Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

lawmakers finally see the light

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Hmmm, US courts can't render decisions on federal legislation that might also affect a foreign entity doing business in the US. Law according to Tony. Your ignorance of the legal system is only exceeded by your half cocked assumptions regarding my name origin/avatar. I suppose in your legal opinion you would argue the reciprocal, that EU courts have no jursidiction over US firms? You would absolutely correct, provided that those firms had no intention of doing business in EU memeber states.
 
bocefus said:
Hmmm, US courts can't render decisions on federal legislation that might also affect a foreign entity doing business in the US.

bocefus said:
The beauty is that the legislation would no doubt be challenged in the courts and would bring out the ugly facts of "state aid". This would settle the Airbus versus Boeing subsidies dispute once and for all.


I'd refer you to your kids or the neighbors, but I doubt you have kids that speak to you, and I doubt your neighbors would let you speak to theirs. So, I guess you're on your own here.

Explain how "affect a foreign entity" equates to "bring out the ugly facts of 'state aid'" or "settle the Airbus versus Boeing subsidies dispute once and for all."





You know, BO, you're entitled to your opinion, no matter how ridiculous I think it is. The problem we have here is your response to this statement:
TonyC said:
No. Neither should they be required to reject it.

You responded,
bocefus said:
To date, no such requirement exists, nor is one proposed..

HOW, pray tell, would you describe the proposed legislation which serves as the subject of the article you posted to begin this thread, if not as a requirement to reject proposals from Airbus?

You're so busy ranting about Federal Courts and neighbors kids, you can't seem to evaluate the simple facts here. Your inability to analyze information confirms the image of childishness your avatar evokes.


Take a deep breath and try to focus on the facts, not the emotions. And if you're so emotionally opposed to the French, stop advertising their clothing.


:rolleyes:












.
 
Hugh Jorgan said:
This reminds me of the proverbial battle of wits with the unarmed opponent.
I've been known to become involved in other hopeless causes, as well. You'd think I'd learn, huh?




Oh, well....







.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top