OT: This Week In Voting Machine Security 3425
Some people don't accept what others label as "facts" until some kind of proof can be shown. You presented your argument which stated that "Bush is guilty of breaking the law" and provided your evidence for that argument. Regarding your evidence, you
"Right. It does not offer proof. The definition of proof is: "a formal series of statements showing that if one thing is true something else necessarily follows from it". While the evidence in my argument points to the conclusion and strongly supports it, it is not, technically, in a logical sense, proof."
Each consbreastuency (returning one member of parliament) will have 60k to 80k electors. There are 650 seats but each is...
What more needs to be said? Even *you* agreed your evidence offered nothing in the way of proof. Your position here is, as usual, absurd.
-- Heck, OS X is not even partially based on FreeBSD - Snit Sandman and Carroll are running around trying to crucify trolls like myself - Snit I am a bigger liar than Steve - Snit