monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Thanks for the link, Walter.

Egads, it's fascinating..

No he's trying to educate you on the history of US/Muslim relations.

The US has conflicts with everyone, everyone who is poor and defenseless that is. The easier to subjugate and steal from.

And, of course, as far as Snood's weak-ass attempt to make a "point" goes, U.S./muslim relationships would be strictly incidental.

Twain knew history well, and even wrote a novel based in medieval times. He was well aware of all the muslim atrocities commited over the course of centuries including, but certainly not limited to, those committed during the "holy wars."

But just to be clear, you didn't mean to imply that Twain would have condemned Muslims because he was afraid of being labeled an Islamaphobe.

Some people need these things to be spelled out for them.

I can always depend on a few members to leave just the right number of words out to render their comments baffleloney. If there is a God, he is indeed good.

Right, Finn. Twain would never let fear of disapproval deter him from stating his opinions. He don't play dat.

Of course he hated muslims, he just didn't take the time to say it on that particular occasion, that's all.

It was a joke, wasn't it, Finn?

This is just what happens when you are a rank partisan.

There's a lot more where that came from, eh, Snood?

Of course it was.

Layman delights in provocation and regularly brings in a healthy catch of foolish fish.

Well, that's actually a very cogent quote.

It doesn't say anything that we didn't already know: Trump has done nothing wrong and the Democrats are abusing the law to commit witch hunts against people who disagree with them.

We need to outlaw the Democratic Party in America. Get rid of these freaks once and for all.

Will it be you then, or Baldimo who does the historical research on this latest joke?

It's not provocation to wish for and advocate the deaths of a gigantic group of people. If he was suggesting 'capping' Jews or Blacks or ... you would at the least, pretend outrage.

I remember a a ten year old child a dire prediction from Jeanne Dixon. Of course as an adult I don't believe in such nonsense but as a child I considered it possible. I remember being honestly frightened by the prediction. Nuclear war? No. She said in the future, ..."the United States would become nothing but another second rate country like Canada"...

Why don't you?

If I thought he really advocated the murder of a "gigantic group of people," I might object to his sentiments, but first of all, I don't think he does, and secondly I'm not an A2K policeman.

One thing I can guarantee you is that his adherence to his persona will result in him responding that he does want to see "a gigantic group of people" killed.

Twain done his own damn research, eh, Cammie-boy? It's a shame that you know so little about history, authors, or any other topic you bring up. Some say that Chomsky wrote 80 books, but he really just wrote one book, 80 times. And you've read it 1000 times, but nothing else, apart from ISIS websites.

Your great disdain for research is noted. You fear discussing actual research as much as you fear doing it.

He has stated such. Again, if it was Jews, Blacks, Japanese, Chinese you would pretend outrage.

You jump to be the A2K policeman when it suits your partisan feelings.

What exactly does that mean? Is it different from this Twain quote?

==========

In a 1906 essay about the Moro massacre in the Phillippines, which was not published until after his death, Twain criticized the military:

General Wood was present and looking on. His order had been, "Kill or capture those savages." Apparently our little army considered that the "or" left them authorized to kill or capture according to taste, and that their taste had remained what it had been for eight years in our army out there--the taste of Christian butchers.

In a February 1901 article titled, "To the Person Sitting in Darkness," he continued to criticize the U.S.:

There must be two Americas: one that sets the captive free, and one that takes a once-captive's new freedom away from him, and picks a quarrel with him with nothing to found it on; then kills him to get his land. . .

True, we have crushed a deceived and confiding people; we have turned against the weak and the friendless who trusted us; we have stamped out a just and intelligent and well-ordered republic; we have stabbed an ally in the back and slapped the face of a guest; we have bought a Shadow from an enemy that hadn't it to sell; we have robbed a trusting friend of his land and his liberty; we have invited clean young men to shoulder a discredited musket and do bandit's work under a flag which bandits have been accustomed to fear, not to follow; we have debauched America's honor and blackened her face before the world. . .

And as for a flag for the Philippine Province, it is easily managed. We can have a special one--our States do it: we can have just our usual flag, with the white stripes painted black and the stars replaced by the skull and cross-bones.

it means that Twain could have found fault with historical Islam and contemporary America. Is that really so hard to fathom?