--- Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yeah...it's pretty fuckin' pointless. Tantamount to proving a guy > pointing a > gun at you is actually pointing a gun at you, TO the guy pointing the > gun at > you.
Oh, I don't know about that. What about proving that someone is pointing a [gun] at you, who has already lets you know he's pointing a [gun] at you via deniable means of some kind, but who categorically denies such when asked about it directly. In that vague scenario, I would imagine that there is some utility in proving conclusively that someone is pointing a [gun] at you if only to warn others around you about the threat. I, of course, live a similar scenario. The main difference is that it is a group with a somewhat unethical agenda that poses the threat, and who swear up and down that (a) they are all really, really nice people, and (b) that they have no actual interest in my affairs. Both assertions are quite false, but proving it is another matter -- and difficult too, given the ignorance and stupidity currently in fashion at the moment. But I don't mean to provoke an off-topic discussion in this thread. Please do carry on. Regards, Steve ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
