R.I.P. Recliner Pilot

[IMMensaMind 459]

The fat in his chin alone puts him over 10%!

 

It was actually 18% at that time. I would hope you saw the timestamp on the picture - and I posted a while ago what I did to change my diet and get the results I got. I would think that you clowns will tire of doing what you're doing and move on yourself after a while...

[IMMensaMind 459]

A quick google search about abortion and breast cancer shows article after article of no connection. I work at a cancer center, and on monday I will ask our Oncologist if this is true. Will get back with you guys Monday. Matter of fact, we have two, I'll ask them both. In there professional opinion, does breast cancer and abortion have a link to each other.

 

Hold on: what was your search criteria? You just don't throw that up without a challenge.

 

 

If you do this "quick search", you find all sorts of links which connect the two. How about some honesty, for a change?

 

Abortion and Breast Cancer

[Frank M 181]

Is this IMMensa?

 

I think that's higher than 9 percent body fat, no?

 

:pukingsmilie:

 

What's up with the chocolate milk mustache that dripped onto his chin?

[Meglamaniac 380]

Been a while since we had a train wreck of thread like this

[Frank M 181]

Been a while since we had a train wreck of thread like this

 

 

I've been thoroughly entertained since post #1!

[The Elevator Killer 497]

I dont recall a savannah luv.

 

The story was she met this guy on line and was concidering meeting him. "Should I." She meets him and he turns out to be a midget. He is tragicly killed being thrown from a carnival ride because he didn't meet the height requirement.

[Meglamaniac 380]

The story was she met this guy on line and was concidering meeting him. "Should I." She meets him and he turns out to be a midget. He is tragicly killed being thrown from a carnival ride because he didn't meet the height requirement.

LOL, damn how did I miss that

[crackattack 513]

Hold on: what was your search criteria? You just don't throw that up without a challenge.

 

 

If you do this "quick search", you find all sorts of links which connect the two. How about some honesty, for a change?

 

Abortion and Breast Cancer

 

Whatever you say skippy. The very first link in yours says there is no link . It all is about what study you want to believe. Yes there are some studies that say they are, and there are studies that say they are not linked. So I guess it falls on what study you want to believe. I'll go with the NCA, which says there is no link.

[Internet Tough Guy 1]

 

I guess you think this internet tough guy stuff is real.

 

 

 

Ok, who the fock woke me up and for what?

[The Elevator Killer 497]

Ok, who the fock woke me up and for what?

 

[IMMensaMind 459]

Whatever you say skippy. The very first link in yours says there is no link . It all is about what study you want to believe. Yes there are some studies that say they are, and there are studies that say they are not linked. So I guess it falls on what study you want to believe. I'll go with the NCA, which says there is no link.

 

If you had been paying attention, jif, you'll notice that the NCI report is the first link, and it's the exact study that MN referenced, and the exact study that I posted a repudiation of for not following the Scientific Method. It is exactly what I told you I suspected: politics corrupting medicine. Try to follow along please, instead of just being another boring knee-jerk liberal.

 

You go with whoever you want, just as I said you should. I posted the research of MD - and others - who question the protocols followed by that NCI report, and they question the political motivations behind a study which attempts to counter 50 years of definitive conclusions on this topic; conclusions that are supported by such basic concepts regarding hormonal levels and cancer-cell production as to be intuitive for lay people.

 

This whole topic got started because MDC claimed "it was nuts" to believe that Abortion and Breast Cancer are linked. It's very clear that you disagree with MDC on this, because you said it simply a matter of who you believe.

 

You chose poorly. That is your choice. It doesn't take a whole lot of intelligence to understand that there is an active agenda on the pro-abortion side to continue the practice of abortion, just as there is motivation on the side of the pro-life crowd to end it.

 

However, only one side has the benefit of science and research studies which pre-date the political battle of abortion, and that is the pro-life side, because it has been known for over 50 years that these two are linked.

 

And that speaks volumes, to those who wish to listen. Believe what you will: if anything, I should be more than happy to have leftists believe that there is no such link, shouldn't I?

[donhaas 18]

 

That's awesome. Did you get your niece to photochop for you, donhaas? I know you don't have the skillz.

 

 

Of course, don - that picture was 5 years ago, when I said I was much heavier. I also said that I've lost about 20 pounds, and am around 9% body fat. You said you were 6-4, 225. You're 5 pounds heavier than I am, and a 1/2" taller (if you're to be believed) - and since you've said that you're hung like Favre, we know that you have that extra weight elsewhere - like hanging over your belt.

 

He's talking about you too, then.

 

 

If you can put down the ho hos for a second and turn down the FoxNews, I'd like to introduce you to these things called muscles

 

[Me_2006 14]

I wish Torrid were still here. He and Mensa could just have their own thread spiraling toward infinity and leave the rest of us alone.

[edjr 5,568]

If you can put down the ho hos for a second and turn down the FoxNews, I'd like to introduce you to these things called muscles

 

 

 

is surferskin sitting next to you?

[FeelingMN 273]

Uh huh. I posted far more information than that, tough guy. I posted evidence of the bias of the reports - the recent reports - which are you relying on as "new" information that suddenly contradicts 50 years of study on the matter, all of which previously pointed to a very direct link.

 

And you cannot fathom the bias, even though the evidence is right in front of your face. You won't accept even the possibility that your reports have bias.

 

The MD I posted to is just one of thousands of sources of this information. That particular doctor, however, specializes in this field, and has done research on the viability of those reports.

 

Can you post evidence that proves that his claim that the reports bias - and reasons - are false? Can you refute him? Or are you just going with the usual leftist claim that since the challenge to the information is biased, it is by definition illegitimate?

 

Where is your equal discrimination on judging the bias of the initial reports? He's pointed out to you the political bias held by the controllers of the study you're harkening, so why the double standard from you?

 

Are you that afraid to find out something which doesn't fit into your neat view of the world?

 

Shame. Like I said: you want to be blind, carry on. I suspected political bias before I even looked for it. I found extremely incriminating reasons to distrust the new claims that abortion and breast cancer are not linked.

 

Disregard it all you want. My wife isn't having an abortion - and hasn't had a miscarriage - so it doesn't affect me whatsoever.

 

I told you to fock off, and you've insulted me a number of times. I'm interested why you're so concerned about me telling you to do so, and not at all concerned about why you instantly snap and spew the run-on insults.

 

Double standard you have. I tried to share information that I found.

 

Doctors believe that pregnancy hormones play a role in causing morning sickness, breast soreness, tiredness, and other standard symptoms of early pregnancy. After a miscarriage, your hormones will not return to pre-pregnant levels right away, so there can be a period of time that you will still feel pregnant -- even if you have just had a D & C.

 

Lingering pregnancy symptoms after a miscarriage can feel like adding insult to injury for obvious reasons. It's easier to put up with the nausea and tiredness if there's going to be a happy ending to it all. But at least the pregnancy symptoms should not linger for too long; your hCG levels will probably fall to zero within about two weeks (although it can take as long as 4-6 weeks for some women). If you are still having trouble with persistent nausea or vomiting longer than that, check in with your doctor. Also note that if you feel you have symptoms of an infection after a miscarriage at any point, you should call your doctor right away.

 

http://miscarriage.about.com/od/physicalrecovery/f/symptomsafter.htm

 

I took issue with your doc's statement about abormally low hormone levels in women who miscarry. It seems as if horomone levels remain elevated for a bit following miscarriage. These levels aren't low....and they sure as hell ain't abnormally low. So then what's the difference between a spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) and a planned abortion? Well, besides all the angels crying.

 

Your doc didn't want to touch that distinction which is why he simply offered a very generic, bland, unimaginative (none of this is directed at you) statement. But by mentioning miscarriage....he had to since anyone with a friggin working brain would wonder what the physical differences between miscarriage/abortion are....he appears to have covered all his bases....well, to some people. Rather than proving a difference, he just proceeds to make his moral argument (pro-life vs. femminist pro-choicers).

 

Saying you don't think someone is funny isn't an insult. I don't think Rush Limbaugh or Karl Rove are funny... Crap....I don't know why I used those guys as examples. It's just that they remind me of you.....or you of them.....god, what am I trying to say? That all right wing ideologues are pear shaped and humorless? No.....no....that's not it. Crap.....sorry.....I like your shoes?

