On 12 Aug 2006 15:43:51 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 14:41:33 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Brenda Ann wrote:
There's a difference between memorizing a formula or method and memorizing
specific answers to specific questions. The former is called learning, and
can be applied to many situations. The latter is called laziness, and
teaches nothing that can be used for any other purpose.

That is just hair-splitting.

The same hair splitting as the difference between stealing money and
earning it - they're both methods of obtaining it.

again you tread close to libel and flatout insaity

There's nothing either malicious not defamatory in that. ("Who" am I
defaming? "Hair"?)

But, since you don't know the difference between "learning" and
"memorizing", nor which subjects fall into which category, you
probably can't see the parallel.

and again

Telling you something true about yourself isn't actionable, unless
done with certain intent, which you'd be hard-pressed to prove.

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:51:06 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 23:51:10 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:

There's nothing either malicious not defamatory in that. ("Who" am I
defaming? "Hair"?)

myself for example by comparing me to a theft

1) A theft is an act - I wasn't comparing anyone to an act.

2) Quote where I'm comparing you to anything.

Telling you something true about yourself isn't actionable, unless
done with certain intent, which you'd be hard-pressed to prove.

never said it was actiionable

You keep using the word "libel" - that means actionable, since libel
is a civil tort.

do you understand english it seem not

Oh, I understand it. It's difficult to get published if you don't
understand the language in which you're writing. Your posts, however,
demonstrate a clear lack of ability to use the language to communicate
clearly.

however when you keep compating someone to theifs in time I suspect it
would rise to being actionale

If I ever did, which I never have.

what protects you is that judgement is not particularly collectable
and therefore not worth an atorneys time

How would you know whether a judgment against me is collectable?

Or is this another case of what you say having nothing to do with what
you mean?