Some of these attack posts can be very brief. Consider all the false accusations in just two sentences: "largest ... in American history", "religiously-inspired", "mass murder", "The guy who ordered it", "liked to", and finally the oft-repeated play on President Young's name "bring 'em young".
It does no good to reply to such posts. They just come back with the same thing next time the subject comes up, whatever they think are the best-sounding accusations.
(I do not flag AJ because I do not want to seem to be inviting more of the same.)
Marlowe's #389: But if we are going to have free and open and cordial discussions of religion, then allegations (whether true or false) against religious leaders and allegations (whether true or false) about what certain religions teach or have taught in the past, should not be considered as violative of the spirit of the religion forum or of the general posting rules on FR provided they are done to further discussion and ultimately seek the truth rather than to ridicule or berate any particular poster's beliefs.
In theory that may seem to be a high-minded and noble idea, but in practice it doesn't ever work out that way here because of a multitude of posts like #493 and because of the lack of a scholarly approach to subjects that require lots of careful scholarship to present them in their most accurate light.
Anyone trying to read such a thread (and Marlowe and I have posted on dozens of them over the months and years) just gets a load of disinformation, inflammatory rhetoric, and poisoned bait. Why should I cooperate with that?
It is better to stick to the Scriptures. The Word of God tends to calm the discussion.
You know perfectly well that your rude, arrogant practice of insulting people while refusing to ping them causes flame wars to continue even more so.