 

[DanXIII 8]

well-oiled anal cavity

 

I'm versatile.

 

 

[IMMensaMind 459]

http://miscarriage.about.com/od/physicalrecovery/f/symptomsafter.htm

 

I took issue with your doc's statement about abormally low hormone levels in women who miscarry. It seems as if horomone levels remain elevated for a bit following miscarriage. These levels aren't low....and they sure as hell ain't abnormally low. So then what's the difference between a spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) and a planned abortion? Well, besides all the angels crying.

 

Your doc didn't want to touch that distinction which is why he simply offered a very generic, bland, unimaginative (none of this is directed at you) statement. But by mentioning miscarriage....he had to since anyone with a friggin working brain would wonder what the physical differences between miscarriage/abortion are....he appears to have covered all his bases....well, to some people. Rather than proving a difference, he just proceeds to make his moral argument (pro-life vs. femminist pro-choicers).

 

Saying you don't think someone is funny isn't an insult. I don't think Rush Limbaugh or Karl Rove are funny... Crap....I don't know why I used those guys as examples. It's just that they remind me of you.....or you of them.....god, what am I trying to say? That all right wing ideologues are pear shaped and humorless? No.....no....that's not it. Crap.....sorry.....I like your shoes?

 

 

 

He made a very general statement. I'm sure you could e-mail him if you want more specifics.

 

As for your insults, you and both know you've thrown a multitude of them...don't act stupid, MN.

[MedStudent 56]

I didn't want to weigh in on the abortion-cancer thing but I had to make a few points. mensa keeps referencing 50 years of study prior to the recent studies. Many of those studies were flawed because abortions were illegal and they had to rely on asking breast cancer patients if they had abortions in the past and was subject to recall bias.

 

The more recent big studies that show no link between breast cancer and abortions were done with much better data and much more data. They could track people with abortions and see if they develop breast cancer. I'm still dumbfounded on why the NCI would be biased. What motivation do they have to hide the truth? Doctors are liberals? I think most Doctors doing research are looking for breakthroughs and new discoveries. They are not going to hide the truth to push an agenda.

 

The best and most complete studies showed no link.

[MDC 5,895]

This whole topic got started because MDC claimed "it was nuts" to believe that Abortion and Breast Cancer are linked.

 

For the record, that was only one of several statements from Angle that I posted, ranging from "well outside the mainstream" to "factually inaccurate."

 

Her belief that abortion and breast cancer are linked was less troubling to me than the fact that she thinks the 9/11 hijackers entered the states via Canada or her bill pushing for Scientology style massage and saunda treatment in prisons.

 

[Frank M 181]

I didn't want to weigh in on the abortion-cancer thing but I had to make a few points. mensa keeps referencing 50 years of study prior to the recent studies. Many of those studies were flawed because abortions were illegal and they had to rely on asking breast cancer patients if they had abortions in the past and was subject to recall bias.

 

The more recent big studies that show no link between breast cancer and abortions were done with much better data and much more data. They could track people with abortions and see if they develop breast cancer. I'm still dumbfounded on why the NCI would be biased. What motivation do they have to hide the truth? Doctors are liberals? I think most Doctors doing research are looking for breakthroughs and new discoveries. They are not going to hide the truth to push an agenda.

 

The best and most complete studies showed no link.

 

Just a few from Pub Med, the standard search tool for looking up peer-reviewed papers from scientific/medical journals (not blogs)

 

Nursing Standard January 2010

Breast cancer risk in women: the protective role of pregnancy.

Early age at full-term pregnancy lowers the risk of breast cancer in women, whereas in older women first full-term pregnancy appears to increase the risk. Lactation seems to be relatively important in reducing the risk and abortion is associated neither with increased nor reduced risk.

 

Contraception June 2008

Incomplete pregnancy is not associated with breast cancer risk: the California Teachers Study

Using Cox multivariable regression, we found no statistically significant association between any measure of incomplete pregnancy and breast cancer risk among nulliparous or parous women.

