http://i.imgur.com/ffHCGV4.gifv

LIES!

I'm mrford

Fact:

Facts rhymes with Pacts

the naval base in tartus, and also because assad is on the rusky side of this little proxy war

edit: that wasn't a cat fact!

Cats can be used as super soakers!

http://i.imgur.com/47j2ftb.gifv

Did you know?

The first cat in space was French. She was named Felicette, or “Astrocat.” She survived the trip.

Did you know?

Original kitty litter was made out of sand but it was replaced by more absorbent clay in 1948.

If you’re ever lost at sea, don’t drink the ocean water. The large amount of salt in the water dehydrates humans. Cats, on the other hand, can drink sea water in order to survive. Cats have crazy kidneys that filter out the salt from the water so they can re-hydrate themselves.

http://i.imgur.com/IW8simF.gif

lolol

everything i expect from a heston post a) ridiculous amounts of stupidity and b) racial slurs

Why are you blaming Obama, you dumbass?

He wasn't the one who outlawed military members being armed.

http://www.dtic.mil/...r/fulltext/u2/a272176.pdf

That's the Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 5210.56, signed into effect in February 1992 by Donald J. Atwood, deputy secretary of defense under President George H.W. Bush.

Once again, you have no fluffing clue what you're talking about.

So put that in your mouth and suck it.

tella didn't ruin team server, red x ruined it

get it right you silly canuck

FACT:

fords a poopyhead

did you click on my youtube link

http://forgifs.com/...70-4/DogHumpsCatsHead.gif

come on trife, manage your alts better!

it takes alot of effort and flexibility!

if you weren't dating a dude, i'd show your GF :D

baahhhhhhhhhhhh which idiot(s) ruled it accidental? grrrrr

Fact:

Humans are not special at all in a Cats' eyes.

Burt Macklin, dinosaur hunter.

yup

Yes. Like a wise friend of mine once said "It's stupid not to"

FERGUSON, MO:

WORST THANKSGIVING PARADE EVER

facts is facts, jack.

A group of cats is called a clowder.

The world’s largest cat measured 48.5 inches long.

In the 1960s, the CIA tried to turn a cat into a bonafide spy by implanting a microphone into her ear and a radio transmitter at the base of her skull. She somehow survived the surgery but got hit by a taxi on her first mission.

anywhos, i'm outtie. regardless of who's right or wrong, thanks for helping me pass the time while on the clock on a boring slow day :)

have a swirvey day!

plz dont rae carruth me :P

i want consistency :) i wouldn't be a fan of him getting paid while appealing his guilty verdict - it would encourage parties to drag out all legal proceedings as long as they possibly could. asked you that question merely to see how you'd feel about it

Question for you - would you be okay with Greg Hardy being suspended WITH pay until his appeal is concluded?

Mecklenburg County Judge Rebecca Thorn-Tin would beg to differ, Billy Ray

if i'm a communist then i'm hereby labeling you a mouthbreathing, inbred, nascar watching, IQ lower than the room temperature, gun fellating, bible thumping redneck.

:D personal insults are fun!

That's what I asked at the beginning of my little spiel today. Should the NFL take action on the accusation? On a guilty verdict? Or only once the appeals process has been exhausted? The NFL needs to more clearly define this so that it treats all the players equally. None of his constitutional rights are being violated - his legal sentence is being suspended while his appeal is sought - which is how NC handles things. That's cool, nobody has a problem with him having his chance in court to appeal the verdict. I don't know why you keep huffing and puffing about WHARRRGARBL LIBRULS WANNA PEE ON THE CONSTITUTION HURRRRR. Makes you sound like Cerberus, bruh.

Again my point: For the NFL who's claiming to be tough on DV, allowing someone who's already been found guilty to continue to play while appealing that verdict sends quite the mixed signal to the public/it's fans, in my eyes.

And no, I'm not trolling.

jabroni, i'm not blaming the panthers owner. i'm blaming the NFL for not being consistent in their punishments/suspensions. hardy and rice are both guilty (whether you want to admit it or not) and for the NFL who's claiming to be tough on DV, allowing someone who's already been found guilty to continue to play while appealing that verdict sends quite the mixed signal.

the legal system has already done it's thing. the NFL has done it's thing only in regards to one of the players. that's inconsistent

another lame post by crest23

i'm well away of the NFLPA and the unions. i mentioned employment contracts/agreements quite a few times in my last post.

regarding it:

'Every NFL player, including Ray Rice, signs a contract with the league that includes an arbitration provision. The arbitration provision prevents players from filing lawsuits against the NFL or NFL franchises for disputes arising from their contracts. Instead, the players’ contracts and the NFL’s Collective Bargaining Agreement require the players to participate in an arbitration proceeding to resolve their disputes. The NBA and MLB have similar arbitration provisions in their contracts and CBAs. The arbitration provision agreed to by the players gives up many of their Due Process rights with respect to disputes over their contracts––including termination.'

right thurrr, bruh

'punishing someone for something they can still be found not guilty of, is a dangerous precedent to set. especially when no pattern pf behavior has been set.'

unless there is an employment contract stating otherwise, it's not illegal for an employer to suspend/fire someone if they're merely accused of crime - even if they haven't been found guilty of a crime yet. is it fair? not in my opinion, but that's how things are. it's what at-will employment pretty much is. almost all states are like this. i believe 49 outta 50 states are at-will. being accused of a crime is not a federally protected class. neither is being a braves fan, a yankees fan, comic book collector or being a soccer player. you can be fired/suspended for any of those reasons, as long as you're not a protected class and there's not a employment contract/agreement stating otherwise.

huge difference between the court system and private employers, bruh. due process is required in a court of law. it is not required in the NFL.

are you seriously stating that the NFL needs or is required to follow due process?

LOL

the NFL != united states court system

you'll probably be shocked to learn that the overwhelming majority of employers are not required to follow due process.

to recap

ray rice = guilty
greg hardy = guilty, appeal pending
ray mcdonald = being investigated for DV, assumed to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law

yes, after you've been found guilty by a judge, you are guilty - until if/when you appeal the ruling successfully. he's guilty. sure, if the wins the appeal the decision will be reversed, but until that happens/if that does happen, he's guilty.

he hasn't been sentenced? you for real, son?

http://espn.go.com/...-counts-domestic-violence

"Mecklenburg County Judge Rebecca Thorn-Tin sentenced Hardy to 18 months' probation. A 60-day jail sentence was suspended."

again, once you're found guilty you're guilty until it's been successfully appealed. you don't get to call yourself not guilty after merely starting the appeals process. from now until probably sometime in 2015 (after the 2014 NFL season) when the actual appeal takes place and the appeal may be granted - that jabroni is guilty, bruh.

guess what someone who admitted guilt, and someone who was found guilty by a judge have in common?

dey both guilty, sonnnnn


and in regards to who i am. the braves suck more wang than republicans do :)

we're going to have to agree to disagree. i think that the NFL is being inconsistent with their policies/treatment/punishment of those with DV issues.

it's okay to disagree. i just ask that you don't stop your car in front of mine and have your buddies do a drive by shooting into my car. kthnx :P

"you want to suspend someone before they are found guilty or not guilty?"

"he was found guilty by a bench judge, and the legal process allows an appeal and a trial by jury."

i'm so confused!

-----------------------

'if you think that people should be suspended because they are accused of a crime'

i never said anything close to that dumbass.

-----------------------

my point is that both ray rice and hardy have been found guilty in a court of law of DV charges. one was banned, yet the other one still plays to this day... why? it makes it seem like the NFL is sending mixed signals. they want to be tough on DV issues, but yet, they're letting hardy play despite him already having his day in court. they need to be more consistent on things and define their policies a lot better.

and just for a cheap shot parting blow, rae carruth anyone? :P

jabroni, he's already been found guilty in a court of law nearly 2 months ago.

http://espn.go.com/...-counts-domestic-violence

while your statement that the legal process isn't done with hardy is technically sorta correct, your next line that 'suspend people before they are found guilty' is completely retarded.

the point that i was trying to make is that there will be many many questions that'll need to be answered in regards to suspensions in the NFL. mike and mike were talking about it this morning. they mentioned that the idea that folks could be fired/suspended just upon the accusation of another person is crazy and the basis of innocent until proven guilty is one the main tenets of what our country is built upon. but they couldn't understand why hardy was still playing, he's already had his day in court. they also admitted that if one of them (M&M) were to be accused of 'insert crime here', they'd very likely be suspended until the thing gets resolved. there's a big difference between criminal matters and the law and employer/employee relations.

i understand you're a panthers fan, and i think that it's making you biased in your opinion, and also blinding you to facts.

to clarify - i think the NFL needs to set standards/rules in order to become more consistent with their decisions. when can the NFL suspend someone? on a mere accusation? on a guilty verdict? or only once the appeals process has been exhausted? thereshouldn't be different lines in the sand for different players.

why is greg hardy still playing football right now?

ugh what a stupid message by lizard facts

my worst nemesis

we meet again

another lame post by trife

another lame post by dog facts

Another lame post by Lizard Facts

FACT:

NO HE IS NOT

is cat facts a new member?

MOD SEXUAL HARASSMENT!