The “Gold Star" Dishonesty of the 2016 US Presidential Election

Following are the two concluding paragraphs of an article that I wrote in Mukto-Mona:
“Thus, while “Gold Star” is a respectable title, it does not always come from willingness to sacrifice life, especially when America is not at serious foreign wars, such as in the 1990s, when the junior Khan benefited from the US military as a member of the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps. However, any death or dismemberment while serving the country in a foreign war should be appreciated and honored by the nation. Humayun and his family have been honored by the USA with their “Gold Star" status. But, using that honor to exaggerate and manipulate truth for political gain was not only unscrupulous; it was disrespect for the fallen soldier as well.
Clearly, the Khan speech and its display at the Democratic Party Convention of 2016 were dishonest and an exercise in irresponsible political correctness vis-à-vis the serious worldwide problem of Islamic fanaticism and terrorism."
To see the complete article, please follow: http://enblog.mukto-mona.com/2016/08/21/the-gold-star-dishonesty-of-the-2016-us-presidential-election/

My comments on Mukto-Mona: http://enblog.mukto-mona.com/2016/08/21/the-gold-star-dishonesty-of-the-2016-us-presidential-election/
This is in response to Mr. Mazharul Huq’s comments.
To paraphrase Hillary Clinton, “it takes a village to raise a child.” We are all made up of the environment in which we were raised. For 0.0625% of a population to be terrorists, the percentage of fanatics and believers in terrorism is certainly a lot higher in that population. For example, when a PhD in a Science or Engineering subject fasts routinely for a month without even drinking water over 16 hour days and eats at sunset, a few hours later and before dawn, he/she is following Islam without using the otherwise smart part of his/her brain. Qualitatively, there is certainly a similarity between this otherwise innocent person and the one that is willing to kill and be killed for following/promoting/protecting Islam.
As for Muslims being the worst victims of Islamic terrorism and fanaticism, it is obvious. The problem lies in the fact that there are too many among them who are too serious about who is following Islam properly or not. This intra-religion problem as well as the problem of Muslim injustice and atrocity on non-Muslims around the world would certainly subside if the Muslims could look at Islam with their natural human intelligence and common sense and stop being or trying to be followers of Islam. For one thing, I do not see a logical basis to think that Mr. Huq and I are supposed to be different in terms of religions.
As for the USA being tolerant, I obviously like it here. But the way I see most of the moderate Muslims in the world today, frankly I would not want even 10% of the US population to be Muslims when our great grandchildren grow up in this country. Obviously, I would not be so sacred or worried if the Muslims were to emphasize on their Human identity, and to get serious about living life with logic and senses of right and wrong over insisting on being Muslims that follow or try to follow Islam blindly.

We are all made up of the environment in which we were raised. For 0.0625% of a population to be terrorists, the percentage of fanatics and believers in terrorism is certainly a lot higher in that population.
You're time would be much better spent trying to understand where the desperation, frustration, rage and hopelessness that drives terrorism comes from. Hint - people are not born with it. Another hint - if you're on a street and you walk up to an unfortunate and slap him in the face, what sort of reaction would you expect?
We are all made up of the environment in which we were raised. For 0.0625% of a population to be terrorists, the percentage of fanatics and believers in terrorism is certainly a lot higher in that population.
You're time would be much better spent trying to understand where the desperation, frustration, rage and hopelessness that drives terrorism comes from. Hint - people are not born with it. Another hint - if you're on a street and you walk up to an unfortunate and slap him in the face, what sort of reaction would you expect? 1) I can understand the Muslim frustration againt Western interventions in Arab lands and against the West's almost unconditional support for all the atrocities that Israel has been committing over many decades against the Palestinians. But if you look at the world at large, the West is not anywhere near being the worst victim of Muslim injustice and atrocities. Here are a few examples for you: a) In 1971 there was a genocide committed by Pakistani military and their local Muslim collaborators in East Bengal (Bangladesh). Most of the murder and rape victims (of the somewhat exaggeratedly claimed 3 million and 200,000, respectively, by the government of Bangladesh) were Hindus, who were targeted indiscriminately for just being Hindus. I lost one of my best elementary school teachers and two of my aunts; and I know that they were absolutely innocent people who did not even shout a slogan against Pakistan, let alone fighting for anything; they were just living in their ancestral homeland of centuries peacefully with no hatred against any kind of people. b) In 2012, 50 Buddhist homes and 12 Buddhist temples were burned by Muslim mobs in Bangladesh just because one Buddhist youth's Facebook page was tagged by someone with a picture of the Koran with a shoe on it. c) in 2013, over a 100 Christian homes were burned by Pakistani Muslim mobs just because a 14 year old girl of that community was accused of burning a page of the Koran. d) The Western world is aware of what Boko Haram has been doing in Nigeria, including kidnapping 276 schoolgirls in 2015, because according to that Islamic group education for women is supposed to be forbidden by their religion. e) The West is also aware of the decimation of the tiny and powerless Yazidi population of Syria by the Islamic State. 2) Sure, no one should be blamed for their birth. But humans should be held accountable for their propagation of unjust, hateful and barbaric beliefs, and for more so for their actions on those beliefs. 3) The Muslims of the world have been slapping the non-Muslims of the world a lot more than what they have been getting. If you talk about the the USA, it has committed the most heinous acts of terror in Hiroshima and Nagasaki; but the Japanese have not committed any terrorist act on innocent (or even guilty) people in the the USA in reprisal. In the USA, there were a lot of talk and litigations on the health effects of Agent Orange on the Vietnam war veterans. Do you realize that the US veterans were spraying that poison on a civilian population, which did not turn into terrorists against the USA later? I can certainly bow my head to the Japanese and the Vietnamese peoples for their civility.

There is way too much bad logic in this thread. I couldn’t finish the article it was so bad. When Khan said his son wouldn’t be in America if it were for Trump, he meant, if Trump were able to implement his 100% ban on Muslims, then even a 2 year old would be banned, and never have the chance to become a soldier and save lives. And trying to make assumption about whether or not the kid’s action actually saved lives, that is in horribly bad taste.
I could respond to many of your statements, but I’ll take the one about Vietnamese not becoming terrorists. They don’t have oil there. They don’t have rich royal families. They don’t have the wars in their history like the Mideast does. They don’t have the kind of territory that a desert offers. We invested in their country and did not treat their refugees the way we treat Muslims. They don’t have a religion that has “jihad” in it. These are just a few of the differences.
Oh, and, welcome to the forum.

2) Sure, no one should be blamed for their birth. But humans should be held accountable for their propagation of unjust, hateful and barbaric beliefs, and for more so for their actions on those beliefs.
Sukhamaya Bain, I see what you are saying in your last comment (the first two not so much). I also see that you speak from personal experience and have seen and lived with things I can't imagine, coming from in my comfortable isolated little corner of the world. I certainly agree with your item two. I would add that we all need to take ourselves a little less seriously. I'm glad Lausten stepped in with his remarks, I'm curious how you will respond. I found your first two post confusing and missing the point - can you take that first post and distill it to a sentence or two? Perhaps then what you are really trying to express, will come through. Back to the issue of Islam, Seems to me what happened was an extremely radical tiny faction caught the imagination of Saudi leaders who for their own self-interest-blinded reasons nurtured Wahhabi extremism into what it is today. {Although it could probably be argued that was in turn a reaction to the belligerent way American Oil Interests were bullying around the Saudis while making them ungodly wealthy.}
Wahhabism to ISIS: how Saudi Arabia exported the main source of global terrorism http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2014/11/wahhabism-isis-how-saudi-arabia-exported-main-source-global-terrorism Although IS is certainly an Islamic movement, it is neither typical nor mired in the distant past, because its roots are in Wahhabism, a form of Islam practised in Saudi Arabia that developed only in the 18th century. BY KAREN ARMSTRONG
also https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/wahhabism-isis-and-the-saudi-connection/ You Can’t Understand ISIS If You Don’t Know the History of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/isis-wahhabism-saudi-arabia_b_5717157.html
There is way too much bad logic in this thread. I couldn't finish the article it was so bad. When Khan said his son wouldn't be in America if it were for Trump, he meant, if Trump were able to implement his 100% ban on Muslims, then even a 2 year old would be banned, and never have the chance to become a soldier and save lives. And trying to make assumption about whether or not the kid's action actually saved lives, that is in horribly bad taste. I could respond to many of your statements, but I'll take the one about Vietnamese not becoming terrorists. They don't have oil there. They don't have rich royal families. They don't have the wars in their history like the Mideast does. They don't have the kind of territory that a desert offers. We invested in their country and did not treat their refugees the way we treat Muslims. They don't have a religion that has "jihad" in it. These are just a few of the differences. Oh, and, welcome to the forum.
Thanks, Lausten, for welcoming me to the CFI forum. As you found 'too much bad logic' and 'couldn't finish the article', looks like we have to agree to disagree quite a bit. As for Donald Trump's statement, obviously it was too much of a generalization. But it is no sillier than to isolate a two year old boy. The boy obviously comes with a family; and depending on how that family raises him, he might grow up to resect the liberty that we have in the USA or to become someone like the terrorists of San Bernardino or Orlando. Don't we need to realize that the reality is that even during the Obama administration Muslims are being profiled or scrutinized more while trying to enter the USA? Trump's talks or not, the reality is that Muslims are the champions of the world when it comes to following what they think is their religion blindly; and that includes veiling women to terrorizing and killing good people for not following Islam. Just observe around you for your friends and colleagues in the USA, and see what religious group is using their brain the least while following or trying to follow what they think is their religion. I believe the curse of injustice, hatred and barbarity on human civilization for religions or otherwise needs to be intellectually addressed by genuine humanists. As for our respect for the Vietnamese (mostly Buddhists) and not so much for the Muslims; what came first, chicken or egg? Respect is generally not given; it is earned. I would respect a people that believes in nonviolence and looks at life logically more than one that believes in fighting for religion and living life like religious zombies. I actually have a lot of respect for the contemporary Christians of the West, not because they are Christians; but because they have been making good progress toward looking at Christianity with common sense, and thereby turning themselves, and allowing others to turn, into atheists and agnostics.
Trump's talks or not, the reality is that Muslims are the champions of the world when it comes to following what they think is their religion blindly; and that includes veiling women to terrorizing and killing good people for not following Islam. Just observe around you for your friends and colleagues in the USA, and see what religious group is using their brain the least while following or trying to follow what they think is their religion.
I don't have time to follow multiple threads of thought with you. It is not a contest to see who is the craziest religion, then punish them disproportionately. Even if it's true that Muslims have done the most terrorism recently, that does not justify treating all Muslims with suspicion. Equality means treating people equally. That doesn't mean we don't vet people attempting to immigrate from a war zone. It does mean we judge people by their actions, not what they are wearing. I see plenty of white mainstream people not using their brains right now when it comes selecting who to vote for, so your argument is not very convincing.
  1. The constitution does not apply. The Constitution has no protections for non-citizens seeking entrance to the US.
    Irrelevant. Trump is talking about all Muslims, including citizens. Trump does not acknowledge there are productive loyal citizens here who are also Muslim. Khan flies in the face of that. That was the main point.
  2. Kahn laid his son’s memory out like a bunker so he could take pot shots for Hillary at Trump. It was Khan who used his own son badly for his own political glory.
    Trump would agree with you. He doesn’t even feel the need to explain that. He knows his base assumes that too. Trouble is, it’s not true. He couldn’t explain what “like a bunker” means or how what he said were “pot shots” and I doubt you could either.
  3. Trump’s replies missed all this and fell right into Hillary’s trap.
    Nothing new there. For reference, the off hand comment about his wife not speaking was a “pot shot”.
  4. The media jumped in…the band, so to speak, plays on.
    Whatever. There is no “the media” that speaks with one voice, so I can’t respond to this.
