Bush's snark hunt (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


DomKen -> Bush's snark hunt (7/1/2008 11:46:28 PM)

It seems that saying something was true thrice isn't cutting it with appelate judges.




candystripper -> RE: Bush's snark hunt (7/2/2008 12:31:41 AM)

Wish the article had included an excerpt of the opinion, containing the rhyme.  I like that sort of thing.
 
It's great to see American jurisprudence begin to return to normal.
 
Thanks, DomKen.
 
candystripper




farglebargle -> RE: Bush's snark hunt (7/2/2008 3:26:36 AM)

The opinion in its entirity.

http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200806/06-1397-1124487.pdf

P.28
quote:


We are not persuaded. Lewis Carroll notwithstanding, the fact that the government has
“said it thrice” does not make an allegation true. See LEWIS
CARROLL, THE HUNTING OF THE SNARK 3 (1876) (“I have said
it thrice: What I tell you three times is true.”). In fact, we have
no basis for concluding that there are independent sources for
the documents’ thrice-made assertions. To the contrary, as
noted in Part III, many of those assertions are made in identical
language, suggesting that later documents may merely be citing
earlier ones, and hence that all may ultimately derive from a
single source. And as we have also noted, Parhat has made a
credible argument that -- at least for some of the assertions -- the
common source is the Chinese government, which may be less
than objective with respect to the Uighurs.


Did you know that we're holding Chinese dissidents in Cuba?





Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.015625