Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (14804)	1/4/1998 11:03:00 PM
From: JF Quinnelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Hakeem is no scholar of religion, and those essays of his are filled with "complex questions"; he doesn't bother to prove his tendentious allegations, he just assumes them in the body of his work. I know that if I spent a month unwinding his arguments you would just find some other collection of objections to offer up. I haven't the interest in wasting my time. If you want to find the answers to his claims then you will spend the time yourself. If you believe Luther was responsible for the Holocaust, as Hakeem implies, then explain why it took four centuries for the logic of Luther to work itself out, and why did it take a government that was "incompatible" with Christianity to do the deed?

To: Grainne who wrote (14804)	1/5/1998 11:37:00 AM
From: Janice Shell	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 108807

Hitler...only had one ball Goering...had two but very small Someone...dah dah dah something And Goebbels had no balls at all. (Can anyone help with the missing line?) Actually there's no proof whatsoever that Hitler had an undescended testicle, though he did have sexual problems. Nor is there any proof that he was part Jewish, though his stepfather may well have been. Reading one book on National Socialism (no matter how many times) does not constitute "making a study" of the period. As for Hakeem, well, academics know how to evaluate each others' credentials, and I say he's a crank able to publish this rubbish only in the annals of a crackpot organization that apparently seeks to make a religion of atheism, which is scarcely the point of unbelief.