24 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •