My name is Stephen Clarke. It's not a state secret.
Excellent! You're name will be added to the Schryver-Danite hall of shame.
I don't remember that, but I'm sorry it still rankles
Sure you do. When Ritner's email was revealed, the first thing you did was google a way to discredit me.
In any case, you do not have clean hands when it comes to indulging in online gossip and whisper campaigns against Robert Ritner.
My hands are completely washed clean of the despicable rumor mill that goes on behind closed doors among the apologetic elite. That "whisper campaign" originated on the FAIR e-list (saying Ritner had an extreme bias because, like Quinn, he was homosexual) and as you well know, I shared that rumor when I was an active apologist, in an attempt to discredit Ritner as biased. In other words, I played my role in the smear tactics that are so popular among apologists. I also apologized to Ritner for that, which is the real difference between Dan Peterson and I. He refuses to apologizes for anything. Ever.
I don't like to see anyone unfairly smeared by online character assassins.
Uh huh. Your response to the Ritner fiasco speaks to the contrary. For five years Dan Peterson had been smearing him based on nothing more than hearsay, and you never so much as hinted that you didn't like it. Not once. But the second I caught him in a flat footed lie by posting Ritner's response for the whole internet reading world to see, the only thing you could think to do was google up some way to attack me for engaging in the same kind of behavior expected from all loyalist apologists like you, Schryver and Peterson. Something I passed along roughly a decade ago when I was a blind apologist like the rest of you.