 

International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, November 2003

ACOG committee opinion. Induced abortion and breast cancer risk. Number 285, August 2003.

The purpose of this Committee Opinion is to provide a review of recent studies regarding the potential relationship between induced abortion and subsequent breast cancer and to discuss methodologic challenges in this field of study. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Committee on Gynecologic Practice concludes that early studies of the relationship between prior induced abortion and breast cancer risk have been inconsistent and are difficult to interpret because of methodologic considerations. More rigorous recent studies argue against a causal relationship between induced abortion and a subsequent increase in breast cancer risk.

 

International Journal of Cancer, February 2008

Breast cancer risk in relation to abortion: Results from the EPIC study.

Overall, the findings provide further unbiased evidence of the lack of an adverse effect of induced abortion on breast cancer risk.

 

Archives of Internal Medicine, April, 2007

Induced and spontaneous abortion and incidence of breast cancer among young women: a prospective cohort study.

Among this predominantly premenopausal population, neither induced nor spontaneous abortion was associated with the incidence of breast cancer.

 

Journal of the National Cancer Institute, April, 2006

Pregnancies, breast-feeding, and breast cancer risk in the International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study (IBCCS).

Neither history of interrupted pregnancies (induced abortions or miscarriage) nor history of breast-feeding was statistically significantly associated with the risk of breast cancer.

 

 

 

[IMMensaMind 459]

I didn't want to weigh in on the abortion-cancer thing but I had to make a few points. mensa keeps referencing 50 years of study prior to the recent studies. Many of those studies were flawed because abortions were illegal and they had to rely on asking breast cancer patients if they had abortions in the past and was subject to recall bias.

 

The more recent big studies that show no link between breast cancer and abortions were done with much better data and much more data. They could track people with abortions and see if they develop breast cancer. I'm still dumbfounded on why the NCI would be biased. What motivation do they have to hide the truth? Doctors are liberals? I think most Doctors doing research are looking for breakthroughs and new discoveries. They are not going to hide the truth to push an agenda.

 

The best and most complete studies showed no link.

 

The "best and most complete" studies are exactly the ones that the MD I posted took issue with - specifically, certain procedures and practices which absolutely delegimitize the study.

 

How do you square the inconsistencies that the MD pointed out? I don't see a good answer to his charges. In addition, there have been over 100 studies, and most of the aren't 50 years old - that's just when the subject first began to be studied.

 

As to how or why the NCI would be politically biased, you should know that much of your field is politically biased. My grandfather has been published in the NEJM and JAMA many times. They each have their own biases, and they do change over time. My grandfather used to complain regularly of the viewpoints held by some doctors being suppressed due to the knowledge of which party they support, for instance.

 

In the case of NCI, NARAL and NCI are linked. Leftist politics and NCI are linked.

 

Let he who has eyes see.

 

An important excerpt from the first link which supports what I have been saying:

 

That categorical statement relies solely on the National Cancer Institute’s study “Summary Report: Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer Workshop.” But that report was published in 2003, and is at odds with more up-to-date science. Over the past 16 months, independent studies in Turkey, China, Sri Lanka, and Seattle have all concluded that there is indeed an increased risk for breast cancer in post-abortive women. All four studies were published in significant professional medical journals.

 

The Chinese study “A case-control study of reproductive factors associated with subtypes of breast cancer in Northeast China,” was published in the Journal of Medical Oncology on September 23, 2009. The study’s abstract concluded: “Breastfeeding protected parous women from any subtype of breast cancer. Postmenopause and spontaneous abortion were inversely associated with the risk of luminal tumors. By contrast, multiparity, family history of breast cancer and induced abortion increased the risk of breast cancer.”

 

The Turkish study “Breast cancer risk factors in Turkish women – a University Hospital based nested case control study” was published on April 8, 2009 in the World Journal of Surgical Oncology. It concluded: “These findings suggest that age and induced abortion were found to be significantly associated with increased breast cancer risk whereas oral contraceptive use was observed to be associated with decreased breast cancer risk among Turkish women in Istanbul.”

 

The Sri Lankan study “Prolonged breastfeeding reduces risk of breast cancer in Sri Lankan women: a case-control study” was published in Cancer Epidemiology in June 2010. It concluded, in part: “The significant factors associated with increased risk of breast cancer were: post-menopausal women (OR=1.74; 95%CI=1.01, 3.01); having an abortion in the past (OR=3.42; 95%CI=1.75, 6.66) and exposure to passive smoking (OR=2.96, 95%CI=1.53, 5.75).” In other words, as the Daily Mail UK reported, although the study was focused on the association between the duration of breastfeeding and the risk of breast cancer, other risk factors were discovered, and “the highest of the reported risk factors was abortion.”

 

The Seattle study “Risk Factors for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in Women Under Age 45” was published in April 2009 in Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention. The study concluded, in part: “In analyses of all 897 breast cancer cases (subtypes combined), the multivariate-adjusted odds ratios for examined risk factors were consistent with the effects observed in prior studies of younger women . Specifically, older age, family history of breast cancer, earlier menarche age, induced abortion, and OC (oral contraceptive) use were associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.”

 

The Seattle study was remarkable not just for its conclusion, but because of the identity of one of the authors, Dr. Louise A. Brinton, MPH, Ph. D. It so happens that Dr. Brinton works for the National Cancer Institute and was one of the organizers of the NCI’s 2003 workshop that produced the study that NARAL cites as the sole authority for their sweeping claim of no abortion/breast cancer link. Unfortunately for NARAL, while Dr. Brinton may have held that opinion in 2003, she no longer does. From the Daily Mail UK “Earlier this year, Dr Louise Brinton, a senior researcher with the U.S. National Cancer Institute who did not accept the link, reversed her position to say she was now convinced abortion increased the risk of breast cancer by about 40 per cent.”

 

Unlike Planned Parenthood, NARAL does not even seriously pretend to be interested in women’s health, only in electing pro-abortion politicians and passing pro-abortion legislation. Their mission statement reads: “NARAL Pro-Choice California is the political arm of the pro-choice movement. We educate voters about reproductive rights in California. We provide resources and information for voters who want to support pro-choice legislation and elect pro-choice legislators.”

 

This is information which serves to prove my counterclaim about Sharron Angle - her belief that Abortion can cause Breast Cancer is not nuts.

 

This information also refutes FeelingMN's claim to the contrary. I'm sorry you didn't have doctors that told you the truth about abortion, Feeling - but your wife didn't have that anyway.

[IMMensaMind 459]

For the record, that was only one of several statements from Angle that I posted, ranging from "well outside the mainstream" to "factually inaccurate."

 

Her belief that abortion and breast cancer are linked was less troubling to me than the fact that she thinks the 9/11 hijackers entered the states via Canada or her bill pushing for Scientology style massage and saunda treatment in prisons.

 

 

I posted repudiations of both attacks, and you have not answered.

[Willis McGahee's Dentist 61]

It's official. MensaManiac is the most long-winded, arrogant, condescending, boring poster in the board's history. God, it's painful.

[Secret Asian Man 26]

It's official. MensaManiac is the most long-winded, arrogant, condescending, boring poster in the board's history. God, it's painful.

 

My tooth hurty. You purr rong time?

 

[Know Doubt 0]

Feel sad, leftist? Miserable? Need another handout? Another self-esteem class? I am who I am; I've posted enough information that you can conclude what you want. Fact is all lefties try to gang up and beat what they're afraid of.

 

Too bad you're afraid of free discourse. Sad, really. You disagree, but you're so emotional about it that you really don't know how to respond except with vitriol. It's not as though you've gotten impatient trying to explain; you haven't even put up an argument.

 

 

If I cannot get you to see the more sound argument, bothering you trying is good enough.

 

 

Wow, touch a nerve?

I only commented on all you've tried to feed us humble pie with.

 

You of course since I seemingly in your mind disagreed with you assumed that I'm a liberal or Democrat.

I didn't disagree.

Show us where I disagreed with you in this thread.

[IMMensaMind 459]

Wow, touch a nerve?

I only commented on all you've tried to feed us humble pie with.

 

You of course since I seemingly in your mind disagreed with you assumed that I'm a liberal or Democrat.

I didn't disagree.

Show us where I disagreed with you in this thread.

 

Who cares? You were disagreeable. I invite disagreement. Insulting without offering something substantive is just stoopid.

[IMMensaMind 459]

It's official. MensaManiac is the most long-winded, arrogant, condescending, boring poster in the board's history. God, it's painful.

 

It's ok: that pain you feel is you learning something. I know, I know: learning something from a Conservative strikes you as so....impossible - but here you are, not knowing how to react to it. Ejecting bile is a natural bodily function of someone attempting to digest something, it's just not going smoothly for you right now.

 

No problem...you'll get over it..

[MDC 5,895]

I posted repudiations of both attacks, and you have not answered.

 

I haven't answered because:

 

1. I don't think that anything I could say would ever change your mind so why waste the keystrokes?

2. Responding seriously to you is just inviting another one of your boring diatribes.

 

Besides, you clearly have the advantage because you're such an excellent typist and I'm here for entertainment, not to be bored to tears by FFT's version of the Comic Book Guy on the Simpsons. It's just easier and more satisfying to tell you to shut your fat piehole.

[IMMensaMind 459]

I haven't answered because:

 

1. I don't think that anything I could say would ever change your mind so why waste the keystrokes?

2. Responding seriously to you is just inviting another one of your boring diatribes.

 

Besides, you clearly have the advantage because you're such an excellent typist and I'm here for entertainment, not to be bored to tears by FFT's version of the Comic Book Guy on the Simpsons. It's just easier and more satisfying to tell you to shut your fat piehole.

 

Okay - so you cannot back up your opinions. Duly noted, but also not surprised. I will always cherish the initial misconception I had about you.

 

[Willis McGahee's Dentist 61]

It's ok: that pain you feel is you learning something. I know, I know: learning something from a Conservative strikes you as so....impossible - but here you are, not knowing how to react to it. Ejecting bile is a natural bodily function of someone attempting to digest something, it's just not going smoothly for you right now.

 

No problem...you'll get over it..

I'm talking about your long-winded multiquotes about breast cancer and how you're just repeating yourself over and over and over again. You are a bore! I could care less about your politics. Between that and your tendency to try to build up your low self-esteem by pretending you're things you're not (a genius, a tough guy, and some 9% ripped physical speciman for example), you must be a freaking nightmare for your wife to live with. Yuk! Better her than me.

[MDC 5,895]

Okay - so you cannot back up your opinions. Duly noted, but also not surprised. I will always cherish the initial misconception I had about you.

 

 

The same Post story claimed that as a legislator, Angle had supported “a prison rehabilitation program promoted by the Church of Scientology and involving massage and saunas.”

 

Seeking to “clear the record,” Angle told us “I am not even sure that the Church of Scientology fits into it at all. You have to make some quantum leaps here.”

 

She noted “the program itself is a multifaceted program, and it had two protocols: one in the area of withdrawals, and it was a natural withdrawal system. As s you know, that can have some severe physical side effects and the cramping that was involved there required that other people be taught how to relieve the cramping. So that is where it said that people were being massaged.”

 

“The second protocol was what they called the ‘disintoxification,’ which was actually sweating the drug out of one’s system so that there were no longer any cravings for the drug. This is a very intense potassium, calcium, vitamin, mineral regimen, with a hot rock sauna that sweats the toxins out. Those two protocols were developed by [the late Church of Scientology founder] L. Ron Hubbard, and they had to give him credit. But it is not Scientology, but rather natural homeopathic medicine.”

 

So Sharron Angle supported some kind of Scientology-backed sauna and massage detox program in prisons. That's from a conservative pub called Human Events.

 

What prompted the Canadian Ambassador to send the letter were statements made on Oct. 16, 2001 while Angle was speaking to Hispanic students at Rancho High School in Las Vegas. Her campaign is running commercials against illegal immigration and one of the students asked her why all of the illegal immigrants portrayed in her campaign videos were Latinos.

