Does he personally control the entire firm? Maybe he's constantly getting outvoted on every investing decision to come along, but he won't step aside in hopes of being the conscious so many execs lack these days.
Most do. Even Julie Andrews eventually appeared topless in a movie. It's rare when starlets hold firm to a no-nudity stance.
Yeah, he spent a lot of time fighting against court orders to clean up his (illegal) tent city. Even when TOLD what the law is, he didn't give a damn.
Looks like TechDirt redacted sensitive info... see how easy it is? If TechDirt can do it, surely GitHub can. ;)
Isn't killing pets one of the first signs of a serial killer? Hmm - that actually makes sense here.
Too bad, that would probably be the easiest way to stop the fake news.
;)
Only thing needed to say...
https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/010/692/19789999.jpg
Sadly, embedded images in markdown don't work here.
Maybe because the reporters show up with cameras while the reverse show up with bats and guns. See the difference?
The problem is that you aren't trading one to one, or even two to one. TBones are rare, and not normally the result of someone trying to beat an "orange" light. They're nearly always caused by someone turning left in front of oncoming traffic (both having the green), or by someone flat missing a red light altogether and driving into the intersection in the middle of the green the other direction. Neither are prevented by red-light cameras. And just because YOU suffered no injuries or damage in your rear-end collisions doesn't mean no one does. Rear-end collisions are one of the primary causes of injuries in car accidents; mainly whip-lash in the people hit, and facial injuries to the people do the hitting, both of which can be very serious injuries.
They're not "required" to, they just do. I think as much as they do it when unnecessary, they're just sick bastards who get off on it. They graduate from shooting pets to shooting people.
Hey, now! There are plenty of female and minority evil executives these days. "The Man" hasn't been exclusively white and male for quite some time now. Progress and all.
What surprises me more, and not at all, is that Cartoon Network hasn't opposed her trademark. After all, the Slime Princess is a prime character in Adventure Time, and has been for years. But I guess that CN realizes that attacking kids never helps your image. It takes a certain kind of lawyer to take a kid to court over a trademark.
If you read the transcript, they DID call the family, and checking her home country, and verified her school exams back home with her age on them... and still thought everyone was lying about her age. They spent a lot of time and money on keeping an adult locked up in a juvenile detention facility simply because she was short and looked "young".
It was to prevent certain groups from voting, despite being legally eligible to vote otherwise.
Considering they have to pay you for the pleasure, I'll take mine tomorrow. I could use the extra money.
It only makes sense when the "h" is silent, like in herb. When the "h" is not silent, like in historic, it make no sense at all.
I for one am looking forward to seeing the new Fard Locus or Tassle Radster in GTA6. ;)
So, we need to vote for ventriloquists for political offices? It's worth a shot.
That's because they aren't paying them enough. If they cough up the dough like telecoms, the legislators would be all smiles and apologies.
Re: Re: Is it Defamation?
The problem with UK defamation/libel/slander law is right here: "(1)It is a defence to an action for defamation for the defendant to show that the imputation conveyed by the statement complained of is substantially true." You have to prove yourself innocent. It's completely the reverse of the US where they have to prove you guilty. Or at least, that's the way it's supposed to be in the US... damn civil forfeitures have reversed that.