If it is true, as Mr. Giuliani asserts, that there are terrorists who "seek to destroy our liberties," doesn't it then stand to reason that every time President Bush and other government officials enact or authorize procedures that curtail or suspend our freedoms, they are providing victories to these very same terrorists?
It is true that appellees asserted in one short paragraph of their brief in this Court that the county-wide election method was resorted to by Georgia in order to minimize the strength of racial and political minorities in the populous urban counties.
This idea, that knowledge is identical with its object, is dimly reflected in the modern formula for expressing one of the necessary conditions of knowledge: A knows that p only if it is true that p. To assert that knowledge and its object must be identical raises a question: In what way is knowledge "in" a person?
And if it is true, as the military asserts, that the key to defeating an enemy is having the technological advantage, then "we the people" are at a severe disadvantage.
It is true that the Court asserts that it is not limiting the Fourth Amendment bar against unreasonable searches to the protection of property rights, but in reality it is doing exactly that.
It is true, as Professor O'Donovan asserts in his letter ("Claim that abuse is behind psychosis is irresponsible", Big Issue) that "correlation does not equal causation".
We must immediately add that to believe (or assert) that if A, B, is not to believe (assert) that it is true; for it is true only if A&B; and one might believe that if A, B, and properly assert it, without believing that A&B — indeed, while thinking that it is very likely not true.
If it is true, as the Court has repeatedly asserted, that the tensions inherent in federal-court review of state-court convictions require that substantive rights yield at times to procedural rules, no similar tension exists in a § 2255 proceeding.
In this case, we can assert it is true because we got p = 0.014.
It is true, also, as is asserted, that the process of a State cannot be supposed to run beyond its own territory.
It was not done to be politically correct, but to be true to the facts.You also assert that interest groups petitioned to make sure that the soldiers' expressions "suggested the perplexity the war engendered".
