add on
Jed : "No one would say that people engaged in a conspiracy are only
"acting in harmony toward a common goal.""
I disagree, they would say something nice like that in the prep talks
when join - that working towards a common goal.
------ Original Message ------
From: "ROGER ANDERTON" <r.j.ander...@btinternet.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, 22 Jun, 22 At 17:01
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bearden dead and cheniere.org gone
Jed
"Definition 2 only applies to inanimate objects, as an analogy."
Doesn't say that -- no use of "only" there!
So, you misunderstand definitions
------ Original Message ------
From: "Jed Rothwell" <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 22 Jun, 22 At 16:56
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bearden dead and cheniere.org gone
ROGER ANDERTON <r.j.ander...@btinternet.com
<mailto:r.j.ander...@btinternet.com> > wrote:
definition 2
to act in harmony toward a common end
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conspire
<https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conspire>
--> nothing about a conspiracy has to be unlawful or illegal
-> not your definition
You misunderstand. Definition 2 only applies to inanimate objects, as an
analogy.
: to act in harmony toward a common endCircumstances conspired to defeat
his efforts.… the sun and the wind conspired to make splinters out of
solid wood.— B. J. Oliphant
No one would say that people engaged in a conspiracy are only "acting in
harmony toward a common goal." They have to be secret, and engaged in
nefarious conduct, or it ain't a conspiracy.
You should stop arguing that words do not mean what everyone knows they
mean, and what every dictionary says they mean. It makes you look
stupid.
