site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies


morbo
Complete Your Transaction

join:2002-01-22
00000

reply to amigo_boy

Re: Cut off the head...

said by amigo_boy:

said by morbo:

this "excuse" is favored by the telco lobbyists fighting for immunity. AT&T and Verizon had a choice. they decided to break the law. period.
This "excuse" is favored by those who can't prove a law was broken. They aren't going to criminal court, but instead to that civil court. The same place you go when you spill hot coffee on yourself and it just *has* to be someone else's fault.
if no law has been broken, enlighten us as to why AT&T is spending millions of dollars on lobbying to get immunity?

simple enough question.

amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22
Reviews:
·magicjack.com

said by morbo:

if no law has been broken, enlighten us as to why AT&T is spending millions of dollars on lobbying to get immunity?
If a law was broken, why are self-styled freedom fighters resorting to *civil* court?

If I had a bunch of people seeking to bypass criminal court, relying on ambulance chasers and the nearly non-existent standard of civil court, I'd be nervous too. Just the cost of litigation under those lower standards could be enormous.

They're facing the same thing you are. You can't rise to the standards of criminal court. So, you lower yourself to civil court. Why should the fact that telcos are trying to defend themselves from *that* cheap shot be indicative of their guilt? Don't you have the burden of rising to the standard of criminal court? It seems like you're blaming the telcos for your own diminished standards.

Mark


morbo
Complete Your Transaction

join:2002-01-22
00000

2 edits

nice attempt to change the focus, but you didn't answer the question:

if no law has been broken, enlighten us as to why AT&T is spending millions of dollars on lobbying to get immunity? if they haven't committed any crime, they wouldn't need immunity from criminal OR civil court.



fAcEtIOUs
Premium
join:2002-03-03
kudos:4

said by morbo:

nice attempt to change the focus, but you didn't answer the question:

if no law has been broken, enlighten us as to why AT&T is spending millions of dollars on lobbying to get immunity? if they haven't committed any crime, they wouldn't need immunity from criminal OR civil court.
For protection from countless, groundless, harassing, yet costly lawsuits - each of which would have to be defended at great cost.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page


morbo
Complete Your Transaction

join:2002-01-22
00000

AT&T and Verzion are entitled to special treatment (retroactive immunity) because they made bad business decisions? that is some twisted version of corporate welfare.



fAcEtIOUs
Premium
join:2002-03-03
kudos:4

2 edits

said by morbo:

AT&T and Verzion are entitled to special treatment (retroactive immunity) because they made bad business decisions?
No. They are entitled to it because they helped defend the US against her enemies at government request. And it wasn't a business decision but one based on patriotism.

amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22
Reviews:
·magicjack.com

reply to morbo

said by morbo:

AT&T and Verzion are entitled to special treatment (retroactive immunity) because they made bad business decisions? that is some twisted version of corporate welfare.
Gawd. You guys are all over the place. Now you're self-appointed role is that of protector of the free market system? Riddle me this: If the free market is what it's all about, why aren't AT&T and Verizon customers stampeding to the clearly marked exits? Why does it take some whiney people hurling the "crime" bomb to save AT&T customers from themselves? And to make the market do what it apparently won't do on its own?

Mark

wierdo

join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·T-Mobile US

reply to fAcEtIOUs

said by fAcEtIOUs:

And it wasn't a business decision but one based on patriotism.
Thankfully, patriotism is not an excuse for poor behavior.

As with torture, if it's that important, go ahead and break the law. If you really were saving the nation by doing it, no jury will convict you. If they do, you can join the likes of Jesus and John Brown, people both willing to die for what they believe in. Only you wouldn't die, just sit in prison for a while, where you could bask in the glow of your heroism and martyrdom.

OwlSaver
OwlSaver
Premium
join:2005-01-30
Berwyn, PA

reply to fAcEtIOUs
The count is currently 40. They will undoubtedly be combined into a single class. So, it is not countless.



81399672
Premium
join:2006-05-17
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:2

reply to fAcEtIOUs

said by fAcEtIOUs:

said by morbo:

nice attempt to change the focus, but you didn't answer the question:

if no law has been broken, enlighten us as to why AT&T is spending millions of dollars on lobbying to get immunity? if they haven't committed any crime, they wouldn't need immunity from criminal OR civil court.
For protection from countless, groundless, harassing, yet costly lawsuits - each of which would have to be defended at great cost.
Groundless? They violated the law. It's as simple as that. For defending each lawsuit, they can ask the court to merge them in to one and likely will get that request granted.

TheWickerMan

join:2002-04-09
Enola, PA

reply to morbo

said by morbo:

nice attempt to change the focus, but you didn't answer the question:
Of course not. He's too busy typing and retyping the phrase "self-styled freedom fighters."

Talis

join:2001-06-21
Houston, TX

reply to fAcEtIOUs
Lol I sure hope you are the telcos lawyer. With a defense like that they are bound to win


Tuesday, 29-May 18:22:16 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics