I said "basic facts" and you answered as if I had said "facts"

I said "basic facts" and you answered as if I had said "facts"
Re: Re: I meant that I didn't follow the trial in detail. -- skibummer	Post Reply		Forum

Posted by: tatiana
06/16/2005, 11:54:04

(About author)

Edit

Why not reply to what I said, not what you wish I had said? I repeat, "It's pretty hard to be alive on the planet and not know the BASIC facts of the Jackson case." Most of the people on the planet do not have all the details of the factual case.

Your conclusion is nonsense. The DA might have been slightly incompetent, not "totally incompetent" or the jury may have been gullible or may have felt sympathy of the rock star or who knows what of many other possible forces might have acted in the courtroom to create the verdict.

My logic is not circular. Certain lawyers twist the truth, juries are fooled by them and verdicts are created. Nothing circular there. A happens, which causes B, which causes C. A rock falls off a cliff, it hits a car on the road below it, the car has a dent. If you see a circle, I'll get you some glasses.

Post Reply | Email Friend | Alert

Previous | Next | Current page

Followups

Is this important? --- Julie D. ( 16-06-2005 ) ( 1396 bytes ) link +1
- Is it important the ski learn what circular logic is? Could improve things here. --- tatiana ( 17-06-2005 ) ( 1043 bytes ) +2
  - Maybe. --- Julie D. ( 17-06-2005 ) ( 1520 bytes )
  - Tsk Tsk --- skibummer ( 17-06-2005 ) ( 690 bytes ) +1
    - Passionate cirucular arguments --- DWA ( 18-06-2005 ) ( 1111 bytes ) +1
      - Too too funny --- skibummer ( 18-06-2005 ) ( 219 bytes )
I know what you said it is there for all to see after all. --- skibummer ( 17-06-2005 ) ( 1896 bytes )