Gravitymaster 0 #51 June 9, 2011 Quote Quote That she defaulted on her loans. I highly doubt they got that part wrong. The article has been updated - it wasn't about a loan default, although the D of E doesn't say what it *was* for. Well, don't let any new information stop you from debating the "facts". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #52 June 9, 2011 Quotef the press reports a skydiving fatality, then it is highly likely that that person did, in fact, die skydiving--and not from the shock of dropping a bowling ball on their foot. It's when it comes to the details that the press usually messes up. In other words, you can't find an actual "fact" in that article to support your opinion. Your post supports the idea that any explanation of a result is a fact regardless of the actual cause of the result. If a newspaper reports a skydiving fatality because a parachute fails to open when in fact it's a poorly judged swoop that killed the pilot, the newspaper is correct because the end result is a dead skydiver? That's defensive bullshit.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #53 June 9, 2011 Quote Quote Quote That she defaulted on her loans. I highly doubt they got that part wrong. The article has been updated - it wasn't about a loan default, although the D of E doesn't say what it *was* for. Well, don't let any new information stop you from debating the "facts". Well, don't let any information stop you from portraying it as 'business as usual'. Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SivaGanesha 2 #54 June 9, 2011 Quote Well, don't let any new information stop you from debating the "facts". It may be new information, but it is hardly supportive of the woman. It confirms that she is, indeed, the subject of a criminal investigation."It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #55 June 9, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote That she defaulted on her loans. I highly doubt they got that part wrong. The article has been updated - it wasn't about a loan default, although the D of E doesn't say what it *was* for. Well, don't let any new information stop you from debating the "facts". Well, don't let any information stop you from portraying it as 'business as usual'. I never said it was business as usual. In fact I said I thought it was odd and that's why I didn't have the knee-jerk reaction you and others did. Never mind, obviously you simply want an argument based on your made up "facts". There are plenty here to accomodate you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #56 June 9, 2011 QuoteNever mind, obviously you simply want an argument based on your made up "facts". There are plenty here to accomodate you. Show one that I "made up", GM - if you can find enough time to do so past your Frank Drebin "Nothing to see here" act you've been putting on throughout the thread.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SivaGanesha 2 #57 June 9, 2011 QuoteIn other words, you can't find an actual "fact" in that article to support your opinion. Again, I've formed an opinion based on the available information. The only way you are going to change my opinion is if you present me with new information. Do you have any? QuoteIf a newspaper reports a skydiving fatality because a parachute fails to open when in fact it's a poorly judged swoop that killed the pilot, the newspaper is correct because the end result is a dead skydiver? The newspaper is partly correct, partly incorrect. The skydiver is dead either way."It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #58 June 9, 2011 QuoteQuoteNever mind, obviously you simply want an argument based on your made up "facts". There are plenty here to accomodate you. Show one that I "made up", GM - if you can find enough time to do so past your Frank Drebin "Nothing to see here" act you've been putting on throughout the thread. Man are you dense. The made up I was referring to was you making up what I've said. It's so painfully obvious you are distorting my position that all one has to do is go back and read the thread and then look at what you got from it. But anyone who's read this site for any length of time knows you have a history of doing this. Now go away and argue with yourself. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #59 June 9, 2011 To me the story here is that you have a Department of Education with a SWAT team. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wsd 0 #60 June 9, 2011 Hey it was a typo, I am not much of a secretary. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #61 June 9, 2011 It's ridiculous that the DoE has enforcement authority. We have enforcement capability they can access without giving it independently to such a messed up department already. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #62 June 9, 2011 "Johnny, if you don't do your homework, it will go down on your Permanent Record." "Big whoop." Twenty years later... - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #63 June 9, 2011 Quote Hey it was a typo, I am not much of a secretary. Hey.. its the teacher role I got used to... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #64 June 9, 2011 QuoteMan are you dense. The made up I was referring to was you making up what I've said. It's so painfully obvious you are distorting my position that all one has to do is go back and read the thread and then look at what you got from it. Ah, yes... and "knee jerk reactions", "what we think we know" and "spinning" are SO value neutral and taking the high road. Too bad you feel like you automatically have to go into 'discredit mode' instead of discussing the situation. QuoteBut anyone who's read this site for any length of time knows you have a history of doing this. And anyone who's read this site for any length of time know that you have a history of siding with the cops regardless of the situation. QuoteNow go away and argue with yourself. Go away and practice your excuses some more - they weren't very convincing this time.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #65 June 9, 2011 Copy of the warrant is now available. "Location to be searched, relating to a fraudulent student financial aid scheme" Dept of Ed has to kick the door open at 6 am for this? Guess they had to make sure the 3, 7 and 11 year olds didn't flush the papers down the toilet while they were playing in the bathroom.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #66 June 9, 2011 I haven't taken any side. I simply said I found this whole situation odd and was waiting to see if there was more to it. Now run along and quit trying to start an argument. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #67 June 9, 2011 QuoteDept of Ed has to kick the door open at 6 am for this? Well, after buying all those assault shotguns, if they just sit around and gather dust in the gun rack, someone will accuse them of wasting taxpayer money. So they gotta take 'em out once in a while and use 'em to justify their purchase. Yeah, that's sarcasm. I was going to put a winky-smiley-face icon, but this incident isn't funny. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
