|Biography Articles Advise & Dissent Books Book Him! Search Contact Home|
"Be optimistic; all the people you hate are going to die."
-- Comedian Tom Green
Vandana Shiva Hate
Another Ad Hominem “Attach”
Dear Mr. Fumento:
I recently read your piece on Dr. Vandana Shiva in the National Review. It is largely an ad hominem attach [sic], which seems irresponsible for someone who fancies himself a public intellectual.
Mr. Fumento is certainly in no better position than Dr. Shiva to represent the needs of ordinary Indians, and indeed has probably spent less time in India or among Indians.
No one would deny that organic production methods produce lower yields, but without considering this fact in the context of population issues, and environmental destruction, you have essentially refuted a straw man. [It must have taken acres of straw to make something that fat.]
Much of Shiva's work is devoted to biological diversity, and the rights of farmers. Your piece makes no effort to mention, let alone discredit this aspect of her work. [In the future, I will endeavor to discredit this part of her work.]
Simplifying complex issues in order to make glib character assasinations [sic] is perhaps the calling of pundits the ilk of Mr. Fumento, but it dishonenst [sic] and counterproductive.
Dear Mr. Hill:
You obviously have no idea what an ad hominem attack is and – guess what – I’m not going to take the time to explain it you. I also think it’s cute how you switch back and forth between the first and the second person. Learn some logic, learn how to spell, and learn some grammar.
Regarding that alleged “ad hominem ‘attach,’” I noted among other things that while most Indians are poor and thin as a result, she was born to wealth and is extremely corpulent. This alone would seem to set her aside from the people of her own country. But her words go far beyond that. I quoted her as saying that instead of availing themselves of biotech crops, which could produce four times the food as her yuppie organic alternative, better alternatives are "liver, egg yolk, chicken, meat, milk and butter." I asked, “How could she not comprehend that people living almost exclusively on rice obviously cannot afford chicken cacciatore? Finally, how can she not know that India has the world's largest population of vegetarians?”
This is somebody who wouldn’t know an “ordinary Indian” if one punched her in the mouth, which is exactly what an ordinary Indian ought to do.
Dear Mr. Fumento,
[94 words omitted.]
Her obesity and her inherited wealth would seem to indicate she hasn’t the slightest understanding of hunger or the lives of most Indians. The quote I provided and that you sidestepped proves it. That’s about as damned logical as you can get.
Let Me Critique Your Article I Didn’t Bother to Read
Did I say greater cause? You wouldn’t know anything about that.
What will you do, write back an email telling me since I have acces [sic] to a computer I have no right to talk about anything?
You “were glancing through” my piece and only read “a couple of lines,” yet you claim my “arguments are not reasoned.” How could you possibly know? You say I attribute false quotes to Shiva, yet merely inserting those quoted words into a search engine pulls them up with her name attached. Specifically her claims that desperately poor and often vegetarian Indians should eat “liver, egg yolk, chicken, meat, milk, butter” comes from an op-ed she wrote dated February 14, 2000. You “do not see any justification for calling her blubbery,” notwithstanding that I provided a photo showering her to be downright fat. That’s a synonym for blubbery. My weight is irrelevant; but I’m proud that at age 47 I’m in the “athletic range” of 13 percent body fat or less.
In short, no you don’t have the right to criticize an article you admit you didn’t read, to make accusations about quotes you didn’t bother to look up, and to claim that a photo of a rich fat sow is anything but a photo of a rich fat sow. As your penance, I urge you to go to a desperately poor area of India and tell the rail-thin vegetarian natives to their faces, rather than in a cowardly essay, that they don’t need biotech food because they should eat “liver, egg yolk, chicken, meat, milk, butter.” You may not come away with your life, but at least you’ll have shown the courage of your convictions. Or your stupidity.
But, here’s his response.
I would never tell anyone to eat liver. I’m a vegan. And I plan to spend a year on a farm in West Bengal after I finish my undergraduate degree next year. Yes indeed I will be lucky to survive, but I want to do that before I commit myself as an environmentalist.
