

| Subject: | Re: flames and leak |
| From: | Mick Kalber |
| Date: | Thu, 8 Feb 2001 15:37:40 -1000 |
> I missed a flame war between some list members who are members of the legal profession.< Mike... You'll love this... it's like watching a football game on tape and being able to fast forward through all the garbage you don't want to watch! Here is a recap of what you missed... submitted by unca joel: someone named Bill asked or complained on the list that he had never received his "birth certificate" (hereafter referred to as Exhibit A) from a certain lawyer no. 1 in Massachusetts. that's what started the ruckus. shortly thereafter, lawyer no. 2, the right honorable reprobate from Georgia slashed out with his worthless advice of suing lawyer no. 1 for alledged crimes and misdemeanors involving mail fraud, vanagon pornography, and the selling on national secrets concerning Neiman-Marcus cookie recipes. almost immediately, lawyer no. 3, the esteemed and often underestimated shyster from California, bespoke his tupence-worth of legal advisory concerning the whole mess, but in particular the vanagon pornography, in a valiant but futile attempt to point out the uselessness of advice from lawyer no. 2 in regard to lawyer no. 1 and the aforementioned Exhibit A. whereupon, lawyer no. 2, smarting intensely from such affrontery, issued statements proclaiming himself to be above the Law and/or Common Sense and An Expert on All Matters, Universal and Otherwise, and demanded a retraction and apology from lawyer no. 3 forthwith. Lawyer no. 3, therefore, felt called upon to further inflame the issue and proclaim his sine qua non ultimatum of "Eat me!" before the court of public vanagon opinion. Non-Lawyer no. 1 then attempted to mollify the issue by humor, poking fun at lawyers et all and lawyers in general. Lawyer no. 3 attempted rebutal, but in his own way, to continue mollification. Non-Lawyer no. 2 took offence at said mollification by lawyer no. 3, stating that such mollification was beneath the dignity of such offices and, in a word, haughty. as it stands right now, the score is Lawyer No. 1 ---------------- 5 (for staying out of this mess) Lawyer No. 2 ---------------- 0 Lawyer No. 3 ---------------- 0 Non-Lawyer No. 1 ---------- 0 Non-Lawyer N0. 2 ---------- 0 but we expect the participants to attempt to run up the score during the 2nd period, while the referees are on break. also expected are additional Non-Lawyers taking the field and confusing the issue, not to mention making it very difficult to tell the players from the fans without a score card. :) cold drinks! cold drink! getchure red hots, right here!! peanuts! (i got the sales concession! you want peanuts, you gotta pay me!). :) unca joel
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »