Will you just come out with it, Lord Jim? With specifics?

[Andrew D]

You continually accuse me of dishonesty.

Okay. Quote my words which you claim to have been dishonest, and state the grounds on which you base that claim.

That is something which anyone making such a claim should be willing -- even eager -- to do.

By way of example, you asserted that my "assertion is that 'most' prosecutors in this country suborn perjury". In fact, what I said was that most prosecutors "would" do so under certain circumstances.

So there we are. I have quoted your words which I claim to have been dishonest, and I have stated the ground on which I base that claim: You twisted my words into something which my actual words did not say.

And I am not alone in noticing the facts which underly that conclusion. Another poster remarked the difference between "what Andrew had actually written, rather than your re- (mis-) statement of his contention".

That is not to say that anyone else has concluded that you were being dishonest. That is not for me to say. But the fact on which I base my claim has been noticed by others.

So come out with it.

What, exactly, are my words which you claim to have been dishonest, and what, exactly, are the grounds on which you base that claim?