Indeed, as I understand it most of the Hindu faith are. Best of luck with your endeavor. I would simply commit myself to the people, and let the other chips fall as they may. And by the way, Marie-Antoinette never actually said “Let them eat cake!” That appeared in a novel decades before she was born. It’s a myth to attribute it to her.
Can You Say “Obsession” Boys and Girls?
[Believe it or not this is the same Conger guy from way back in Hate Mail 44.]
I was trying to inject some humor and perhaps steer this colloquy away from being a pissing contest, but I can see that will not work. I've been debating as to whether to continue this exchange; I can see that we both like a good argument, but good arguments can go on forever.
[Or the sane participant can cut them off; 987 words (!) omitted.]
Subject: Scents-orship - My Response to Your Ignorance
Dear Ms. Brown:
I find it interesting that you have determined that scents are linked to your migraines because after getting one you “end up realizing” you were exposed. That’s like in medieval days when people fell ill and then, upon reflection, recalled that the black cat of the neighborhood’s old lady had crossed their paths. Thereupon the one who really ended up suffering was the old lady. As to people not taking you seriously, I can’t for the life of me understand why. I actually don’t go to the neighborhood watering hole, so I wouldn’t know about that. But when you talk about instilling “ground rules,” it’s obvious that you think that freedom of expression is a wonderful thing for anybody you agree with but that those you disagree with are not only “ignorant” but must be shut up. Censorship is alive and well in many nations. I suggest you do everyone you know a favor and move to one of them.
She’s Suffering a Chemical Imbalance
lying [sic] republican [sic] scumbag: I hope you will get very ill from pollution and chemical releases
Lying Democratic douche bag: I hope you will get very ill from looking in the mirror.
A VOC on Two Legs
Well, you certainly do know about volatility. And you’ve guessed correctly that swearing reinforces any good argument. But as to VOCs, there are literally thousands of them. Among these are vapors emitted by a car even when the motor is off. So before you start calling for further VOC regulation, of which there is already much, I want you to pledge to never enter a car again. I would guess that if you were in a queue at the airport or theater, the elderly women would be fainting from the VOCs emitted by your armpits. So I want you to pledge you won’t get in such lines again. Try Netflix. And as it happens, I do oppose rules banning smoking in the workplace (unless it’s a gas station or something like that.) I’d suggest you get your mind out of the gutter and put it into a good scientific book or website.
Subject: Fumento is a coward and a piece of shit
Somebody ostensibly from D Company, 1/506th, 101st Airborne, anonymously posted this in MySpace.]
Fumento was apparently not really there....
http://www.fumento.com/military/ramadi.html [The hyperlink to my article about 1/506th in Ramadi titled “The New Band of Brothers.”]
While Michael Fumento was in our AO at the time [sic]. Maybe. He certainly got the details wrong with this whole article. I don't know how it turned out like this but take everyone there in that article that isn't Delta Company. And replace it with Delta Company. And it will be correct. Fuck everyone else. Except the Scouts and Animal. The only other people that worked as hard as us. Peace!
Hmm . . . First, I wasn't there at all, despite the scores of photos and the video footage I took of Camp Corregidor and its areas of operation (and some photos and video taken of me there) – photos and video links in the very article you're discussing. Then you admit I was there, but that all the details are wrong. Essentially, you're just ticked that I didn't spend any time with Delta Company or that D Company didn’t get any photos, or much verbiage in the piece. D Company played its role, but to denigrate the other four companies in 1/506th and call one of the few reporters who actually visited one of the meanest FOBs in Iraq a coward seems to be going a bit overboard.
[He then relented, but insisted he never called me a coward even though it was in his subject line!]
One from the Rubber Room
Hey Mikey! I enjoyed your appearance on C-span [sic]. Thank you so much for being on. Had it not been for your appearance on the show, I would have never gotten it. Wife and two cats huh? And those visits with the military? No wonder. Bush lover? Ah ha. All those pretty young boys. Have a great life!
Whenever I see my name written in the diminutive (Mikey), I know I’m hearing from a spoiled little brat. Thanks for not breaking the rule. As you’ll recall, on the show I spoke of those persons who want us to lose in Iraq and couldn’t care what damage that might cause or how many Iraqis die in the meantime so long as it feeds their pathological hatred of Bush. Thanks for confirming that as well.
You're welcome Mikey. By the way, you're not such a bad-ass on television. Afraid someone would call your game? Ha ha! Damn, are all Republicans gay? Bye bye [sic].
That’s an interesting preoccupation you have with homosexuality, Robin. Does a name like “Robin” help you swing both ways?
If You Can’t Tell the Future and Make Others Believe You, What Good Are You?
I was listening to you on CSPAN and I was quite surprised to hear you make a statement to infer [sic] that the American people should have known that this conflict were [sic] to take about 10 years - or at least we should be prepared for a 10 year war.
I find this interesting given Rumsfeld's pre-war comment to the public and congress [sic], ""It [sic] is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months." Are you saying that what you state as obvious was not obvious to our deeply experienced military personnel such as Secretary of Defense, [sic] Donald Rumsfeld?
If what you say is true - we should have known and expected a war such as this to be at least 10 years, then you are saying that Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney not only miscalculated the war, but purposely acted with extreme incompetence.
Do you really think that you knew this before the war? If so, did you publish this contrary thought? Did anyone publish this obvious contrary thought? Had you done your job, we might not be in a war right now.
Statements made as to the length of the war all pertained to the capture of Baghdad and bringing down the Baathist government. Those were accomplished in three weeks. My statement regarded a guerrilla war that quite possibly would not have begun had people in charge not made conditions ripe for one. Thank you for assuming I have powers to see into the future or for thinking I have the ear of the President, Vice-President, or Secretary of Defense but I do not. And you smarminess is most unbecoming.
Shouldn’t that Be “Manicured Men”?
[This was in response to a shortened version of my Weekly Standard article, “Return to Ramadi.”]
The US devastation of Fallujah: 6,000 massacured [sic] men, women and children (all civilians) as the US comes in with 'illegal' MK-77 Napalm [sic], Chemical [sic], Phosphoros [sic] and cluster bombs against anything that moves.
Whooppeee, now we have some 'reel' [sic] war hero's [sic]. Not unlike the mutherfuckers [sic] of Israels [sic] IDF that have shown the world that their 'boldness' [sic] and 'heroics' [sic] are limited to massacuring [sic], maiming and displacing unarmed civilians (children seems to be their specialty as the war crimes photos of the foreign media show the world) in Gaza (Beit Hanoun, Jenin, Rafah, Ramallah) and Tyre, Beirut and dozens of villages left 'showered' [sic] with over a million US supplied cluster bomblets, MK-77 napalm, Chemical [sic], Phosphoros [sic], D.I.M.E anti-personnel [sic] (new experimental weapons) dropped by Israel in Gaza and Lebanon this past summer as the Pentagon decided to 'field test' [sic] some of their newer and deadlier weapons via the shameless and unadulterated murderous ZioNazi Jews.
You are one sick puppy, who also can't spell.
To: Fuming Fumento.....
Spell check [sic] can take care of my problem - sorry yours are more deeply configured psychological [sic] and emotionally motivated rabid conniption powered anger spasms exhibited by a sore AH [presumably “asshole”] of a NeoCon [sic] lamenting the November 7th elections...
Funny how the elections seem to have transformed our 'sassy' [sic] (all mouth gutless wonders) AH NeoCon's [sic] into a group of snarling rabid, gutless 'pussy' cats, jajajaja. [Whatever that’s supposed to mean.]
[I didn’t respond to this, but he sent me a spate of terrorist-supplied “news stories” of U.S. massacres and the like, including a reference to the “Fox Jews Network,” this time using “Saddam Hussien” [sic] as his e-mail nom de plume. To one I responded: “Interesting that you can't even spell the name of your hero, Saddam Hussein. I'll bet you can't spell the names of your other heroes either; you know, Adoph Hilter and Josef Stallen.]
