Optimist.

The agencies know where I am and can send the fashion models any time. I'll gladly spill my guts.

I go back to what I've said before. Intelligence services may, or may not, have resources that would give them insight into the sloppiness of Chinese lab practices, and they might have some insight into whether some mishap occurred in this case. And they may not be able to tell us just what they know or how they know it, for tradecraft reasons. But if they are relying on scientific evidence, like the scientific agencies, I don't see why they are more credible than actual scientific agencies.

At minimum I would say there is no reason to believe the political left in this country cares about freedom of speech.

And the political right never has cared, and has, historically, been more effective in stomping on it.

If the "threats" were the least bit comparable to what is actually being done, you might have a point.

The only thing new here is that it’s the government doing it.

Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln............

And I am reminded as is so often the case, of Robert Burns.

Maybe if she had tried to remove a book.................

Some are, some aren't, depending on why they "refuse" to watch it. ("Refuse" is an interesting word choice, suggesting some reason other than mere lack of interest. And what might that be?) I'm not going to see it -- not refuse, just not going to see it -- simply because I have no interest in the entire Harry Potter story.

Is this really hard to understand?

I'm old school. not up to the minute.

Heimdahl was white, Goddamit!

What fun is that?

How many Anglicans actually know the distinctive teachings of their sect well enough to answer such a question? If my experience with other sects is any guide, not many.

Nobody is obliged to assist Debate Me, Bro whackjobs looking for exposure.

Why should I answer my question when you don't?

Rushdie said he couldn't be a heretic because he wasn't a Muslim. I'll take him at his word.

I don't remember Protestants trying to take communion in Catholic churches, or thinking there was anything odd about it. Maybe the Catholic church has lightened up on that -- I haven't been paying attention -- but they're entitled to change their club rules.

Leaving aside that that is entirely unresponsive, suppose you tell me what would happen if the Pope or the Grand Mufti declared you a heretic? Do you think they even think they could?

No, that statement isn't. I take it, then, that we agree on the rest?

Pinky gave up the hall monitor gig a while ago. I wasn't aware of any popular demand that someone else take it up.

So? What makes something a "heresy" rather than just an idea is a structure that claims the authority to define what is true and punish those who believe otherwise. Unless that structure manages to co-opt the government into doing its dirty work, "heresy," however interesting to outsiders, is a matter of internal club rules and has no purchase on non- members.
If you can find a manichean or a pelagian out there and you want to argue that their ideas are even sillier than your preferred orthodoxy, have at it. I'll supply the popcorn. But unless you have some enforcement powers we don't know about, leave the "heresy" charges to the club members.

The zeal of the convert. The bishop of Hippo had the same unfortunate tendency.

Several years ago, I was representing some people in the maritime industry when a controversy bubbled up about some foreign company bidding to run some facilities in the port of Los Angeles, so I asked them about it. People in the shipping business don't get their panties in a twist about things like that, and many foreign companies, including Chinese companies, run U.S. terminals. (Singapore is particularly well-regarded in that respect, and based on what I saw about Singapore companies on another case, I'm not surprised.) Business is business.
There was never any reason to worry about the Hong Kong company running Panama Canal facilities. If an American-based company is now about to take over, it must have been in the works long before Trump decided to make hay about it. But we all know about the rooster who thinks his crowing makes the sun rise each morning.

If by "meaningful," you mean something like interesting or instructive, sure. Just like Aeschylus or Shakespeare. Though nobody burns you at the stake for being wrong about them.

With whom, exactly, are you arguing? I explicitly pointed out a hotly-disputed issue, indeed, in some folks' view, a heresy, in Islam. Is there some reason Saul, or any non-Christian, should care about whether Manicheanism is a "heresy"? A non-Christian might find it interesting that some Christians so regard it and why they do, but whether the club rules of someone else's club are "correct" is meaningless to non-members.

A somewhat extreme reaction to Trump's speech:

https://people.com/sylvester-turner-congressman-houston-mayor-dead-11691129?hid=3c053c0efc766c62c665adc1b439a49799be966b&did=16772709-20250305&utm_campaign=ppl_relationship-builder&utm_source=ppl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=030525&lctg=3c053c0efc766c62c665adc1b439a49799be966b&lr_input=ae3c9729e518d1cd658fbf0103513ef6c01d84d8206d0d1191a2f8b45a7004dd&utm_term=news-alert