Now, I've said about six times on this thread exactly what about this disgusts me. Either people can read what I'm actually saying, or they are adding "stupid" to "rude." I'm sorry to be abrupt, but I'm just in no mood for this.
This is just such a bizarre statement, I don't even know where to begin...
"Let he who is without stones commit the first sin."
There are analogies here to the liberal / conservative response to scandals, but I get your point. As I said, I will not engage in apologetics with you.
Now, I've said about six times on this thread exactly what about this disgusts me. Either people can read what I'm actually saying, or they are adding "stupid" to "rude." I'm sorry to be abrupt, but I'm just in no mood for this.
People on FR (despite the claims of detractors from across the spectrum) tend to be far more politically astute than others. Hence the identification of "Muslims" with "Muslim terrorists" : I don't see too many Muslim missionary organizations to the infidels, and the outreach I have heard of, seems to be concentrated among the underclasses and disaffected, the better to undermine the West from within: cf. the charity works of Christianity such as hospitals, leper colonies, distribution of food and water, without attempting to recruit people to be terrorists.
It was not through inattention to your reading, but looking at a larger scale.
No offense was intended.
Cheers...and signing off for now.