Semper Fi [Always Faithful] . . . to Ollie North
Dear Mr. Robinson:
Why don't you do something novel and go to Ramadi twice like I did and serve alongside brave people like McClung and Patriquin and then talk about it. I repeat, North has had plenty of time to acknowledge both of them and he has acknowledged neither of them. Or do you think somehow he doesn't know and that's why I should contact him? I don't care for ingrates like that and I don't care for their worshippers like you, especially those who can't even spell the word "Major."
From a Smarmy Reporter
Subject: Mr. Embed
I was there for two months as a journalist. I routinely ate at Baghdad restaurants. I shopped at various stores, for Pringles, tomato juice, a tape recorder, DVDs, phone cards, etc. I traveled to Fallujah, Ramadi, Tikrit and Mosul to get stories. All I had was a driver and a translator. I never wore my flak vest, except to place it against the door of my car when I took long trips. I repeatedly had guns in my face at checkpoints by sketchy Iraqi "police." I physically felt the force of a car bomb. I felt love for Americans when I visited Kurdistan....I e-mailed Michelle [Malkin, who embedded in a camp in Baghdad and repeatedly went outside the wire] and asked her to spend extra time away from her embed and find out what the real Iraq is like. Maybe you did the same. I don't have time to wade through your entire site. Whatever she does, I wish for her to be safe. I also hope she has a revelation about the reality of Iraq. [She did; she came back more optimistic than when she went.]
Dear Mr. Non-Embed:
I note from your bylines that you were in Iraq at absolutely the safest time for any reporter, immediately after the invasion. This is nothing to boast of, yet you boast nonetheless. You actually “physically felt the force of a car bomb”? Oh my! You want to trade war stories? While on my first embed, after things turned quite nasty in Iraq and while embedded in the most violent province of Iraq, I suffered an illness that would have been readily treated with medicine in the States but because of the primitive conditions I was under resulted in my having surgery in Iraq to save my life. Much of my colon was removed and I was given a colostomy. I have since had three more operations to try to get back to normal. On my second embed I was mortared twice, thus “I physically felt” the force of two explosions – but explosions directed not at a third party but rather at the forces I was with, which included me. I was personally sniped at. On another occasion, a soldier directly in front of me came inches away from being hit by a sniper. I was also taken under fire by a machine gun. Video of the soldier’s near-sniping and of my being shot at is available on my website in my article “The New Band of Brothers.” As a result of all this, I do not suffer gladly faux reporter such as yours. What you did during the nascent days of the insurrection would be suicidal today. If you want to die, come back now and try to pull off what you did then. As to Michelle Malkin, she has two small children. Do not feel justified in urging her to kill herself.
World Trade Center Illness Hate
That Constitutional Right to Perfect Health
I would like to inform you that my 38-year old husband worked in [sic] Staton [sic] Island from December, [sic] 2001, until June, [sic] 2002. My husband previously worked in the environmental field and was tested yearly for illnesses, hazardous chemicals in his body, etc. He always had a clean bill of health, in fact, most doctors commented AND noted in his chart that he was unbelievably healthy and had the lungs, etc., of a 20 year old. [I’ll bet.] Not quite two years after leaving the Trade Center cleanup, he developed gallstones and pancreatitis. He has been hospitalized 5 times, has lost over 30 pounds, has developed other, serious digestive problems, and is now having severe joint problems, all of which his specialists now attribute to breathing the dust. He now takes more meds than I can count, and his illnesses have forced us to consider bankruptcy. What I would give to know that his problems are "psychological;" then, perhaps, a psychologist or psychiatrist could "fix" him. However, one look at his healthy picture on the pass/ID from the Trade Center cleanup days and a look at him today tells the story. My husband is now 43, his life is irrevocably changed, and we wonder from day to day when the next hospital stay will be.
I didn't say his symptoms were psychological. I said people get sick and people die and the vast majority of them were never anywhere Ground Zero. You're the one with the psychological problems, believing that for some reason your husband was destined for immortality until 9/11 came along. And the specialists did not attribute his problems to breathing dust. You fabricated that.
I fabricated nothing. His medical charts and physician notes are conclusive, and for you to insinuate that I "fabricate" expert medical opinion is luducris [sic]. Should the world now address you as Dr. Fumento? To the best of my knowledge, you are but a journalist with legal ties, expressing your opinions, and certainly not medical fact. Furthermore, for you to imply that I'm psychotic due to the fact that I think my husband is immortal is almost comical. You, sir, put words in my mouth or seriously misconstrued my meaning. You have addressed me and my honest attempt to inform you of my husband's condition to give you another person's insight to what life has been like before and after 9/11 in a demeaning manner. Regardless of what you think or believe you know, my husband, along with 70 percent of the WTC workers are sick [another wholesale fabrication] and some are dead. It's pretty damn coincidental, wouldn't you say. [sic] Oh, forgive me. How psychotic I must sound to think that thousands of people -- people who were otherwise relatively healthy, if not perfectly healthy -- may attribute their illnesses to the day to day inhalation of toxic chemicals. I'm curious, Dr. Fumento. Exactly how many days did YOU spend at Ground Zero or on Staten Island?
Perhaps you should go stick your face in some of the remaining debris and dust, take a nice deep breath, and rewrite your story in a few years.
Happy to post my name as:
Fine. This is easily settled. Just fax me a few pages from your husband’s medical records in which a doctor says his condition is from exposure to the dust at Ground Zero. Write again and I will send you a fax number. If you do not, you are a liar and I have permission to tell the world that Tammy Myers is a liar and tell the world I will. Oh, and learn how to spell.
[In all the years I have asked people to fax me some medical records to prove their bizarre claims of suffering Gulf War Syndrome, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, and now World Trade Center Illness nobody ever has. That didn’t change with Mrs. Myers. She simply wrote back telling me that I was incredibly ugly and almost certainly homosexual.]
Parasitical Doctors . . .
You should be ashamed of yourself for disparaging the people who are now ill after working at Ground Zero. You have revealed your ignorance of genetics, synergism of chemicals, and the extreme toxicity of the substances produced when the WTC came crashing down. I work with patients who are measurably ill after exposure to only one toxin such as a heavy metal or a pesticide or a petroleum based substance.
Who paid you to discount these illnesses?
I hope you are around 20 years from now to see the increased incidence of cancers in and the death rate for New Yorkers and others who were there.
K. Henry, MD
Dear Dr. Henry:
Nobody paid me but the journal I wrote for, which amounts to what you make in an hour. You’re the quack who makes his living by telling people they have non-existent illnesses and keeping them on treatment for life. No doctor of “environmental illness” has ever cured a patient; you just string them along forever. Yet I’m supposed to be ashamed. Why don’t you engage in some more professional line of patient treatment, like leaching?
Your reponse [sic] to my email as it appears below has a venomous tone. You seem very angry. I would only hope that you can open your mind to the fact of environmental illness.
The article I have included below is a very simple example of environmental illness (allergy). The attachment is an even more serious indictment of chemicals in the environment and their profound impact on human health, not to mention that of other animals, plants, and the water and air which we need in a clean and safe form for our very survival.
Happy Holidays to You and Yours,
K. Henry, MD
Dear Dr. Henry:
You sent me an article that stated nothing more than becoming allergic to one thing can make you allergic to another. That has nothing to do with the claims of quack practitioners of “environmental illness” that thousands of manmade chemicals – or indeed all manmade chemicals are causing a large proportion of the population to become so sick that while there’s treatment there’s no cure; hence they must continue coming to people like Dr. K. Henry in order to pay these doctors’ alimony and Porsche leases. I would have to be terribly incompassionate not to be angry over the agony you inflict upon those poor people who fall into your web.
You are one miserable angry man and you have no idea what doctors like me really do nor how much many of us have sacrificed in our own lives just to help the sick patients who have been told by the real quacks that their symptoms are all in their heads.
