He only posted the sources that support his allegation of Mo being a pedo, leaving out the contradictory researchers, and being presented with it with his usual reaction of the author/source being an apologist. See above. "incriminate every muslim as being a pedo": this allegation is used everywhere against Muslims to incriminate them as such, unless you have been blind for it. I didnot say however that DRB300 did so, I said this pedo matter is used as such by others. Problem reading carefully? About integrity, is posting about something like that, while leaving out the counter evidence a sign of integrity. Put in another way: is a Justice department acting with integrity when they put a person on trial by using only the material that supports their stance and leaving out the evidence that points in the other direction? I asked you the question, if DRB300 statement is undeniably true, given other sources with other opinions and not claim he did unfairly portray him as such. I gave you the decision about it with my addition to his quotes. In my question I didnot claim anything you attribute to me in my question to you. Trouble reading carefully? I asked you these questions, not claims as you used his statement as a point towards L75 "Yes it is very likely and very common that 9 year old girls want to have sex with 50 year old men When you read this proof of him: You cannot be serious when you post such a ridiculous piece as support for your point. This guy must have a sore thumb sucking this nonsense from it.