For those that would like to discuss Redemption methods

[Ice]

By the way, there are a lot of redemption folks that frequent here.



You might even check some of my old posts and see how far I've come. It's been a long road... but I'm glad I made the trip.



Ice

What makes it possible for the human mind to accept obvious contradictions and oxymorons without cognitive dissonance?



In the words of Leghorn Chicken:

AHHHH, AH SAY, AH SAAY LITTLE! THERE'S AH BONEHEAD IN THE CHICKEN YARD!



Chicken Little: Das speiseis mannsbild, sie sind ein ganzlich dummkopf scheiBer und schweigsam arsch!



Leghorn: AH SAY, AH SAAY LITTLE! I'M JUS' SPEECHLESS!



Herr Ice, if you have not read the full cases, how can you state that they are bad. No time is a poor excuse. We've read them. It is rather a shame that you have not had the opportunity to see and read the documents that have been before our eyes in our lifetimes. If so, you would have a whole different outlook and you would not have wasted your time trying to rebut something that is just not rebuttable.



As for your coming "the long road", we dare say that you have just gotten your feet wet!



We are unable to continue this banter for we are off to see the wizard at London University to participate in some research and we will be out of country for an indefinite period of time. Ta-taa...



Oh! By the way, your pooters back door is open.



Dr. Conner Kane McCleoud for Group-Seven Research

[Ice]

I've been at this for YEARS upon YEARS. I have not "just gotten my feet wet".



The "Factoids" you posted have been rebutted. Instead of coming to their defense you state a claim that I haven't been reading.



Post the error you claim was made. Disect the documents/cases/law and demonstrate your claim... or can't you?



Ice