It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Marine vet's 20-foot flagpole has homeowners association filing suit over a display of patriotism t

page: 17
23
<< 14  15  16    18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


I believe reading comprehension isn't your strongest suit? I did not make the comment :



WIth regard to your comments I will let your own avatar pic reply for me... "BULL"


that was posted by : marinesniper0351

You comments just made you look like a fool. Trying to blame someone for someone else's comments? Care to acknowledge that your were wrong? A yes or no will suffice!




posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
Care to acknowledge that your were wrong?


Oh! The irony!


Look. perhaps you should stick to the subject at hand instead of picking on other members like you do. It's going to get you into trouble at some point. Let's talk about the issues, not other members, how about it?



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Annee
 


I believe reading comprehension isn't your strongest suit? I did not make the comment :



WIth regard to your comments I will let your own avatar pic reply for me... "BULL"


that was posted by : marinesniper0351

You comments just made you look like a fool. Trying to blame someone for someone else's comments? Care to acknowledge that your were wrong? A yes or no will suffice!


Oh grow up Mr Perfect. Everyone makes mistakes - - including you.

However - not everyone is rude and resorts to name calling.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


In the first pages of this thread I did happily address the issues. But when someone makes an ignorant comment, and wrongly make accusations, I'm gonna call them on it. We are suppose to deny ignorance aren't we? And that comment was ignorant. Not to mention, the facts were right in front of the young ladies face.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
Care to acknowledge that your were wrong? A yes or no will suffice!


HA! Now that is funny.
So is this our military today? Spoiled, entitled brats that run around scoffing at people and then dodging questions? Are you supposed to be an example? Still waiting for you to acknowledge you were wrong but that is another thread.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Just had to laugh.....catching...my breathe....


Fact? oh goodness~


So AGAIN. What is funny about it? The facts are the facts. The only thing you have presented is the argument that "well he dont wanna so he shouldn't hafta so there."



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
Care to acknowledge that your were wrong?


Oh! The irony!


Look. perhaps you should stick to the subject at hand instead of picking on other members like you do. It's going to get you into trouble at some point. Let's talk about the issues, not other members, how about it?




The 3 year old jumping on me does cause some distractions at times.

There are polite ways to respond when someone addresses a wrong post or poster - - - which does happen.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


Facts are facts indeed, but reviewing this threads many pages, I have come to the conclusion that everyone's interpretation of " facts " are debatable ate best. Some believe that the law supersedes bylaws, some vice versa. The only way to have conclusive evidence which is the most " superior ", would be if this goes to court. At which time a judge would rule of the legality or lack there of.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


No, the facts are established and solid. The only problem is some whiny little girls seem to think some spoiled brat who has no honor or integrity should get a break because some of you refuse to understand the text put in front of you. You can dispute the concept of the Earth being round all you like but that does not mean the facts are not already in. You have shown yourself to be quite averse to facts or admitting mistakes and that is really all we have here.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


I don't think 62 constitutes as young...



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


Facts are facts indeed, but reviewing this threads many pages, I have come to the conclusion that everyone's interpretation of " facts " are debatable ate best. Some believe that the law supersedes bylaws, some vice versa. The only way to have conclusive evidence which is the most " superior ", would be if this goes to court. At which time a judge would rule of the legality or lack there of.


Not true. You just refuse to acknowledge what has been pointed out to you.

Everyone has the right to fly the flag. They do not have the right to fly it any way they choose - - when they live in a community with an HOA - - and have signed a contract to abide by the rules.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


Well you know what they say, opinions are like a##holes, everyones got'em.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by MisterCrowley
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


I don't think 62 constitutes as young...




64



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


Well you know what they say, opinions are like a##holes, everyones got'em.


Yes and the fact that you choose opinions over facts even knowing such a cheap phrase makes it all that much more interesting. All you have are opinions. I guess that says more about you than I thought. Sorry if the facts are getting in the way of your opinions. I see that is a trend.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


Facts still remain, Flag act of 2005, and the US code. I can't help it if some do not wish to acknowledge law.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


Facts still remain, Flag act of 2005, and the US code. I can't help it if some do not wish to acknowledge law.


Why are you acting like a child? Say something with some substance. You clearly did not understand the full text of the 2005 flag act or the US code. It has been explained to you ad nauseum. You have not once offered a counter argument, you just keep saying "nuh uh." Now you have been reduced to tossing out empty one liners like an angry child. I hope this is not an attempt to garner credibility.
edit on 10-1-2011 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   
SEC. 3. RIGHT TO DISPLAY THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES.

A condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association may not adopt or enforce any policy, or enter into any agreement, that would restrict or prevent a member of the association from displaying the flag of the United States on residential property within the association with respect to which such member has a separate ownership interest or a right to exclusive possession or use.

SEC. 4. LIMITATIONS.

Nothing in this Act shall be considered to permit any display or use that is inconsistent with--

(1) any provision of chapter 1 of title 4, United States Code, or any rule or custom pertaining to the proper display or use of the flag of the United States (as established pursuant to such chapter or any otherwise applicable provision of law); or

(2) any reasonable restriction pertaining to the time, place, or manner of displaying the flag of the United States necessary to protect a substantial interest of the condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
(2) any reasonable restriction pertaining to the time, place, or manner of displaying the flag of the United States necessary to protect a substantial interest of the condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association.


Just because apparently someone is having a hard time seeing this part. Maybe it is understanding this part but lets toss a little bennefit of the doubt out there. I hate to watch someone drown like this (again
)



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 



To ensure that the right of an individual to display the flag of the United States on residential property not be abridged.


What part of this law do you not comprehend?



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
What part of this law do you not comprehend?


Please attempt to answer me like a grownup who wears big boy pants, ok?
Do you or do you not understand the concept of "context?"
edit on 10-1-2011 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
23
<< 14  15  16    18  19 >>

log in

join