Ninjas vs. Pirates

[The Lost One]

But it is a question of evidence and proof. Just because E doens't believe in "ninja pirates" doesn't mean they don't exist. What I am seeking if proof that "ninja pirates" cannot exits. Simply attacking those who claim that there are ninja pirates is pointless.

[FirstMateJack]

Some of us happen to like straw men thank you very much.

Fine, fine Lost, we'll get all technical if we must.


P1 => If a person is a pirate, they are not a ninja.

P2 => No one who is a ninja can be a pirate.

P3 => All people who wear all black and carry swords or claws or throwing stars are ninjas with self-inflicted super powers.

P4 => All pirates wear brightly colored garb with black and white strips and red scarves, no pirates have super powers unless cursed, and this is considered a non-self inflicted power.

P5 => It is against natural, self evident laws to be a pirate ninja or a ninja pirate or any other form of adjective, conjunction, noun, verb, modifier, expletive, infinitive or anything of the sort that implies directly or indirectly pirates are in some way also a ninja or that ninjas are in some way also pirates.

Q1 => All pirates are not ninjas.
Q2=> All ninjas are not pirates.

Thus, we can achieve the follwing Venn diagram.

______  __ ______
/ _____ \    / _____ \
| Ninjas  |   | Pirates |
\______/    \______/

I think we can all see that they do not in fact overlap.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

yeah, just accept it mr. legal freak.

[Fellfrosch]

I'm going to have to disagree with e for pretty much the same reason he's disagreeing with Lost One: I'm obstinate and, despite lack of evidence, refuse to recognize opposing ideas.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

and because you're a loser. Don't forget that.

[Fellfrosch]

Were I to add that to my list it would imply, grammatically, that you too are a loser. Which is fine with me, because that was kind of my point.

[Lieutenant Kije]

I offer myself as evidence: I've been trying to keep it quiet, but I am in fact a ninja pirate.

** Kije snarls an "Arrr," but silently, in ninja fashion.

  and then dissapears from this argument in a ball of enigmatic flame.

[Fellfrosch]

Somehow I think I always knew. Maybe it was finding those rum-soaked throwing stars in your kitchen cupboard.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

It is well documented that Kije is a liar.

[FirstMateJack]

E is correct, as is documented here: **Documentation Case study Ninja Versus Pirates: Reply #36 on: April 28th, Friday 2006 at 12:14pm »

By saying Arrr, he disobeyed the strict silence codes of a Ninja, and by not belting it out for the world to hear he has hidden his pirate heritage.

This would otherwise be an unsolveable paradox if given that he had to be one, the other or both.

The answer must therefore be, Kije is not a Pirate nor a Ninja.

[The Lost One]

I'm sorry E and FMT, but you are not persuading me. It does seem like Kije is possibly a ninja pirate. I understand your arguments that he is lying but they aren't well stated. Although E's argument is not properly substantiated and lack foundation. FMT makes two interestng argument but the first is one relies on unproven assumptions and for the second argument, the "Arrr" is not dispositive evidence.

So I say that the jury is still out on this.

[The Lost One]

I have to apologive for my last post.  I ment FMJ instead of FMT.

[FirstMateJack]

Alright. E and I will be the Jury in this case.

Let me know when you are ready E and we'll discuss what verdict is.

[Archon]

Lost One, I think it goes without saying that trusting a con man is not a great idea, especially about something so important as this. Since it says right on his profile that he is a Con Man, I think we would be best to ignore his testimony altogether. Either that, or include it, and give everyone a reason to associate your side of the argument with blatant liars.

[The Lost One]

I recognize that Kije credibility has not be established but just because someone claims to be a con man doesn't mean that they always lie.

I handled a case once in which a man was trying to collect from his insurance company. The person was a convicted drug smuggler. Never the less, his drug conviction didn't mean that he had filed a false insurance claim.

As for Kije, I am wonder about a couple of his claims. First, FMJ seems to be assuming that he was a pirate first and latter became a Ninja. I'm not sure fall into that assumption. It seems to be that the easiest was to become a ninja pirate is to become a ninja first and then pirate your ninja theme song and other necessary intellectual property off of the internet or get a Dread Pirate Roberts franchise. So Kije, how did you become a ninja pirate.

Posted by: FirstMateJack Posted on: Apr 28th, 2006, 3:44pm
Alright. E and I will be the Jury in this case.

Let me know when you are ready E and we'll discuss what verdict is.

I motion to remove E and FMJ from the jury. Interested parties are not allowed in this country to serve on a jury. Because E and FMJ are disputing that there are no ninja pirates they fall within the definition of a interested party and therefore cannot be on the jury without casing a mistrial.

FMJ, you attempt to about yourself and E as part of the jury is therefore futile and would actually hinder your attempt to settle this issue. Honestly, do you think that anyone would believe you if your only basis for there being no ninja pirates is your on self-reasoned opinion?