I found your first two post confusing and missing the point - can you take that first post and distill it to a sentence or two? Perhaps then what you are really trying to express, will come through. Back to the issue of Islam, Seems to me what happened was an extremely radical tiny faction caught the imagination of Saudi leaders who for their own self-interest-blinded reasons nurtured Wahhabi extremism into what it is today. Although IS is certainly an Islamic movement, it is neither typical nor mired in the distant past, because its roots are in Wahhabism, a form of Islam practised in Saudi Arabia that developed only in the 18th century. BY KAREN ARMSTRONG
As I clarified in the first post here, to see the complete facts and thoughts of the article, you need to read the complete article at: http://enblog.mukto-mona.com/2016/08/21/the-gold-star-dishonesty-of-the-2016-us-presidential-election/ Karen Armstrong sounds like an Islamic apologist. You need to read the Koran to see that her statement here is just wrong. Here is a link to the Koran for you. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/k/koran/ Search the words "women" and "idol" separately, for two examples; and see how the book of Islam actually treats the mothers of the human species and people who are idolaters. (To me, worshipping idols, a piece of black stone, or some imaginary power without thinking of an image - they all are silly.) However, I am actually not interested in digging dirt in any of the so-called holy books that contain wild imaginations of primitive people. All I care about is that people use their human intelligence and common sense now; and discard stupidity, injustice, hatred and barbarity, no matter what the source of such vices are.
As I clarified in the first post here, to see the complete facts and thoughts of the article, you need to read the complete article at - enblog-mukto-mona - com/2016/08/21/the-gold-star-dishonesty-of-the-2016-us-presidential-elecoe
Okay suckered me into it.
Hillary Clinton as its presidential candidate had Khizr Khan as a political attacker against the Republication Party nominee...
Yeah, that's what conventions are about. Mr. Bain, why do you not take umbrage at the GOP convention invocation by Rev. Burns?
Calling out Trump's Rev. Burns and GOP absolutism | August 9, 2016 http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2016/08/trump-rev-burns-gop-absolutism.html
That was out right blasphemy - why doesn't that upset you enough to write about it? Now you want me to be impressed with the thoughts of a man who starts his tale with a con-artist's ruse, intended to soften up his audience.
Donald Trump’s call for banning entry of Muslims in the USA was after the Islamic terrorist attack in San Bernardino earlier in December 2015, where 14 people were killed and 22 injured. Since then, the worst mass shooting in the history of the USA was committed by an Islamic terrorist in Orlando on June 12, 2016, where 49 people were killed and 53 injured.
WTF That's not even close to what happened One was a pissed off couple with easy access to weapons of mass destruction assault rifles and such - you know the Amerikan way, Probably fueled by the boob tube of News media hysteria most are mainlined into and found a handy slogan to shout - with that was no Islamic attack - Orlando that was a stupid kid who hated himself for feeling homosexual. His hormones and rage at the world and himself drove him crazy. Our media obsession with violence, I mean just look at the crap movies Hollywood produces, is it any surprised that some unhinged kids go off the deep end??? >:-( Add to that weapons, weapons, weapons everywhere, cheap and easy to acquire. Doesn't help that the world doesn't offer any hope to most youth these days. Wasn't always so, it's actually a new development. Fruits of over population and consumption don't you know. Yeah, guest you don't know. Wake up. Don't f'n blame Orlando on Islamic Terrorism - it was as All American as All American gets, well in this new day and age that is.
According to Mr. Khan, “he put those dreams aside the day he sacrificed his life to save the lives of his fellow soldiers." Did Humayun volunteer to go to Iraq war in 2004, or he was obligated to do so for the benefits that he had already received from the US military? Did he really give his life to save his fellow soldiers? The fact was that he was killed by a fast-approaching suicide car bomb at his check-post, very likely before he fully realized what was going on.
Holy shit Suki Bain, that's disgusting. Obviously you have never done any military service. Not that I have, but at least I have a realist appreciation for what it takes to become an accomplished soldier. - Going through the training, becoming part of a team, being on duty. Yup it probably happened very fast, but he was on duty and he was trained and accomplished - You weren't there, I'll bet the guy jumped into action and did his duty and didn't for a moment think about his life. I bet he acted as efficiently as he could, because protecting his unit was ingrained - you can't seem to comprehend that level of duty and dedication and jump to action, so of course miss the humanity. Why you gotta concocted such a cheap article dedicated to pissing on a soldier's memory? That you can imagine such malicious slander. But you're part of the up and coming movement, what bright future that bodes snark :-/ I fear reading further,
It was interpreted as students who do not do well at school are likely to take the advantage of financial help from the military and then being required to get into wars abroad.
NO - you are presuming to do that for him!
There are numerous examples of members of poor families who were sent in multiple tours of duties in places like Iraq, and surely most of them did not do it willingly; they had to have their obligations for getting help from the military fulfilled.
