wrong target

Submitted by the Grand Infidel of Kaffiristan (Australia), Dec 24, 2011 at 20:38

Mr Riaz once again proves he is unable to understand what he reads:

GIK wrote: "..Any reasonably minded person should be able to figure it out.."

in response to questions that Mr Riaz wrote to another blogger:

"What is this evidence - what is it for? What are you aiming at. What are you claiming this evidence shows?"

He then continues in his response:

"...There is no point giving out odd bits of history laced with your opinion attached to claim all is historical.If you were THAT reasonable - you would have given an answer rather than useless comments."

Besides being yet another useless value judgement from a person who obviously wishes to re-write history - if Mr Riaz he had been following the discussions - he would realise GIK presented no historical arguments relating to the fact that the Jews have been associated with Jerusalem for 3000 years.

GIK's assertion was simply that a reasonably minded person would easily gather the intent of Sara presenting a large number of indisputable historical facts as an answer to Mr Riaz's questions.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".