Dead agent arguments? Please. That’s a red herring to derail the discussion instead of being logical. Look at the first number you threw out: “only” _4.56 million_ Wahhabis in the Gulf Area? You may want to read more about Wahhabism, Salafism, and other fundamentalist, traditionalist branches of Islam that are adamantly opposed to Western civilization and its values. If even 1% of that 4.56 million “radicalized” to contribute to the almost 30,000 Islamic terrorist attacks worldwide since 9/11, that would be close to 50,000 terrorists. And we’ve seen what just one (Orlando, Nice), two (San Bernardino), or several (Bataclan, Charlie Hebdo) terrorists can do.

You falsely say I suggest that “we should not criticize movements that do not advocate beheading”! Absolutely not correct. That would not be a position I hold. Since you threw in Scientology jargon for “dead agent” I’ll comment that you are not “duplicating.” What I am suggesting that you, Jon, appear unwilling to criticize a group — radical Islamists — who are doing far worse physical and psychological damage both numerically and in severity compared to Scientology. That does not mean that Scientology does not deserve criticism — it does in many ways. What is inexplicable may be that you have taken the blinders off regarding Scientology, but seem to be an apologist for even worse treatment of people by a different brand of another religion.

And the worst victims of radical Islam? Other Muslims of the “wrong” flavor, Christians, Jews, women, gays, and so on. You surely know that the major schism in Islam is the Shia-Sunni divide. You should also understand then that the mere 4.56 million Wahhabis you mention officially consider the Shia to all be heretics, and thus are subject to punishment up to death under Islamic law (sharia). This divide is not a theoretical risk of death — it is at the heart of the matter in Syria and Aleppo where hundreds of thousands have died.

You cannot of course show where Scientology has been the source of hundreds of thousands of deaths in 2016, or during its entire existence. Yet you combat Scientology — and rightly so, we agree on that — yet naively overlook the risks of radical Islam — and on that oversight, we profoundly disagree. The point is not to quit criticizing Scientology, it is to quit defending even more virulent strains of religion.

Dead agent arguments? Please. That’s a red herring to derail the discussion instead of being logical. Look at the first number you threw out: “only” _4.56 million_ Wahhabis in the Gulf Area? You may want to read more about Wahhabism, Salafism, and other fundamentalist, traditionalist branches of Islam that are adamantly opposed to Western civilization and its values. If even 1% of that 4.56 million “radicalized” to contribute to the almost 30,000 Islamic terrorist attacks worldwide since 9/11, that would be close to 50,000 terrorists. And we’ve seen what just one (Orlando, Nice), two (San Bernardino), or several (Bataclan, Charlie Hebdo) terrorists can do.

You falsely say I suggest that “we should not criticize movements that do not advocate beheading”! Absolutely not correct. That would not be a position I hold. Since you threw in Scientology jargon for “dead agent” I’ll comment that you are not “duplicating.” What I am suggesting that you, Jon, appear unwilling to criticize a group — radical Islamists — who are doing far worse physical and psychological damage both numerically and in severity compared to Scientology. That does not mean that Scientology does not deserve criticism — it does in many ways. What is inexplicable to you have clearly taken the blinders off regarding Scientology, but seem to be an apologist for even worse treatment of people by a religion.

And the worst victims of radical Islam? Other Muslims of the “wrong” flavor, Christians, Jews, women, gays, and so on. You surely know that the major schism in Islam is the Shia-Sunni divide. You should also understand then that the mere 4.56 million Wahhabis you mention officially consider the Shia to all be heretics, and thus are subject to punishment up to death under Islamic law (sharia). This divide is not a theoretical risk of death — it is at the heart of the matter in Syria and Aleppo where hundreds of thousands have died.

You cannot of course show where Scientology has been the source of hundreds of thousands of deaths in 2016, or during its entire existence. Yet you combat Scientology — and rightly so, we agree on that — yet naively overlook the risks of radical Islam — and on that oversight, we profoundly disagree. The point is not to quit criticizing Scientology, it is to quit defending even more virulent strains of religion.

OMG … YAY I am so excited for you P.. I am also so very proud. One day you will be able to assess me psychologically ..

No one else has been able to..hahahha You were absolutely one of my bright lights at Howdy con..

You made my day honey.. xox baby..

Hi Baby! I’m almost done with the semester! So far i have all As, and got 15 grad schools all over the US to apply to. <3

Thank you, Tony, for your response. And please (Tony and readers) accept my apology for concluding, wrongly, that my disappearing comments, one of which is now again visible to me (and which was largely a recap of an earlier comment which is still astray — and that’s fine since it would have been duplicated by what now appears), was a result of an intentional action. It sounds like it was some sort of Disqus glitch, as Tony mentions.

I usually avoid recommending books or restaurants.

Coming right up

Smoked of course, thick cut with a hungarian paprika and maple glaze.

I’ll dig it out and read it, thanks!

Smoked or unsmoked (I’m presuming an air cure)?