Hi Steve! 21 Jan 2003, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[McDonald's coffee case] S> No. Though in actuality, we will never know the exact amount. S> http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm S> Please check your facts before posting such "common knowledge." Thanx for the clarification. [microwave oven] >> For european thinking these cases are ridicolous. >> And judge would give the other party right. S> The cat one sounds like an urban legend to me, but I'm S> naturally skeptical anyway. you are right. http://www.snopes.com/horrors/techno/micropet.htm (PS no problem to find it in google though :) microwave cat sued) Anyways my examples had been terribly wrongly chosen (because 20.000 $ for 3rd grade burning which the mcdonalds lady wanted is absolutely OK) the point behind it is still true. REAL example: woman's doctor doesn't do childbirth's, because the insurrance would be unpayable. (29.000$ vs 107.000 for insurrance if she did births) (have forgotten the name, but it was on very credible 2. german television) There are 2 possibilities: 1) american doctors are soooo bad, that they very often do something wrong (very low propability) 2) american's too often sue and want to much money Signs point to 2) When the terrible accident happened in Kaprun, Ed Fagan (a slimy cobra) tried everything to drag the case to an US court, because there he would have made real $. >> And than they learn that the US const. and the UN charta says that >> every human being has undeniable rights. S> I can not find it in my copy of the UN Charter. Please S> enlighten me as to which section and paragraph of the UN S> Charter recognizes "undeniable rights." Indirectly in the preamble: "to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small" Which refers (among other points) to: "Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world" I (as not being a native speaker) thought that inalienable and undeniable were roughly the same, but anyways I ment inalienable. PS: as for Guantanamo: Art. 5 "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." Thanx for your clarifications about the above 2 cases. S> Steve Ackman CU, Ricsi -- |~)o _ _o Richard Menedetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> {ICQ: 7659421} (PGP) |~\|(__\| -=> Fishing rod: a hook at one end, a fool at the other <=-