BluesStringer
Les Brers
You're stating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that I linked to is crap and not legit.
You've just destroyed any slightest bit of credibility you have.
I just checked again. There are zero links in any post of yours in this thread. That's zip, zero, nada. Your reference or allusion to a law does not equal a link. A link is (usually, depending on individual settings in a browser) blue in color, like this: Link Removed.
Scientific fact, or opinion?.And yet you spend this much time yammering on about the government and how much you hate it.All while refusing to take part in it.That speaks volumes.Incorrect, but when you were proven wrong, you tried to deflect by stating that the information contained in the Clanton, AL Police Department's own website is wrong.Obfuscatory, perhaps.Quite possibly you meant the right to remain silent?Incorrect, either way.When you speak, you have waived the right to remain silent, even if you want to believe you're just "putting the cop on notice".Cited references and proofs?Or another opinion stated as fact?'Don't know about the pertinent law, but we'll assume you think it would be lies and obfuscation anyway.Statement of law without any way to back it up.Funny, the bakers refused to bake a cake because of the customers sexuality.The case also had "absolutely nothing to do with the BOR".Maybe you should have explained that to all parties involved before the legal battle regarding discrimination.A court case based on "hurt feelings" might have gotten a lot less press.You refuse to offer proof to back up what you say, because you won't like how that proof will be understood?'Interesting way to avoid backing up what you state.Trick questions being those that ask you to prove what you state.
This is commonly referred to as thread-jacking. Right after I report this blatant and most egregious case of it that I've ever seen, I will attempt again to ignore you.
Blues