And why would that, in your mind, cheapen the Gold Star "honor" ? Your train of thought is beyond what I can image. The Gold Star is for the parents and family of service men or women who died in the line of duty. Who the hell are you Mr. Bain, to dismiss that sacrifice so flippantly??? For your own opportunistic motivations? Your article was no service to anything but feeding the flames of thoughtless hostility.
https://www.army.mil/goldstar/ "Today, the nation recognizes the sacrifice that all Gold Star Family members make when a father, mother, brother, sister, son, daughter, or other loved one dies in service to the nation."
However, I am actually not interested in digging dirt in any of the so-called holy books
No, instead you're into manufacturing dirt. This has been a profound disappointing read Mr. Sukhamaya Bain. :blank:
It is not a contest to see who is the craziest religion, then punish them disproportionately. Even if it's true that Muslims have done the most terrorism recently, that does not justify treating all Muslims with suspicion. Equality means treating people equally. That doesn't mean we don't vet people attempting to immigrate from a war zone. It does mean we judge people by their actions, not what they are wearing. I see plenty of white mainstream people not using their brains right now when it comes selecting who to vote for, so your argument is not very convincing.
I mostly agree with you here. But it is a lot more serious than some game contest between groups of crazy people; Islamic fanaticism and barbarity have been harming good people on Earth too much right now. I certainly would not want that kind of minds to spoil the land of liberty that has adopted me. We certainly should judge people on their actions; but before that we need to know what they have in their minds, so that we do not regret later the actions that are likely to come from their minds. When I look at the Christian fanatics, I obviously do not like their fanaticism; but, for an example, I have to recognize that they have been allowing the growth of atheists and agnostics in the West without much serious trouble.
but before that we need to know what they have in their minds, so that we do not regret later the actions that are likely to come from their minds. When I look at the Christian fanatics, I obviously do not like their fanaticism; but, for an example, I have to recognize that they have been allowing the growth of atheists and agnostics in the West without much serious trouble.
You are generalizing and convicting people based on thought crimes. That's exactly what religion does.
It is not a contest to see who is the craziest religion, then punish them disproportionately. Even if it's true that Muslims have done the most terrorism recently, that does not justify treating all Muslims with suspicion. Equality means treating people equally. That doesn't mean we don't vet people attempting to immigrate from a war zone. It does mean we judge people by their actions, not what they are wearing. I see plenty of white mainstream people not using their brains right now when it comes selecting who to vote for, so your argument is not very convincing.
I mostly agree with you here. But it is a lot more serious than some game contest between groups of crazy people; Islamic fanaticism and barbarity have been harming good people on Earth too much right now. I certainly would not want that kind of minds to spoil the land of liberty that has adopted me. We certainly should judge people on their actions; but before that we need to know what they have in their minds, so that we do not regret later the actions that are likely to come from their minds. When I look at the Christian fanatics, I obviously do not like their fanaticism; but, for an example, I have to recognize that they have been allowing the growth of atheists and agnostics in the West without much serious trouble. ALLOWING? Do you really think they've been ALLOWING it? What would you expect them to do to stop it or even slow it down? They don't have the power to stop the growth of Atheists or Agnostics or any religion. That you think they do shows your gross lack of knowledge about the world and its people. Would you have them start perpetrating terrorist acts to keep their religion powerful and the only game in town? I suggest you move to Saudi Arabia or Iraq if that's how you think. Maybe that would knock some sense into you, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Wondering what others might say about this frame for the Khan episode: Kahn and wife, representing a voting block of Muslim Americans, stand to speak in favor of Hillary. In front of them, held out to the audience is a sacrosanct "gold star", the memory of a dead son who died while in service to USA. From behind the memory of this son, the elder Kahn holds forth a small booklet of the constitution asking, accusingly, if Trump had ever read this...regarding his proposed Muslim or terror-linked immigration policy) This holding the booklet scene is the highlight of his speech. The billions of Muslims are watching (a few anyway), and the glorious military of the US salutes...figuratively, the gold star. Trump is made a vile evil hater of all the Muslims and military and a threat to the foundation of the US. From this snippet,that made national news headlines through NPR and beyond for weeks, is a disconnected logic and political bafoonary. 1. The constitution does not apply. The Constitution has no protections for non-citizens seeking entrance to the US. 2. Kahn laid his son's memory out like a bunker so he could take pot shots for Hillary at Trump. It was Khan who used his own son badly for his own political glory. 3. Trump's replies missed all this and fell right into Hillary's trap. 4. The media jumped in...the band, so to speak, plays on.
Thank you, James Smith, for your no-nonsense thoughts. You and I are mostly in agreement here. Let me add that I have no interest in the character of the individual named Khizr Khan. But if you search his name via Google, you can see that he has enough Islamic baggage, and that he is not a champion of the liberty and human rights that are enshrined in the US Constitution. For him to question a presidential candidate on the US Constitution was an insult to the USA, which the Democratic Party should not have used for their perception of political gains. If you take a broader look at the so-called moderate Muslims that immigrated to the USA in recent decades, you obviously see that they have been enjoying the liberty and affluence of this country; but most of them are not for separation of Islam from the state in the countries that they emigrated from. Given the opportunity and demographic strength, they are likely to turn, or to accept turning, countries like the USA into Islamic jungles. Do you see any Muslim-majority country in the world today that has elected a government that is secular humanist with separation of Islam from the state? While Donald Trump is too obnoxious, and the Republican Party is too conservative, I see the short-sighted, dishonest and irresponsible political correctness involving the followers of Islam, including recognizing nations like Saudi Arabia as good friends of the USA, by politicians and intellectuals as a chronic disease that would continue to harm the USA and the human species in general in the world.

Playing a bit fast and loose with facts aren’t you Sukhamaya? Show me the secular humanists in government here in the US! Also, have you looked at other Muslim countries, like Indonesia? And where did you get this data about how Muslims here feel about the governments in their home country? First you talk about the benefits of this country, because it suits that part of your narrative, then you switch to how our government supports Saudi Arabia, because that suits a different line of thought. You have gone from bad to worse with your argument.


I mostly agree with you here. But it is a lot more serious than some game contest between groups of crazy people; Islamic fanaticism and barbarity have been harming good people on Earth too much right now.

Yeah talk about a insane game contest caused by some crazy people >:-(
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NktsxucDvNI

Mother of three survives car crash — only to be gunned down by the other driver, police say https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2016/08/31/mother-of-three-survives-car-crash-only-to-be-gunned-down-by-the-other-driver-police-say/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na It was just after 7 a.m. when the 53-year-old mother of three cruised through an intersection and a man in a sport-utility vehicle ran a red light, slamming into the driver’s side of Pearl’s Ford Taurus, police reports would later say. ... Both drivers survived; somehow, the man in the SUV was able to walk out of his now-overturned vehicle.... Rifle in hand, the driver of the SUV (who ran the red light caused the accident) walked toward Pearl and — as she held her hands up — he (29-year-old Matthew Ryan Desha - U.S. Marine Corps from 2004 to 2008, and was deployed to Iraq twice during that time.) shot her several times (Stag Arms AR-15 rifle), the woman told the news site.
Yeah it's all them nasty muslims messing with our sacred ways.
you can see that he has enough Islamic baggage, and that he is not a champion of the liberty and human rights that are enshrined in the US Constitution. For him to question a presidential candidate on the US Constitution was an insult to the USA, which the Democratic Party should not have used for their perception of political gains.
You don't even listen to yourself, do you? You dear sir, need go no further than the mirror to find someone who is NO champion of the liberty and human rights enshrined in the US Constitution. You are easily as manipulative and ethically dishonest as those you point your finger at.
.............
However, I am actually not interested in digging dirt in any of the so-called holy books
No, instead you're into manufacturing dirt. This has been a profound disappointing read Mr. Sukhamaya Bain. :blank:
Sorry, my friend, my purpose was/is not really to please anyone who attacks people personally without due knowledge and diligence. You have a right to say almost whatever you want to, but that does not mean your claim that someone like me has manufactured dirt in the so-called holy books would be correct. Again, I refer you to the Koran, and ask you to talk in this forum about how the Islamic holy book treats the mothers of the human species. Would you be comfortable treating your mother, daughter, sister and wife like that?
Sorry, my friend, my purpose was/is not really to please anyone who attacks people personally without due knowledge and diligence.
You've been attacking without knowledge this entire thread.