I drive a Ford and I live modestly. [Alimony payments to discarded trophy wives will do that to you.] My patients praise me for helping them after they have been told over and over by the medical establishment that either nothing is wrong or that they just need yet another round of drugs. I have cured people who supposedly had incurable diseases. I thank God for giving me the ability to do so.
Get off your blinded high horse and open your mind. Your anger at doctors has much more to it than you disclose. It is personal and it is dangerous.
K. Henry, MD
“Personal and dangerous?” You’re not just a quack, but a fruit as well. Of course patients praise you; that’s part of the routine. You offer them hope where “The Medical Establishment” has failed, if only because many illnesses are wrongly diagnosed the first time and those with psychogenic illness often refuse to listen to the truth. They’d rather hear your lies – especially if the insurance company is picking up the tab. I love the critic of your so-called “profession” who pointed out that poor people don’t get environmental illness because they can’t afford it. Say hello to the ex-wives for me!
. . . and Parasitical Lawyers
Mr. Fumento. [sic]
Just read your pathetically ill-informed piece on the illnesses suffered by 9/11 responders. My clients are dying in the prime of their lives, while struggling for every breath and tethered to oxygen tanks. What a relief to know that this is all a myth and the product of mass hysteria. I'm sure their widows and orphans will be relieved to hear that their fathers and husbands are just suffering "hysterical death" as opposed to the genuine article. Shame on you and shame on whoever [sic] is bank-rolling your "research."
Translation: You have no evidence that anybody is “bank-rolling” my work, except for the fee one journal paid for my piece. (I gave it away to other journals.) Conversely, to the extent people catch on you lose your chance to win cases and take home 33% to 40% of the judgment or settlement. I want you to know that while it may look like I'm laughing at you on the outside – I'm laughing at you on the inside, too.
Plainly, you are not – and were never – interested in an intelligent and factual discussion of the issue. My mistake was to assume otherwise, and to think that you were simply ill-informed. Instead you have now revealed that you are not just ill-informed but also immature, ignorant, heartless and appallingly unprofessional. If your idea of intelligent discourse is to hurl invective and call names, as your writing was similarly directed toward the lowest common denominator of the public, you discredit not only yourself, but your organization, your sponsors and your "cause." There is nothing to laugh about, you tiny sad little man. Good and decent people who put their lives on hold and their health on the line, are desperately ill and dying. If you think that is funny, I cannot imagine what happened to you in your life to render you so angry and unfeeling. Again, shame on you. You have my sympathy, an emotion with which you have apparently no familiarity. [Don’t you just love it how hate-mailers so often confer upon themselves degrees relating to psycho-analysis?]
According to Webster’s Dictionary, a shyster is “a person who is professionally unscrupulous especially in the practice of law or politics.” How better to describe somebody who tells her clients they have an illness that doesn’t even exist in order to take a cut of a settlement or suit against a defendant that cannot possibly have done any harm since no harm was done. You tiny sad money-grubbing little parasite. Incidentally, I was tickled to find in Webster’s that the etymology of “shyster” is “probably from the German [word] Scheisser, literally defecator.” Webster must know you personally.
Where’s the Mouthwashing Soap When You Need it?
You seem to believe that profligate use of the f-word can make up for all manner of sins, including lack of medical knowledge and general stupidity. If you were a doctor you would have identified yourself as such. You did not. Likewise you would have identified yourself if you were a health or science writer. You did not. You are also unaware that asbestos and fiberglass cause no acute damage to the lungs. Asbestos may certainly cause damage but only after at least a 20 year latency period. I wish to inform you that it has not been 20 years since 9/11. As to fiberglass, according to the American Lung Association website: “Breathing fibers may irritate the airways resulting in coughing and a scratchy throat.” It says nothing about short-term illness. As to long-term illness, it notes that the most recent findings of the International Agency for Research on Cancer is that fiberglass is “currently considered not classifiable as a human carcinogen. Studies done in the past 15 years since the previous report was released, do not provide enough evidence to link this material to any cancer risk.”
Karma will not get me. She’s a very nice lady and we get along just fine.
Retract your e-mail and publish one that actually reports on the people who have gotten sick for no other reason than that people do get sick, in addition to suffering psychosomatic illness because foul-mouthed fools like you, who lacked mothers that washed their mouths out with soap, keep telling them they ought to be sick.
No Micheal [sic], I am not a doctor. And I do not have powerful connections with illuminati or freemasons. Nor do I have a swanky press job where I can run off my mouth with no consequences. [159 words omitted to get more quickly to the juicy stuff.] You are a terrorist. It is people like you that reign [sic, “who”] terror on society with your "that's just the way it is" style of media. [106 words omitted.]
And, Mr. Fumento, the "F" word is a part of the english [sic] langauge [sic] used to express strong emotion. I reserve this word for the worst scum of the planet, which so happens to be you. Being a journalist I thought you would have some grasp on the english [sic] language. Fuck is not an invalid word. It is a strong word. You can't invalidate what somebody wrote just because the word "fuck" is in it. Do you even understand anything about linguistics or why the word "fuck" is so taboo in order to make it a stronger word?
No, not having credentials isn’t what makes you stupid. But something obviously has.
OK who is stupid again? Research scientists collecting objective data or people reporting false findings with no scientific or medical backing based on pure conjecture?
Sorry, but Ian O’Connor’s refusal to recognize valid scientific and medical work does not turn it into pure conjecture. I suggest you go back to what you do best, throwing around the f-word.
After I wrote a column saluting Maj. Megan McClung, KIA Ramadi, under whom I’d been twice embedded, many people wrote to me thanking me for a lovely tribute. And then there was this guy, who posted this in a comments section.
Word theft. Gee, Mike, it sure is nice to learn that you served an honorable tour in my USMC, thereby earning the right to use our phrase "Semper Fi".
This is proof that some “jarheads” really are. You earn the Airborne Silver Wings. You earn the Green Beret or the Ranger tab. You don’t earn the right to use two Latin words that mean “Always faithful.” It’s a sign of respect to a Marine to close a message, including e-mails, with “Semper Fi!” My guess is that “fjl,” who is afraid to use his name, probably spent his entire time in the rear echelon where he earned essentially nothing.
Dear Mr. Fumento,
I must write to tell you how entertaining your writings and readers submissions are. I've not enjoyed such in quite some time. Forget, for the moment if you will, the truly serious nature of many of the subjects, and allow me to write that the communications are sterling.
Dear Mr. O’Tyrrell:
As it happens I’ve easily converted your missive into a soap opera script. I’ve submitted it to both “The Young and the Worthless” and “As the Stomach Turns.”
This Guy Just Slays Me!
Subject: THOU SHALL NOT KILL, PERIOD.
THOU SHALL NOT KILL, PERIOD.
Sorry buddy; that’s a bad translation that’s falling out of favor among biblical scholars. If you know the Old Testament at all, you know that upon many occasions God ordered slayings and indeed mass slayings. “And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor. And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men. (Exodus 32: 27-28)
If you were honest, you wouldn’t be cherry-picking verses out of the Qur’an either.
You’d be admitting that the Qur’an calls for the killing of unbelievers and that Mohammed himself instituted Islam through wholesale slaughter such as that of the Jews of Qurayza who dared resist him. His armies surrounded them and “besieged them for twenty-five nights until they were sore pressed and God cast terror into their hearts.” Muhammad selected Sa’d bin Mu’adh to decide their punishment, and al-Aus, an ally of Qurayza, agreed to let Sa’d choose the punishment. Sa’d declared that “the men should be killed, the property divided, and the women and children taken as captives.” (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah (The Life of Muhammad), A. Guillaume, tr. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1980), p. 164.
Subject: typo’s [sic]
To whom it may concern,
Stem Cell Hate
Somehow these “Questions” Sound Like Accusations
Wake Forest's Dr. Atala submitted a letter to Congress which was read on the floor of the House before the vote on HR3 wherein he stated that "amniotic stem cell research should not be seen as a substitute for embryronic [sic] stem cell research." [Actually, he did say something to that effect, but this quote is fabricated.] Why did you not mention this in your recent article extolling the superiority of ASCR over ESCR?
518 scientific organizations, patient advocacy groups, universities and the Episcopal Church support ESCR; 17 theocratic groups oppose it. How do you account for this fact?
There are currently 9 adult stem cell treatments "cures" for diseases after 40 years of research, not 60-80 as claimed (including 3 phoney [sic] Parkinson's treatments). Why do you promote this misleading information?
Dear Ms. Brown:
Regarding your first question, I did in fact answer it almost two years ago. I wrote:
ASC researchers fear having their funds cut off by the National Institutes of Health, which – despite the limitations laid down by President Bush – is seen as overwhelmingly biased toward ESC research. A search of the NIH grant database from 2001 to the present, using the term "embryonic stem cell," brings up a list of 750 grants. For ASCs the list is a mere 140, with an additional 139 for umbilical-cord stem cells.
ASC researchers also fear having their papers turned down by the major publications. The two most prestigious science journals in the world, Science and Nature, are overwhelmingly pro-ESC research, but do run some papers presenting the benefits of ASCs. So ASC researchers figure they have a chance of getting published – if they pay homage to the editors' enthusiasm for embryonic stem cells.
Between concerns over money and publication, you can see why researchers aren't eager to make enemies by criticizing the potential of embryonic stem cells. (No one wants to be heard bashing the boss's fair-haired boy.) Sometimes ASC researchers let their true beliefs slip: I'll hear them say things like "adult stem-cell research is what's on the move; embryonic stem cells are going to fade in the rearview mirror." Yet they'll quickly catch themselves and, in the same breath, insist that, "of course, it's important to keep researching embryonic stem cells."
I don’t know how many groups support ESC research or how many oppose it and am not about to take your word for it or the word of the website that might have given you that information. But insofar as it’s a common theme of my articles that ESC research advances and potential are grossly exaggerated while ESC researchers, persons invested in ESC research, and the media have sought to intentionally downplay ASC advances – as indeed I demonstrated in the very article you attack – that just might explain it. All you’re doing is paying testament to their lobbying success.
The “only nine” figure is a fraud published in a mere letter to a sympathetic journal by ESC researchers. I wrote all about it here: http://www.fumento.com/biotech/stem-cell-scam.html
Finally, doesn’t it occur to you that any science involved in almost 1,300 clinical trials (as opposed to zero for ESCs) is clearly a highly promising one? Nah, I didn’t think so.
[From a comment challenging my posting on a blog. The post was about a breakthrough study showing amniotic/placenta stem cells are as versatile as embryonic stem cells and it criticized Newsweek for claiming trials with the cells are “many years away” when in fact there is one currently ongoing.]
Still ignoring my previous post, Fumento? Question too hard for you?
Then let me point out the problem with your post here, where you assert that Newsweek "blows" the reporting on the study by saying: “Many scientists are quick to emphasize that comprehensive human trials are still many years away."
Your evidence against this?
In my book, one trial does not make "comprehensive human trials".
Note the term COMPREHENSIVE and plural TRIALS.
The only thing that blows here (interesting choice of words. Always interpret it to indicate closet homosexuality, btw) is your blogging.
"In my book, one trial does not make "comprehensive human trials."
Get a new book. It IS a comprehensive trial; I provided a link to it. Read it. It began almost six years ago and is still recruiting new patients. And where does Newsweek (and you) get off on saying trials are "many years away" when there's one going on even as we speak? Oh, but it's "trial," singular. So if somebody said to you, "The ability of the Chinese to shoot down satellites is years away," you'd agree because, after all, they did only shoot down one satellite a few days ago. In the event, I only referred to trials found at clinicaltrials.gov. Using PubMed it took mere seconds to find another clinical trial in the July 18, 1996 New England Journal of Medicine: "Placental Blood As A Source Of Hematopoietic Stem Cells For Transplantation Into Unrelated Recipients.” The same journal reported on another such completed trial in 1998.
The reason I didn't respond to you the first time is because you didn't deserve a response. It is the same reason I will not respond to whatever smarmy next posting you come up with.