As your last question showed that since you don't read my full answers
Sorry you didn't recognize your full posts which I quoted.
You failed to admit your statements were inconsistent even after I showed you the evidence. You continue to make outlandish statements and when I call our statements into question you simply say I misunderstand what your saying. I can only respond to what you write and what I conclude you are trying to say based on what you write.
Did you not say all Arab countries which have the Qur'an as their constitution are following Islamism. And then did you not say when well really they are Islamic not followers of Islamism? This is simple and straightforward. If I made such an error I would be more than happy that someone noticed an inconsistency in my arguments so I may either re-evaluate my argument or fix the problem. You have done neither. You would prefer to intimate that I have the problem. The only problem I have is with what you say.
there isn't an answer I can give that will satisfy you
Actually it is easy. Give answers which are consistent with what you say.
If you say all governments which have the Qur'an as their constitution are followers of Islamism then it follows that SA is a follower of Islamism. But when you follow that by saying well no I mean Islamic. When I ask the question, which is it Islamic or follower of Islamism, you fail to answer. If you say one or the other you have to admit that a previous statement is incorrect. The only way out for your argument is to admit what you really mean is they are Islamic. I know it defeats your argument but at least it is consistent. Go figure out another angle for your beliefs.
Another easy way is for you to preface statements of your beliefs by saying .... I believe without any facts or evidence to support my statement the following ... Yep people have beliefs which are unsupported by anything but something inside them ... I have them you have them but I don't use them as facts for anything. I am not interested in your beliefs and certainly will not argue with you about them. If however you do an analysis of a set of facts and have an interpretation which differs from mine, I am more than interested and will discuss.
