Time: Tue Sep 16 15:10:47 1997
	by usr01.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA19477;
	Tue, 16 Sep 1997 14:20:40 -0700 (MST)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 14:20:29 -0700
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: Proposal for fewer distractions [corrected]

AD HOMINEM ARGUMENTATION:

It is a fallacious method of argumentation,
in which an attack is made "on the man"
("ad hominem" in Latin), instead of the        
merits of his argument, or lack of merits.

"ad" means "to" in Latin
"hominem" means "the man" in Latin (acusative case)

For example:

Paul says there is a deliberate fraud in
the confusion between USDC and DCUS.
He publishes an essay on the Internet,
proving this fraud, and then follows with
a plethora of pleadings in which this finding
has actually been applied in several federal
court cases.

His opponents attack him instead, for 
failing to obey some arbitrary & picky rules 
for email conduct, thus distracting
others from the merits of this imporatnt
distinction.

[end of example]


There are a multitude of other examples
I could give you.  I predict that you
will see a distinct rise in such "methods",
as the Supreme Law Library grows -- with
the addition of pleadings from 27 more
cases.  These pleadings are very conclusive
evidence of criminal racketeering within
the Department of Justice, in violation of
RICO (Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq.)

When everything is loaded, you will, for example,
be able to count the number of distinct times
that the Jury Selection and Service Act has
been challenged, and those challenges have been 
obstructed by DOJ and its hench-persons.

Just wait, and you will see!!

Frankly, I think that jealousy is partly
to blame for such conduct by so many 
people on the Internet.  Unfortunately,
they are somewhat like an air horn at a football
game:  when one goes off, the people you want
to hear, are drowned out completely, and/or 
cowed into silence.

/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://supremelaw.com




At 05:08 PM 9/16/97 -0400, you wrote:
>
>In a message dated 9/16/97 9:01:53 PM, you wrote:
>
><<I am now broadcasting ad hominem attacks
>which are being directed at me, and 
>Brooks is attacking me for doing so.>>
>
<snip> asks (only when you have time)
>
>What are ad hominem attacks.  I don't know the deinftion.  From what I see,
>it is a negative thing.
>
>Thanks.

========================================================================
Paul Andrew Mitchell                 : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA;  M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine

tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com   : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this

As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
========================================================================
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]

      

Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail