LOL! That goes for me! I have already taken heat from Miss Kimiko, for refusing to watch the silly thing.

Nevertheless, some of the crap on this thread goes beyond the pale.

 

Read "Islam Unveiled" by Robert Spencer and see what it is all about!

 

the problem with saying don't judge ancient cultures by contemporary standards is that the moslems of today are unwilling to accept that standard because for the most part they still follow the ancient culture.they still believe in child brides(even "temporary marriages" which is basically child prostitution) and though they use modern technology,their culture and beliefs are still guided by what was written in the koran. england and much of western europe are already halfway to being conquered from within by the jihadists. hows the religion of peace co-existing in holland for example. we judge things by our rational,post enlightenment mindset. they might as well be herding goats in the ninth century desert, their mindset hasn't changed.

 

Good points, and I do not want to sound like an apologist. I suspect the opinions on this forum are not reflective of the general mindset in the United States, and it remains to be seen whether the United States will roll over and bare its neck to Sharia Law as many European countries have done. Thus far the examples of its incursion into our courts and legislatures has been scant, and strictly anecdotal.

Even the effects of cultural destabilization due to our porous southern border are unclear in this regard. By and large, the central and south Americans coming into the United States illegally are more polarized religiously than we are (for the most part they are devout Christians). I could be wrong, but I have a hunch that central and south Americans would be even less tolerant of Sharia Law than the United States citizenry generally.

Again, I could be totally wrong about this. We did, after all, elect the most liberal president in the country's history a few years ago, so we do have a proven knack for spiting ourselves in the name of tolerance. Whether we will re-elect him is anyone's guess, but anything is possible. In the meantime all we can do is hope that he wasn't crossing his fingers when he swore (on the Quran??) to honor and uphold the U.S. Constitution.


P.S. - That last bit was tongue in cheek. Couldn't resist. (He did put his hand on a Bible, didn't he?)

 

Hey there conservative can we afford all that. President Bush doubled the national debt and sold our economic asses to the Chinese just to fight what the two wars we've got going on now.

It always seem like not only rank hypocrites to me but also makes it appear conservatives are completely incapable of honest addition and subtraction.

Our nation is broke unless conservatives want to kill a bunch of people for being different. Somehow we can always seem to be able to afford that.

I don't think things that are getting people killed everyday and I do mean this day as being silly.

I think its really self evident how destructive prejudice, ignorance, and fear really is.

That's why I think its essential to fight those things in our society.

Good question. Lots of cultures especially 500 years ago saw nothing wrong with 12 year-olds getting married.

But isn't that sort of a hypothetical question when we sure don't have to go far to find real live pedophile Catholic priests do we? Priests that were often protected and transferred to keep raping children because addressing it would be bad publicity for the Catholic Church.

So in reality I really don't see all that much difference between the Muslim religion, the Christian religion and the Jewish religion. Let's not forget the times God supposedly told the Jews to invade some place and kill every man woman and child.

I actually think child murderers are worse than pedophiles.

I also believe its flat out wrong to judge contemporary cultures and religions by searching out the extreme examples and then try and contend that represents a culture or religion.

That's what's happening in the US right now on the part of many people who claim we were attacked by Muslims on 9/11 instead of terrorists.

That' just pisses all over everything this country is supposed to stand for.

And that sure looks wrong if we try to measure everything from our culture and alleged ideals. But that's also the same as saying no one has a right to be different from us, while we hypocritically claim that everyone has the same rights.

That's just not a good thing, proving we are actually the hypocrites and bigots they say we are.

These are excellent points and all I would add is the Holy Bible and Koran have been compared several times on this forum and you can cherry pick war, murder, and religious conquest, as well as peace and love out of both of them.

But regardless of that truth there is such a strong tendency to try and contend that those pushing for Sharia Law, which are actually a small minority of Islamic Fundamentalists, represent all Muslims.

That's like saying all Christians believe the earth is only 6,000 years-old and there is no such thing as evolution because God created the world in 6, 24 hour days and humans walked with dinosaurs.

The largest majority of Christians don't believe a word of that.

 

Actually most of this is simply not true because the facts are that the majority of Muslims don't want to, and don't live under Sharia Law.

Here again is an example of taking small isolated minorities in underdeveloped places and trying to claim that represents all Muslims when that is not the truth.

Its actually just prejudice and bigotry in action.

Also why didn't you mention France which is actively passing laws against some Muslim practices.

By the way are those thousands and thousands of people protesting and dying all over the Middle East demanding Sharia Law? Or are they demanding freedom and democracy?

That right there proves the majority of Muslims do not want to have to live according to Sharia Law so what real chance does it ever have in the US?

None really, which is why I contend we actually have a much greater danger of people actively trying to make us live under "Christian Law."

 

Oh, my! I have incurred the wrath of the great one.

Okay. You will have the last word, come hell or high water, so I will restrict myself to this response only, because I can't do this until past midnight. That said, I will try to respond courteously.

If war were a budget line item that one could strike with a thick red pen, I would race you to the ledger. We can't wish our enemies away by shooting them an email and saying, "Sorry, the blood and mayhem are fun, but we just can't afford it."

As to whether we have been executing the war cost-effectively for the past decade, well, there is blame to go around from sea to shining sea on that score.

Look at France. The epitome of Western post-industrial liberal enlightenment. And they are trying to draw a Maginot Line against Sharia Law, far too late. I side with WGF on this one, but he is French, so I will let him fight his own battles. I will say this: it is quaint and provincial at best, and dangerously optimistic at worst, for we in the United States to believe that Sharia Law could never entrench itself here, as it is doing in Europe.

We are counting angels on the head of a pin, now. People are animals. That much is clear.

No arguments from me. I am an atheist. I have Hindu, Moslem, Catholic, and Protestant friends. And I do not just pay lip service to that. We trade lawn equipment. They intermingle at my pool parties.

Moslem individuals are wonderful people, in my experience. The Moslem Brotherhood scares the bleep out of me. I do not see a contradiction there. After all, the deep underbelly of the American Bible Belt scares the bleep out of me, too.

Live and let live. I am down with that. Now, let's see if the Moslem Brotherhood can get on board.

Agreed. Yet the contrarian point is that the Islamic faith appears to be going through another evangelistical expansion, and their incursions into competing cultures are seldom executed peacefully. The other cause for concern - and even justifiable fear - is that Moslems outnumber Christians by an order of magnitude. Even if only one half of one percent of them really do want to violently subvert competing cultures, they would comprise an army of more than a million.

Maybe the fear upheld by some in the United States is rational, and maybe not. I am not sure what I think. I will close with an old and apropos adage: one must never allow the camel's nose under the tent, for if one does, the rest of the camel is sure to follow.

 

In Pakistan which is one of the most populous moslem countries it is a crime to insult islam and it is acrime to convert from islam to any other religion punishable by death. Show me an equivalent in the west? France banning headscarves is the best you can do. There are large sections of cities in France where the police don't go unless in riot gear with a large force. In those areas moslems impose their own sharia and self segregate.

I don't know about Colorado but in the NE these moslem men have more than one wife. The feds go after mormons but don't go after the moslems. In NY a moslem man killed his wife,I believe he chopped her head off,for trying to divorce him.They founded and ran a cable channel to promote a belief that moslems are moderate. Many not all moslems want to live under sharia law,but they don't want to live under christian law,as you put it.And if a violent block of them takes charge because they are fanatics and willing to do what it takes,the moderate moslems will just sit back and sit on their hands at best.

And lets see what these crowds in the middle east get in the end. They are opposing aging secular moslem dictatorships who only play the religious card to whip their people up against the U.S. and Israel. Who nows how they will end up.Arab culture is very tribal and no ones free yet.

 

I don't believe you can find any wrath in my last post. So I don't think we're off to a good start based on what I feel is a false accusation.

But if you can find my wrath I'll apologize for it.

That also is not always true. I go lots of times without the last word. but as I've stated before I think the prejudice, discrimination, and demonization of Muslims is something worth discussing because people are dying over it.

But under President Obama the costs of our wars are a budget item which was not true under President Bush. You can check that for yourself right here.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/02/weighing-the-ir/

And what are you proposing, we simply kill all our enemies? Who are there and where are they at? In the case of Muslims should just kill all of them to be on the safe side? Will that work?

Since we've got the military might shall we just take over the world? And forget the Muslims for a minute, do you think the Russians and Chinese are going to just sit back an allow that.

Or is there a very strong possibility the US could also be turned to glass in the blink of an eye for our attempts at world domination and genocide?

I didn't say anything about whether not the our wars are cost effective. I was pointing to the lie and spend policies of the conservative/Republican/Tea Baggers who kept the cost of those wars hidden off the federal budget.

You don't even want to get me started on the corruption, profiteering, and down right theft of money on the part of buddy buddy contractors like Halliburton.

Its just another lie of conservatism that we can't afford welfare for people but they can't bring themselves to touch corporate welfare. Not even the billions in tax subsidies for oil companies making the highest profits in the history of the world.

I was also pointing out the hypocritical lie of conservatism to rail against government spending and scream the nation is broke unless its military spending and then there's always enough money for another war.

Or even for funding pet projects that the department of defense doesn't even want or need but are funded anyway because they get them re-elected.

Where has Sharia Law entrenched itself in Europe? Not in France certainly? So where are the European countries were Sharia Law is entrenched? And what do you mean by that? That the court systems in those countries no longer follow the laws written and passed by their legislatures?

Just point them out to me and to what extent Sharia Law is entrenched in those countries?

And once you can show me just how entrenched Sharia Law is in those countries I think we can better judge what chance it has of becoming entrenched here.

But I really don't see 3/4's of the people of this nation agreeing to amend their constitution and become an Islamic Theocracy anytime soon. In fact I don't ever see that as any kind of real possibility.

True but aren't we human animals supposed to have something no other animals have? The ability to reason, adopt moral codes of conduct, and constantly expand our knowledge base? No other animals are supposed to be able to do those things.

So quite honestly when I see people reacting our of fear, prejudice, and ignorance I think it actually is a lower form of animal behavior and a very very dangerous one at that.

And the only solution and safe guard against that is objective reasoning and logical and rational approaches to problem solving instead of the "kill 'em all" fear based illogical and irrational animal instinct.

Well if that's true how come you want to kill all the Muslims in Pakistan for example. There's going to be some innocent women and kids in there isn't there? I don't think that's a very friendly approach to dealing with Muslims.

You mean like the Tea Party? I know exactly what you mean.

But your fear of the Muslim Brotherhood mostly springs from ignorance and prejudice delivered to you free of charge by the Western Media. There is scant evidence that the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization and ample evidence they are actually a fringe political party just like our Tea Party.

However, I think this serves as a perfect example of how illogical and irrational the fear of Sharia Law taking hold in the US really is. That's because the Muslim Brotherhood was born and persecuted in Egypt for decades. They have been martyrs and protesters, and at best don't even represent 20% of Egyptians. If the Muslim Brotherhood can't sell themselves in their home country what chance to they have in any other countries?

I just find that laughable actually.

Now wait a minute how can you live and let live on one hand and then advocate for all out war against our "enemies" on the other hand?

That does not really make sense to me because you obviously fear the Muslim Brotherhood when I don't think you really know anything about them. And you don't seem to make any distinction between the Muslim Brotherhood who I don't believe has ever attacked us and Al Qaeda who has.

What terrorist threat does the Muslim Brotherhood represent to us if they become an recognized political party in Egypt? I'm just not following the logic there.

Didn't you just say many European countries are now entrenched in Sharia Law? If that's true I don't remember hearing about any religious wars taking place in any European countries.

So either there are no European countries entrenched in Sharia Law or if there are the incursions had to have been peaceful.

But I suspect the logical and rational answer is its a little of both. No entrenched Sharia Law and mostly peaceful assimilation.

I'm really surprised you could be so misinformed about the numbers of Christians, Muslims, and Jews.

Christians (2.1 billion) out number Muslims (1.5 billion) by at least a half billion. And there's another 14 million Jews who sure wouldn't be on the Muslims side.

But what really makes this a really REALLY unjustifiable fear is because we're not just talking religions here. We're talking world populations and when we consider Muslims trying forcefully or even politically to take over China, Russia, the US, the UK, and the European Union it actually becomes hilarious.

Who would be vaporized in an instant if they ever tried to stand up against the West?

The real danger is that we blow ourselves up not being taken over by Muslims.

Are old adages always true? Better yet are they ever true? I don't think so. I'm pretty sure that if a Camel sticks its nose under the tent and you kick him in the head or shoot him where he stands no more camel is coming in the tent.

What I think that old adage really represents is just how irrational and illogical fear is.

And there are active protests from both sides going on right now as we speak. There is a sizable and growing number of people in Pakistan who want to do away with all the Blasphemy laws.

The only thing really going on here is you don't believe in democracy in other countries and for the people who live in them to decide what laws they want to live with.

But isn't this a really poor example since Pakistan is our friend and ally in the War on Terror? Are you contending that Pakistan also wants to take over the US in implement Sharia law?

And how does that enforce Sharia on you? And isn't the really simple solution better enforcement of Secular laws?

The only thing the feds have gone after some Mormons for is sexual abuse of Children who were married off to old men with multiple wives. Those are the only times the feds have pursued polygamists.

In fact there's a show called Sister Wives in its second season on one of the Cable Channels right now about this guy in Utah with four wives. They're doing right in front of the world and no feds have hassled them.

I'm thinking this is actually a false stereotype and prejudice.

And that Muslim man has been tried and convicted for killing his wife. But let me ask you something. How many men murder their wives in the US every year for trying to divorce them or even for the insurance money?

They are not all Muslims now are they?

Actuall from what I'm seeing right before my very eyes everyday is the opposite. Most Muslims, even in the Middle East want democracy and freedom not Sharia Law.

And if most Muslims don't want to live under Sharia Law I sure can't blame them for not wanting to live under Christian law. I've been protesting and fighting against Christian law for my whole life.

Which is why I've been trying to point out the US is in much more danger of someone imposing Christian Law on US citizens then there is Sharia law.

And what do you think the rest of the world will do? Sit on their hands as well? I kind of doubt that. In fact I think if radical Muslims tried to take over the world we'd kill them where they stood and everyone else in the country with them if we had to.

That's what makes all this fear of Muslims and Sharia law simple irrational fear and prejudice.

You might be right the future is always uncertain. But how about the present? You're kind of ignoring that aren't you? Because the reality is people filling the streets and in many cases dying there are demanding freedom and democracy not Islamic fundamentalism.

In fact that is one of the things they are trying to break away from.

So again all this appears to be just comical Chicken Little dramas to me.

 

Okay, I am back.

(chuckles) I deleted 'wrath,' and replaced it with 'loquacious largesse,' which amused me even more. Then I realized that while you would have gotten the latter, many readers would not have, so I restored 'wrath,' as a somewhat less amusing yet sufficient alternative. I hope you are not truly offended.

Encroachment

The French are passing legislation to push back against Sharia Law. Surely you know that. Deny knowledge if you wish. Whatever. Again, I will leave it to WGF. And he is right about Holland, too. And the UK is having issues.

Adversaries

I do not advocate killing every Moslem, or even killing everyone in Pakistan. Yet nor am I suicidal. Should the day come, on which we must kill or be killed, I should hope that we will do whatever we have to do. And yes, if Al Qaeda's central governing body is being harbored in Pakistan, I advocate going in. Which we have not done, to the degree necessary.

Numbers

Yes, Christians (as a whole) outnumber Moslems (as a whole), if one makes several imaginative leaps and equates Catholicism and the myriad Protestant sects with everyone from the Mormons and Seventh Day Adventists to the Christian Scientists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Amish. But I would argue that the major Christian sects have fragmented to the point where nothing less than the corporeal manifestation of Satan himself would unite them.

The Moslems have sects, too, and their share of fragmentation and dischord. But their religion is younger; they, not the Christians are currently experiencing an expansion phase; and in my opinion (granted, it is purely my opinion) the Moslem Brotherhood represents the potential that they could unite. We ignore that potential at our peril. Let none forget that this country (the United States) was made possible by the failure of England to recognize the possibility that thirteen farflung and ethnically disparate colonies might unite under a single banner.

The possibility that the Moslem nations could unite... paranoia?

We could argue finer points all night long. Yet the middle east's governments are crumbling before our eyes, while we debate. I wonder... what is the motive force, in your opinion? Mere disaffection with their leaders? A yearning for democracy? If only I could believe that. Would that it were true.

 

Stumbler, you like to say people don't have their facts straight. Where do you get the fact that most moslems don't want to live under moslem law?
A poll you conducted of the worldwide family of moslems?

I wish they weren't a threat but as long as people bury their heads in the sand and deny it,it will only get greater.
As far as the "world" stopping it-how is it going stopping Iran from developing nukes.

Besides they aren't going to try beating us through a nation-state like Pakistan but by infiltrating us and bringing us down from within. Already Europe has lost most of their will to resist and in a generation or two will be moslem run, purely by demographics.BTW in Pakistan, a governor of a province who opposed such things was killed by one of his bodyguards,who was then lauded by the lawyers of Pakistan and showered with flowers.

BTW Clarise, I am not Mr. Fraser,who says he's in France. I live in the U.S. and I am not WGF but WJA.

 

My mistake. I am wrong almost constantly these days. Just ask CFH. Such is life.

 

But at least loquacious largesse, which I think I would have just used talkative liberal is accurate where wrath is clearly not the same thing and linguistically incorrect.

Word selection that substitutes semantics for errors is never a good choice in my opinion at least but I think that's the same opinion of most editors.

Yes, in fact I think (but haven't checked) that I mentioned the French pushing back against Muslim traditions before you did. Which clearly proves to me the French will not tolerate Sharia Law, and if they won't there is little chance any other developed western nation will tolerate such a thing either.

But you said Sharia Law was entrenched in European countries and I see no evidence of that what so ever. Not even in France where they are even passing laws against how some Muslims dress let alone what law they will live under. I'm pretty sure Sharia Law is not shit when you're sitting in jail under secular laws.

And why leave it to WGF to defend your statements? You're the one who made them but can't really point to a single example other than France.

See I just don't believe that Sharia law is entrenched in any European Countries.

But you didn't say anything about some distant hypothetical day in your initial statement. You proclaimed to be a conservative and advocated not just the wars we have in Afghanistan and Iraq right now but also military incursions into Pakistan if I remember correctly and I thought then and now that was an irrational, illogical, and reactionary response on multiple levels.

Not the least of which Pakistan being our ally and have about as many military deaths and far more deadly terrorist attacks from fighting both Al Qaeada and the Taliban then we do. Incursions (i.e. invasions) seem really irrational considering those realities.

But not as bad as overlooking the reality we have military incursions into Pakistan on almost a daily and certainly weekly basis. Am I to believe as intelligent and informed as you appear to be you've never heard of predator drones or the multitude of Pakistanis and Afghanistan civilians (think women and kids) we've (US citizens through our government) have killed with them.

Clearly the American Government and its citizens through our consent have already been doing what you claim you want for nearly a decade, so non-acceptance of that reality only leaves bombing or invasion. And since Pakistan is a nuclear power, the only safe response from the US should we go to war would be total nuclear annihilation.

That's why I think incursions into Pakistan are not only irrational (since we are already doing that) but perhaps even suicidal. Especially when they are one our allies and have never done anything to us.

Why not Saudi Arabia? Isn't that where almost all the terrorists including Osama Bin Laden came from as well as the money that actually facilitated the attack?

Incursions into Pakistan seem as irrational as incursions into Iraq to me.

But for this math to work one would have to believe that all Muslims are one faith and one belief and that would be really ignorant and irrational don't you think.

I mean the reality is that we might have Baptists and Catholics but they are not killing each other in bombings and civil wars any more like they used to. But when we look at the several different sects of Islam they are actually killing each other over the deal.

So no since they obviously have different sects just like Christians and even fight each other like we do Muslims are a minority compared to Christians and you were just really wrong to claim that Muslims outnumbered Christians.

You may have a point. All you need to do is tell me what the Muslim Brotherhood represents, what they stand for, and whether or not they are a terrorist organization or a political party much like our own Tea Party?

You can answer those simple questions can't you?

Because you keep referring to the Muslim Brotherhood as something to fear, some great threat, but have not said why we should fear them anymore than the Tea Party.

But let me ask you about something. Was that a religious banner they united under? Or was that a case of all religious beliefs and sects uniting under the common banner of freedom and democracy? There were all faiths fighting in that revolution was there not? Wasn't that what guaranteed freedom of Religion.

And clearly our founders had no fear of Muslims. One of the earliest acts of the new nation after all was to declare that the United States was in no way a "Christian Nation" and accepted equally believers of the Muslim Religion. That was the whole purpose of the Treaty of Tripoli after all wasn't it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli

Yes, I very much think so when I really have to wonder how the Muslim nations of the world could not be any more united than they are right now and Israel is the only nuclear power in the Middle East not to count the nuclear arsenal held by the west and Russia and Chine who would oppose a Muslim take over even more than we would.

Why do you keep avoiding those realities?

What's the dissatisfaction? You haven't really been watching have you? The dissatisfaction, in fact the common denominator is the internet. I thought everyone knew that at this point.

The one change in the Middle East is the common people via the internet seeing how the rest of the world lives and saying we want that.