 

Angle’s answer, quoted in the Las Vegas Sun, was as follows:

 

“I think that you’re misinterpreting those commercials. I’m not sure that those are Latinos in the commercial. What it is, is a fence and there are people coming across that fence. What we know is that our northern border is where the terrorists came through. That’s the most porous border we have. We cannot allow terrorists; we cannot allow anyone to come across our border if we don’t know why they’re coming. So we have to secure all of our borders and that’s what that was about, is border security. Not just our southern border, but our coastal border and our northern border.”

 

That quote was in the Las Vegas Sun but here's the Link.

 

By the way, the "abortions cause breast cancer" myth is a favorite of Pro Lifers but it's been thoroughly debunked.

 

I'll even throw in a bonus one:

 

The mayor of Dearborn, Mich., rejected assertions by Nevada Senate candidate Sharron Angle that Islamic religious law, or “sharia,” had taken hold of the Detroit suburb. Angle made the claim after saying a “militant terrorist situation” exists in parts of the United States.

 

“There’s no sharia law in Dearborn, Mich. … It isn’t even talked about in Dearborn,” Mayor Jack O’Reilly told CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Monday night. “This is an invention of some people who have, as their goal, they believe that Muslim faith is a false faith, it’s dishonest. And they really believe at the heart of it … that if Muslims won’t convert, they should be removed from America.”

 

...

 

 

Angle, a Republican running against Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, met with a Nevada tea party group in late September and was asked to share her thoughts about Muslims “wanting to take over the United States” and “taking over a city in Michigan.”

 

Angle responded: “We’re talking about a militant terrorist situation, which I believe isn’t a widespread thing, but it is enough that we need to address, and we have been addressing it,” according to a recording of the event the Mesquite Local News provided to multiple media outlets.

 

“My thoughts are these. First of all, Dearborn, Mich., and Frankford, Texas, are on American soil and under constitutional law. Not sharia law. And I don’t know how that happened in the United States,” Angle added. “It seems to me there is something fundamentally wrong with allowing a foreign system of law to even take hold in any municipality or government situation in our United States.”

 

While Dearborn has a large Muslim population, Angle’s reference to Frankford is unclear. The city was annexed by Dallas in 1975, and a CNN camera crew found that a small church and cemetery are all that remain.

 

In his letter to Angle, O’Reilly wrote that Muslims and Christians have lived peacefully alongside each other in Dearborn for decades.

 

“I am deeply distressed that you have been misled about our community and the way that we conduct our affairs,” he wrote. “Muslims have been practicing their faith in our community for almost 90 years without incident or conflict. To suggest that they have taken over ignores the fact that Dearborn hosts seven mosques and 60 Christian churches.”

 

Here is your Link.

 

So there you go. Sharron Angle supports saunas and massages in prison, thinks the 9/11 hijackers came from Canada, and believes that Muslims have established sharia law in a Texas ghost town.

[MedStudent 56]

So Sharron Angle supported some kind of Scientology-backed sauna and massage detox program in prisons. That's from a conservative pub called Human Events.

 

 

 

That quote was in the Las Vegas Sun but here's the Link.

 

By the way, the "abortions cause breast cancer" myth is a favorite of Pro Lifers but it's been thoroughly debunked.

 

I'll even throw in a bonus one:

 

 

 

Here is your Link.

 

So there you go. Sharron Angle supports saunas and massages in prison, thinks the 9/11 hijackers came from Canada, and believes that Muslims have established sharia law in a Texas ghost town.

 

so, like i said 200 posts ago, sharron angle is a nut. A focken certifiable looney who couldn't beat the most unpopular senator in the USA. And mensa still is trying to prove a link between cancer and abortion with his links to pro-life whacko sites.

[IGotWorms 3,317]

I really don't care for this "IMMensaMind" d0uchenozzle alias.

[IMMensaMind 459]

I'm talking about your long-winded multiquotes about breast cancer and how you're just repeating yourself over and over and over again. You are a bore! I could care less about your politics. Between that and your tendency to try to build up your low self-esteem by pretending you're things you're not (a genius, a tough guy, and some 9% ripped physical speciman for example), you must be a freaking nightmare for your wife to live with. Yuk! Better her than me.

 

I'm repeating myself? People continue to attempt to claim that they're correct, in spite of very strong evidence that they're not. You don't seem to have a problem with those people, though, because you're a lib!

