[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: e$
In message <[email protected]> "James A. Donald" writes:
> Jim Dixon writes
> > I believe that government employees are drawn from the general population
> > and the distributions of their attributes are roughly the same as those
> > of the general population. 'Sanctity of government' is not a phrase or
> > concept that I introduced.
>
> You made a claim concerning our judicial and legal system,
> a claim so far out of contact with reality that nobody can be bothered
> to refute you.
I made no claim. I asked a question. I quote the exchange in its
entirety:
> Jim Dixon says:
> > In message <[email protected]> [email protected] writes:
> > > They are simply trying to stop you from playing games. The law
> > > isn't like geometry -- there aren't axioms and rules for deriving
> > > one thing from another. The general principle is that they want to
> > > track all your transactions, and if you make it difficult they
> > > will either use existing law to jail you, or will produce a new
> > > law to try to do the same.
> >
> > On what experience or observation do you base these rather extreme
> > remarks?
>
> Plonk.
This is fundamentalist ranting, followed by a reasonable question,
followed by <infidel! he dares to question the holy word!>, followed
by ritual denunciations from bystanders.
I am an agnostic. I don't believe that 'they' exist. I believe that
you have a system staffed by a random selection of the American
population, somewhat skewed because people have some control over
what area they work in. To work with a system, you need to understand
it objectively, you need something more than incantations.
--
Jim Dixon