Kingbee, I don't believe that Britain is to blame for Arab expansionism.

And as for Nicaragua or the rest of the Americas, I have not even addressed any of that. So why bring it up as if if I was somehow wrong about it?

As for me launching a "scam", I'm afraid I don't know what you are talking about. You might have read all I wrote, but you CERTAINLY did not understand much of it. You repeatedly brought up issues that have either not been part of what I wrote (like my opinion regarding "neocon" involvement in Nicaragua) or that I must be a "crackhead" (because I saw Nazis and pacifists demonstrate together).

You are trying not to discredit my point, but my person. And that, my friend, is an ad-hominem and a logical fallacy. If you have ANYTHING to say regarding why so-called pacifists demonstrate against democratic countries fighting fascists but not against fascists fighting absolutely anyone, I suggest you keep quiet. I certainly won't reply to you any more. There is no point in doing so.

Reply #28 By: Citizen kingbee - 4/29/2005 1:46:04 AM Right = Less Government Control Left = Total Government Control that makes anarchists rightwingers?

Yes, they are the true right wing. Same with the survival nuts too. Ruby Ridge, Tim McVaey, Free Range Ranchers of the west are all the real Right wingers. The radio talk show host Micheal Savage is by far more of a Right Winger then say Rush.

The only reason anarchists show up to left wing events is to cause trouble. Trouble that they hope, will not only see the left wingers crushed, but the Government weakened. Communist are the natural enemy of the anarchist. Governments tie both groups together in their PR so that they can use the anarchist's violence to justify the crackdown on the left wingers.

Also Neo-Cons are not as far to the Right as you think (almost leftist in some respects). The History of who the orginanal Neo-cons where/are would shock you.

I'll see about posting some remarks this weekend on the Neo-Cons.

Andrew, I wonder what you and other JoeUsers think of the article comment by Simon Walters in The Mail On Sunday (London August 20)):

Quote: A senior Downing Street source said that, privately, Mr Blair broadly agrees with John Prescott, who said Mr Bush's record on the issue (Road map, Middle East peace),was "crap".
The source said: "We all feel badly let down by Bush . We thought we had persuaded him to take the Israel-Palestine situation seriously, but we were wrong. How can anyone have faith in a man of such low intellect?" Unquote

I'd have blogged on this but it invites comment in the light of Andrew's article. Also, I wonder where the papers come up with these sources?

To the point: Is Bush taking the Middle East seriously?

The real question is the premise: Should Bush take the middle east seriously? Why should we care of the Palestinians are happy? What is so significant about Israel/Palestine where so much effort should be made about it?

that makes anarchists rightwingers?

I always thought anarchism meant 'without rulership'. It is still possible to have systems in place that facilitate daily life, systems that may well be considered by some as left, central or right.

Anyway, that was my understanding of anarchism.

"One of the reasons I left Germany is because I didn't want that any more. I left a country where synagogues are always guarded by the police for a country where synagogues are only occasionally vandalised when a few idiots paint swastikas on them, presumably to protest Jewish barbarism or something like that."

As I'm sure you are aware, Ireland has never had a Jewish population of any significant size, so to praise the Irish for a lack of anti-Semitism is a moot point.

Whereas in Germany, the Jewish population has tripled in the past fifteen years, a fact which can only cause the deepest joy.

As I'm sure you are aware, Ireland has never had a Jewish population of any significant size, so to praise the Irish for a lack of anti-Semitism is a moot point.

You probably realise that what is an intellectual exercise for you is a fact of life for me. I don't care about the why, I care about the what.

Also, the United Kingdom has always had a Jewish population of a somewhat significant size, yet the holocaust happened on the continent. And what makes the British more anti-Semitic now doesn't seem to be the number of Jews, but the number of (so-called) Muslims among their population.

A minor point is perhaps that the Irish, in contract to the Germans, confront foreigners as newcomers rather than strangers. I have seen little "they take our jobs" here, while such complaints are as common in Germany as they are silly and wrong.

Whereas in Germany, the Jewish population has tripled in the past fifteen years, a fact which can only cause the deepest joy.

That is reason for joy. But I do not plan to return to the continent. I simply don't see how it can save itself.


But be that as it may, I think I should announce that I blog more in the coming weeks. I have more to tell from Israel, the country where synagogues, mosques, and churches stand next to each other, and where I felt quite at home (apart from the heat).