This last argument by Roey Goestru is telling R how to split this number into a matrix.

It was our final argument in the battle for equality.

The point is made.

They may give you an argument.

This argument had to be rejected.

And here's my theme

I made that argument on Mon day of this week.

No 3 433 275

This argument was unfounded.

The Commission cannot but dismiss this argument.

This argument is not convincing.

I think it's a bird's nest on the ground.

Does this command need an argument?

And this was the whole point.

At least that's the argument.

So this second argument can be dismissed.

The Commission does not accept this claim.

I believe that this argument is mistaken.

I do not believe that is the case.

This is its first argument.

The argument is therefore rejected.

This argument is therefore rejected.

The claim was therefore rejected.

The argument was therefore rejected.

This argument is therefore unfounded.

The argument was therefore rejected.

The abovementioned argument was consequently rejected.

This claim had consequently to be rejected.

So my argument today is basically this.

So inside layout was this one argument.

This argument, by the way, is completely general.

This argument has some validity.

This argument is therefore not relevant.

Hence, the claim had to be rejected.

This argument was therefore also rejected.

Hence this argument does not hold.

This has never made much sense to me, this argument.

But this argument is not valid, either.

This angle is called the argument of z .

An argument is termed formally valid if it has structural self consistency, i.e.

This has never made much sense to me, this argument.

This argument of course, shoots itself in the foot.

Let me make this even simpler. I want to be sure to get this point across clearly.

I know that is a lot of figures but in reality what we are doing is trying to limit the possibility of contamination in the local community.

I ask you to lead that argument in Johannesburg too.