I said it was a clue, but did not specify to what it was a clue to, Mark, it seems you have assumed it was a clue that he is wrong, but that was indeed not what it was a clue to. Read the post I made before the PS and you might see other options as to what it was a clue to, and maybee its not a clue to Paul alone.
--- In [email protected], "mark robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Terry is correct. It's a common logical fallacy called > "argumentum ad populum". > > > > > > ************ > {American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote > "not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the > case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions. > There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a > unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill > its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and > unjust lawsuits. > See www.fija.org > [Please adopt this as your own signature.] } > > > > > _____ > > > > UnCoolRabit, while I don't agree with all that Paul has posted, > it does NOT matter how many agree or not for a proposition to > be true or not; for example, 2+2=4 regardless of how many say > otherwise. > > -TLP > > > --- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" > <uncoolrabbit@> > wrote: > > > > PS: Paul, notice this is the most popular thread in the forumn > right > > now, and every one posting is agaisnt you... should be a clue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > _____ > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
