Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (1881)	1/7/2003 12:10:35 PM
From: zonder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 15987

Your lawyers opinion is no better than my lawyers opinion Bill - If you know a lawyer, please do post what he says on what a "competent tribunal" is. If not, I don't know what you are trying to achieve through a "piss contest". I notice you like to use these "Appeals to Authority." They cut no ice around here. Don't be stupid. Law is one of those areas where you HAVE TO have an opinion of someone who has studied it. Face it - your opinion means zip and so does mine when it comes to law. By the way, "Appeal to Authority" is not what you think it is. Oh of course, I forgot - you just heard about it because I mentioned it a couple of times, and decided this was a good time to throw it back to me. How sad. "Appeal to Authority" refers to instances where it is NOT appropriate to cite an authority. However, sometimes it is appropriate, like when we are talking about law among a group of non-legal people. Besides, I have not said that this is the only authority on the subject, just that he is more qualified to express an opinion on the subject than us, because he is a lawyer. Please try to refrain from giving people lessons in subjects where you are not comfortable with your knowledge: ... like logical fallacies: (I guess you meant "Ad Hominem" here) you went for the "Ad Hominine" of their thinking on other subjects. I went for "fast and dirty" because it was in response to a post by Win, from whom I expect a sarcastic and "Ad Hominine" response. Message 18119084 ... or CFCs: (where you (I still can't believe it) advocated listening to refrigerator repairmen rather than scientists and quoted a guy who said "God said nothing against CFCs") Message 18118976 Message 18119010 ... or macroeconomy: (where you advocated printing money where I was saying the value of the dollar is going down) Message 18395947 Was that a good trip down memory lane, Bill? So how about you try not to lecture me on logical fallacies and about what cuts ice "around here"?