 

On the other stuff, you're exaggerating to try to besmirch me. I don't lie. I never said I was a genius; I said I've had this nickname for years; was given to me by my oldest daughter, because I took and passed the MENSA exam. I said that people would never insult me (or anyone else) in person; just over the 'net - the rest was just having fun (but I am ex-military regardless, and I am tougher than most). I said I reduced my body fat from 18% to 9%, and that's true (but I haven't checked in a couple of months). I did P90X to do it, and I changed my diet. I may be @ 10% now, but there is no way I'm more than 1% off, because I look roughly the same. Donhaas doesn't live far from me; he can verify what I'm saying anytime he wants.

 

Tomorrow is my 17th wedding anniversary. My marriage and my girls are my greatest blessing, so you needn't worry about my wife. You libs are so creative: it's funny just how much fiction you have to conjure to try to turn me into a bad person simply because you don't like what I've said while sharing things about me and my life.

 

HTH

[IMMensaMind 459]

I really don't care for this "IMMensaMind" d0uchenozzle alias.

 

You're a liberal. Who's surprised?

[TAS 2]

I have no idea who is right or wrong in this whole political crap, and I could care less. But when someone claims 9% body fat weighing 220 lbs, I call BS.

[IMMensaMind 459]

So Sharron Angle supported some kind of Scientology-backed sauna and massage detox program in prisons. That's from a conservative pub called Human Events.

 

You're stretching - and this is not surprising. She said herself that she's not even sure how the Scientology thing fits into this. This is a program that was supported by leftists in the prison rehabilitation system, and she has dropped it, but was interested in how it worked, and if it worked. This program's beta existed before she thought to support looking into it for effectiveness.

 

She would support it if the results warranted it. That was all - at least as far as I can tell. Massage is massage; sauna is sauna. Labeling it as something boogeymanish for you to work off of is basically nothing more than more character assassination from the left, and a loser tactic.

 

That quote was in the Las Vegas Sun but here's the Link.

 

Actually, as I posted, it was a position that the New York Times held as well. You may want to take up your claim that those who hold that position are nuts with them as well.

 

By the way, the "abortions cause breast cancer" myth is a favorite of Pro Lifers but it's been thoroughly debunked.

 

Pay attention, Dentist: here's another trogolodyte completely ignoring - again - absolutely definitive refutation of a claim they've made. MDC just bulldozes right through the repudiation, as though doing so will make it go away.

 

It hasn't been thoroughly debunked, you mental midget. As I've posted, several prominent medical publications have refuted your asinine claim. My evidence > your evidence. It isn't even close.

 

I'll even throw in a bonus one:

 

Here is your Link.

 

So there you go. Sharron Angle supports saunas and massages in prison, thinks the 9/11 hijackers came from Canada, and believes that Muslims have established sharia law in a Texas ghost town.

 

I have refuted this as well. There is clear evidence of the influence being exerted by Sharia law in Michigan; I posted that evidence. Denials by those who find it politically expedient to deny don't change the fact that what I posted is proof of the influence, and that is what she said.

 

You can disagree with her positions, as you are entitled to your own opinion. You are not entitled to your own facts.

[IMMensaMind 459]

I have no idea who is right or wrong in this whole political crap, and I could care less. But when someone claims 9% body fat weighing 220 lbs, I call BS.

 

And why would that be? I'm nearly 6'4"!

[TAS 2]

And why would that be? I'm nearly 6'4"!

 

You may be right, I just find it hard to believe. I fought for quite some time at 127 lbs, coming down from 150. My body fat was 11% and I was rail thin (not that hat has everything to do with body fat). You would have to almost be in semi body building cycle to be at 9% body fat with your measurables.

[IMMensaMind 459]

You may be right, I just find it hard to believe. I fought for quite some time at 127 lbs, coming down from 150. My body fat was 11% and I was rail thin (not that hat has everything to do with body fat). You would have to almost be in semi body building cycle to be at 9% body fat with your measurables.

 

rail thin @ 11%??? Something was wrong with how you were measured, or you didn't have much in the way of lean muscle mass. I don't know of another explanation. How were you measured? Caliper, or submerged?