Quote:

---

moot (mt)
n.
1. Law A hypothetical case argued by law students as an exercise.
2. An ancient English meeting, especially a representative meeting of the freemen of a shire.
tr.v. moot·ed, moot·ing, moots
1.
a. To bring up as a subject for discussion or debate.
b. To discuss or debate. See Synonyms at broach1.
2. Law To plead or argue (a case) in a moot court.
adj.
1. Subject to debate; arguable: a moot question.
2.
a. Law Without legal significance, through having been previously decided or settled.
b. Of no practical importance; irrelevant.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
A point is moot if it is debatable, such that by being debatable it has no importance.

---

Quote:

---

The question of Iraq’s WMD is not something that would likely be called moot, since the question clearly has significance

---

Quote:

---

but the question of whether the we know if the Iraqi Government is opposed to a faction trying to destabilize and overthrow them would certainly seem to be somewhat moot

---

Quote:

---

and certainly the question of whether we can trust if Al Qaeda is likely to do bad things would seem to be somewhat moot too, since at this point, we can assume that we can.

---

Quote:

---

And this thread is also somewhat moot, since the issue of whether the previously said points were moot was already made and there's likely not going to be much resolution on either case or acceptance of said mootness by those denying it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
No, it's clearly moot because it can never be proven one way or the other.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:


Ex:
"WMD's were a lie."
"Your point's moot because there is no proof."

"Being that there were no WMD's, I believe that suggests falsehoods were passed on, at least."
"Old news, your point is moot."

"There were no WMD's."
"That they found none, doesn't PROVE that they didn't exist, your point is moot."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:


Sadly, your point, tho' correct, is moot, i.e, irrelevant, because we've already invaded the place, screwed it up, and hung the guy.

Truthiness or falseity of any statement made earlier is no longer important...

Sorry about that...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
Well, at least we all agree it's a "moot" point, not a "mute" point.

---

Quote:

---

If we prove that Al Qaeda didn’t use mentally handicap women to pull off this recent suicide bombing - so what? The proof has achieved nothing. That is a fundamentally moot point.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
No... The lesson I would derive would be not to trust what the Iraqi government says. But some people are only ready to accept that lessons they WANT to learn. and so the truth is... moot..

---

Quote:

---

We’re already aware of the difficulties of situational awareness and the inexactness of political rhetoric. So that’s not a lesson most of us would learn since we’ve already learned a long time ago

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

We’re already aware of the difficulties of situational awareness and the inexactness of political rhetoric. So that’s not a lesson most of us would learn since we’ve already learned a long time ago

---

Except when people go off half-cocked over a story that may, or may not, be true. It's an easy lesson to learn, but it's a hard lesson to remember and apply when emotions are running high.

So here's another lesson I would take away: NEVER react on emotion.

---

Quote:

---

Much like attempting to draw conclusions that fly in the face of probability, such as finding a report about the ruthless cruelty of Al Qaeda questionable, simply because someone doesn’t agree with the Iraq war or has an anti-authority bent.

---

Quote:

---

Don't mooks come from Brooklyn?

---