You really should take off your reactionary blinders long enough to take a look around. Its actually a pretty damned amazing world out there right now.

 

By watching the people protesting and dying in Middle East Countries for Freedom and Democracy. If they can't sell it there I don't believe they can sell it here.

Now you give me a logical explanation of why I'm wrong about that.

Threat of what? You haven't told me that yet.

We don't have to. Iran can develop nuclear weapons just like North Korea did. And when they do they know 30 minutes after denoataing one they are dead. All of them.

To this day between Russia and the US alone we have enough nuclear weapons to kill everyone on both sides something like ten time over. How many times does it take to die? One or Ten?

And what bullshit since Israel has been the only nuclear power in the Middle East since the 1970's to this very day.

The real danger in the Middle East when it comes to nuclear weapons in Israel not Iran.

Really? That's a big threat? Let me aske you a couple questions. How much to Americans agree on the Christian religion? How much do Americans agree on social issues? How much do Americans agree on Political Issues?

But you're telling me after 300 years of not being able to agree on anything the Muslims are going to show up and convince us that Islam is the way to go.; I'm just laughing off my perch over that assertion.

Opps sorry but same to you as it was for Clarise. Show me that will you? Show me where Muslims and Sharia law has been entrenched in Europe? I'll believe you if you can just give me concrete examples. Where are they?

Which proves what? Don't we have Christians Protesting at the funerals of troops killed in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Don't we have religious fundamentalist screaming the reason those soldiers died is because God hates fagots? Don't we have people killing doctors because they perform abortions? Don't we have people praising all those things?

Personally I think that the least of things Clarise is fucked up about.

 

Post Script For Clarise

You sure seem to be very selective about which points you respond to and personally I don't think that's due to tine constraints. I think that's due to not being able to refute them but at the same time not being able to resist saying something even if its wrong.

But that is strictly my own analysis and opinion.

 

HEHEHEHE,,,I like clarise. Is that surprising........

 

Here we go with the right and wrong business again. I had this out with CFH420 already. You two always seem to be gunning for each other, but I would wager it is just an act. Seems to me that you two make a cozy-cupcakes-diddli-licous pair. Hmmm. Maybe CFH420 is a sock that you trot out, for purposes of spewing your THC-laced myopia from both sides of the aisle.

Mmm. That is not so nice. But you were the first to use the F-word, my fine little country bumpkin.


P.S. I thought I had responded to every point, but I might be wrong. I caught "Halliburton" in one sprawling paragraph and skipped it. It is impossible to argue the merits of a war, with people who are absolutely certain that Dick Cheney's minions rigged the Towers bombings in 1993 AND 2001, or worse, who deny that 1993 ever happened, or worse, who believe that Obama - shit, I mean, Osama, somehow knew in 1993 that 'W' would steal the presidency and sent morons into the towers with a truck, during Bubba's presidency, to inflict a preemptive strike. God, and you're the first one to trot out "conspiracy" when reasonable people in this country demand that the Messiah produce a notarized birth certificate. Sheesh. (end of rant)

 

Hi!

I am a sweet, demure angel. Honestly.

 

But none of this personal attack addresses any of the points we've been discussing and yes I believe there is a difference between being right and wrong just as there is a difference between a realistic view of the world and a fear driven irrational and illogical view of the world, which like it or not includes Muslims.

So I think what your response does here is simply demonstrate and document what I said in post #136 right above this.

Now Clarise, my dear this is just one big lie darlin'. I've never said nor believed a single thing out of all the things you just said up there. Now that's pretty irrational and illogical don't you think? Its is completely out of touch with the reality.

Making up a bunch of stuff I didn't say because you can't refute the things I have said is a pretty weak and fatally flawed response that certainly belies any appearance of intelligence, objectivity, and academic honesty.

Not good traits for someone claiming to be a writer.

Just like your incorrect usage of the term wrath to describe my response to you where in reality I think the opposite is the obvious truth (see above) is I'm the one who has incurred your wrath.

 

Sort of like ignoring (and refusing to respond to) my remarks that I count Moslems among my friends and consider them to be wonderful individuals, while at the same time conflating my other remarks to the point where I want to wipe all the Moslems off the face of the earth?

Tit-for-tat, dear fellow.

And hold on... I did catch Halliburton in the paragraph I ignored; I am not imagining it... hold on, and I'll go back and read it....