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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Murrey Walker who wrote (171388)	6/27/2006 10:24:58 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793891

Guns don't kill, people do, and so on, and so forth. LOL, Given the context in which you wrote that, I can only conclude that you think guns kill people and favor banning them. Otherwise you would not have put forth the analogy. Yada, yada. Hidden ordinance is what we're discussing here I thought what we were discussing is derelict ordinance. Derelict ordinance is hardly WMD by any meaningful interpretation of the term even if used by someone as a weapon. Seems I recall a young princess from England who was very concerned with the environmental things (buried explosives) you're referring too, and why they continued to maime young children. Indeed, but then the buried explosives that interested her were the ones that were shallowly buried and equipped with a pressure trigger. "Buried" and "explosives" in a very different context. Why not stick to the germaine substance of what's being discussed? I'm trying to. You're the one bringing up the extraneous stuff, like guns and land mines, neither of which is analogous to derelict chemical ordinance. Remember when I anointed you Princess Parse, way back? (g) I do remember. What I don't remember is whether I corrected your usage of the word. It's a perfectly good English word, you know. It means to examine critically, especially the meaning of a statement. It is not a synonym for "spin," which is a deliberate twisting of meaning. It looks for meaning rather than distorting it. Analysis is good, and parsing is part of that. It helps us understand and communicate, to isolate the salient elements of arguments, and to draw wise conclusions and make wise decisions. Part of analysis is differentiation, such as among guns, land mines, and WMD, comparing and contrasting, unmuddling the issues with which we are faced. (Baseball bats wasn't a perfect analogy either. Baseball bats are just as dangerous as weapons when they are old as when they are freshly produced. They are, however, apparently useful for making the point about using paperweights to hold documents in place vs conking your sales rival on the head.)