.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to ShadowSD.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="ShadowSD:452686"]Man_of_the_Century said:[QUOTE]In the section of the quote that HTL posted... No. But read the rest of the paragraph: "Jennifer Bradley and Timothy Dowling, who have co-written an amicus brief for the case, argue...the Act says the EPA must regulate any "air pollutant" that "may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare."[/QUOTE] The lawyers are the ones making the assertion about what is in the clean air act. If this issue is as cut and dry as you suggest, why would they bother to write up a whole legal brief based on a false premise that could be disproved by two seconds of looking at the clean air act? [/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.011 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][