You euros...

J.Reb · Feb 18, 2003, 11:18 PM

seem to be saying things and taking positions regarding Saddam based mostly on anti-US sentiment. I sense that while I hear words like "Saddam must disarm" that all the fervor is put into anti-US posturing. Is this true?

FuNsTeR · Feb 19, 2003, 11:41 AM

its Bush we do not like with his shytty attitude , his politics is that of "a bull in a china shop" , plus i don't like his attitude of "either your with us or your against us" it is a attitude of a bully , this so called Iraqis conflict ... is a joke (not a funny one) claims of WMD ... America used chemical weapons in Veitnam ... so why are you not being dis-armed ? for decades your US goverments turned a blind eye to NorAid collecting funds for the terrorist organization the Irish Republican Army to kill and maim your so called oldest Ally's civilians and Military personel ... that will never be forgiven ... American goverments have supported more Dictators , despots and terrorists than any other nation ... yet you expect us Europeans to trust your goverments .... we are not blind we see the games your up to the war hasn't started and already General Franks is earmarked to be the governor of Iraq and deals been struck with multi national oil companies to run Iraq's Oil feilds .... Bush has made himself perfectly clear on that one

Without a second union resolution their will be no UK participation .... if blair does go to war he won't be in power long enough to see the war finished

Frodo301 · Feb 19, 2003, 12:42 PM

.

Funster please define what you mean when you say the US used chemical weapons in Vietnam. If you are speaking in reference to Agent Orange that was used an herbicide and it was not until later if was found/admitted to have harmful side effects. For accurate info. on Agent Orange please see this website: http://www.lewispublishing.com/orange.htm
Having served in the US armed forces, stationed in Europe for almost four years and having the pleasure to visit most of the countries represented by the UN & more I personally think it is not so much the anti-American attitude as it is a disregrad for the *current* attitude/mandates of the UN. I think if President Bush would allow the inspector's a little more time, change his reason for attacking for the best of the people of Iraq instead of against a war on terror he would more then likely find more support for an invasion/attack of Iraq from Europe and inside the United States. This all being said I still say that the proof is in the pudding and we have all we need as a *world* to attack now. Twelve years is a long amount of time to give anyone a peaceful ability to disarm

raid517 · Feb 19, 2003, 10:21 PM

You rednecks... seem to think the world revolves around you, which it doesn't. That democracy in other countries is contrary to US interests, except when it agrees with Republican party objectives, which it isn't, that criticising your leadership signifies a dislike/hatred of all Americans, which is just plumb stupid.

I'll tell you what, if ant-Americanism (given the whacko definitions that you seem to have for it) is such a crime, then how I define anti-Euroism a crime too? Why is it a crime? Well like you J.Reb, pretty much just because I say it is. Seems to work well enough for you, so why not for everyone else too? Go J.Reb confess, your just a plumb old xenophobe, plain and simple.

Q

ToshiroOC · Feb 19, 2003, 11:08 PM

Now, now, raid, remember, don't insult the person (though he might not find it insulting), insult their beliefs

raid517 · Feb 19, 2003, 11:48 PM

Lol come on ToshiroOC, this guy uses Euros like it's a derogatory term. As if all Europeans and their views could be lumped together under one title. (A bit like the use of the word ni*gars to address a group of people you don't like). This guy has variously referred to other nationalities as trash, Japanese as Japs (even I know that is a no-no) and has referred to another forum member as a 'miserable cretin', he has told members they have the intellectual capacity of a gnat, insulted every nationality from French, to German to Swedish to Belgian, to Canadian to just about anybody you can care to think of that comes from beyond America's shores - and some within - and yet he doesn't get called for it. But if someone responds with the obvious retort that he is just a dumb redneck ,it suddenly becomes an issue? Well either forum rules apply or they don't ,and I'm very sorry if I overstepped them, but there should be a tad more balance in all this I think. Perhaps I could have phrased it different though? Maybe I should have said something like, "hey why don't you buy a nice thick scarf to hide that bright red neck of yours"? In any case, either way, if the label fits you should wear it.

Q

Falstaff · Feb 19, 2003, 11:53 PM

Euro's is used in place of any other racial or cultural slur. Clearly it is getting easier to determine who or whom we are discussing issues with, don't fall into the trap RAID517. Remain objective and somehow, the insults might turn into real salient points. at least I hope so.

J.Reb · Feb 20, 2003, 02:54 AM

A BRIEF ANALYSIS ....

Original post....

You euros...
seem to be saying things and taking positions regarding Saddam based mostly on anti-US sentiment. I sense that while I hear words like "Saddam must disarm" that all the fervor is put into anti-US posturing. Is this true?

Responses....

You rednecks ... seem to think the world revolves around you, which it doesn't. That democracy in other countries is contrary to US interests, except when it agrees with Republican party objectives, which it isn't, that criticising your leadership signifies a dislike/hatred of all Americans, which is just plumb stupid.

I'll tell you what, if ant-Americanism (given the whacko definitions that you seem to have for it) is such a crime, then how I define anti-Euroism a crime too? Why is it a crime? Well like you J.Reb, pretty much just because I say it is. Seems to work well enough for you, so why not for everyone else too? Go J.Reb confess, your just a plumb old xenophobe, plain and simple.

Now, now, raid, remember, don't insult the person (though he might not find it insulting), insult their beliefs

Lol come on ToshiroOC, this guy uses Euros like it's a derogatory term. As if all Europeans and their views could be lumped together under one title. (A bit like the use of the word ni*gars to address a group of people you don't like). This guy has variously referred to other nationalities as trash, Japanese as Japs (even I know that is a no-no) and has referred to another forum member as a 'miserable cretin', he has told members they have the intellectual capacity of a gnat, insulted every nationality from French, to German to Swedish to Belgian, to Canadian to just about anybody you can care to think of that comes from beyond America's shores - and some within - and yet he doesn't get called for it. But if someone responds with the obvious retort that he is just a dumb redneck ,it suddenly becomes an issue? Well either forum rules apply or they don't ,and I'm very sorry if I overstepped them, but there should be a tad more balance in all this I think. Perhaps I could have phrased it different though? Maybe I should have said something like, "hey why don't you buy a nice thick scarf to hide that bright red neck of yours"? In any case, either way, if the label fits you should wear it.

Euro's is used in place of any other racial or cultural slur. Clearly it is getting easier to determine who or whom we are discussing issues with, don't fall into the trap RAID517. Remain objective and somehow, the insults might turn into real salient points. at least I hope so.

Conclusions ....

raid - has bigger psychological problems that I thought. It borders stalking and dementia.

Toshiro - you join in the insults and are not worthy of being called a moderator.

jeff - is an appeaser who tries to ingratiate himself.

Next time any of you post on my thread, deal only with the subject matter and refrain from insults of any kind. If you find this impossible to do, then go elsewhere for your titillations.

ToshiroOC · Feb 20, 2003, 03:17 AM

Quote:

Now, now, raid, remember, don't insult the person (though he might not find it insulting), insult their beliefs

I didn't mean to insult you, J.Reb, and I'm sorry you saw it that way. I have several friends who, to my dismay, proudly call themselves homophobes and/or xenophobes (in less... polite terms, and mainly in reference to the people they don't like). They are good people all around, but they just have extremely contrary and strong views on those topics. If I called one of em a homophobe to his face, he would say "Damn straight!". I was just trying to post a friendly warning to raid that though you might not be insulted by being called that, he should avoid insulting you and should instead insult your beliefs (a.k.a. DEBATE, as this forum is intended.)

Quote:

Toshiro - you join in the insults and are not worthy of being called a moderator.

Quote:

Next time any of you post on my thread, deal only with the subject matter and refrain from insults of any kind. If you find this impossible to do, then go elsewhere for your titillations.

J.Reb, I couldn't care less than a rat's ass about what you think I am worthy of. I am a moderator, and that is that. If you have a genuine problem with it, take it up with one of the staff members, but otherwise, kindly keep your mouth shut (this is a request from me, ToshiroOC, not ToshiroOC-the-moderator). However, I will take issue with you over:

Quote:

jeff - is an appeaser who tries to ingratiate himself.

and

Quote:

raid - has bigger psychological problems that I thought. It borders stalking and dementia.

This is a forum for debate, not insults. If you want to insult each other, go over to the flame warzone and don't come back til you've thoroughly vented. I will ask EVERYONE in this thread to not continue on this line in this thread in this forum, and get back to the topic at hand.

With that said,

Quote:

You euros... seem to be saying things and taking positions regarding Saddam based mostly on anti-US sentiment. I sense that while I hear words like "Saddam must disarm" that all the fervor is put into anti-US posturing. Is this true?

I think that the only country that is genuinely anti-US in Europe when it comes to the war is France - France has been trying to extricate it's foreign policy from the iron grip of post-cold-war USA, and is going against the USA for the sole reason that it feels that it needs to go against the US to get away from the influence of the US on it. However, I think that a lot of the anti-war sentiment in G.B., France, Germany, and other countries is a genuine cry against war. I think that if any other country was threatening to take over Iraq in a blaze of fire, the same people would be going out and protesting the same war. Imagine what your reaction would be if you learned that Russia had decided that North Korea was a terrorist threat, and then basically said that it was going to invade and occupy Korea - if you abstract it to those countries, you can see things from a more European perspective...

-ToshiroOC

ToshiroOC · Feb 20, 2003, 03:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by raid517
Lol come on ToshiroOC, this guy uses Euros like it's a derogatory term. As if all Europeans and their views could be lumped together under one title. (A bit like the use of the word ni*gars to address a group of people you don't like). This guy has variously referred to other nationalities as trash, Japanese as Japs (even I know that is a no-no) and has referred to another forum member as a 'miserable cretin', he has told members they have the intellectual capacity of a gnat, insulted every nationality from French, to German to Swedish to Belgian, to Canadian to just about anybody you can care to think of that comes from beyond America's shores - and some within - and yet he doesn't get called for it. But if someone responds with the obvious retort that he is just a dumb redneck ,it suddenly becomes an issue? Well either forum rules apply or they don't ,and I'm very sorry if I overstepped them, but there should be a tad more balance in all this I think. Perhaps I could have phrased it different though? Maybe I should have said something like, "hey why don't you buy a nice thick scarf to hide that bright red neck of yours"? In any case, either way, if the label fits you should wear it.

Q

It was just a friendly warning to keep things on topic and keep things from degenerating into name calling (and I think this thread started off on the wrong foot as far as that goes)... see my post above

I don't recall the posts you are talking about that you think are insulting - if you want, we can discuss this over PM and you can show me the relevant links. Anyone who wishes to discuss anything in this post or my previous one should either do it in a different thread, as PART of a post that is primarily on topic, or over PM (as I would prefer). Thank you for cooperating.

-ToshiroOC

EDIT: I looked back quickly, and for future reference, the phrase that made me want to post that simple little warning was this:

Quote:

Go J.Reb confess, your just a plumb old xenophobe, plain and simple.

Again, some people take pride in that sort of thing, some people are insulted by it.

J.Reb · Feb 20, 2003, 04:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ToshiroOC
I didn't mean to insult you, J.Reb, and I'm sorry you saw it that way. I have several friends who, to my dismay, proudly call themselves homophobes and/or xenophobes (in less... polite terms, and mainly in reference to the people they don't like). They are good people all around, but they just have extremely contrary and strong views on those topics. If I called one of em a homophobe to his face, he would say "Damn straight!". I was just trying to post a friendly warning to raid that though you might not be insulted by being called that, he should avoid insulting you and should instead insult your beliefs (a.k.a. DEBATE, as this forum is intended.)

J.Reb, I couldn't care less than a rat's ass about what you think I am worthy of. I am a moderator, and that is that. If you have a genuine problem with it, take it up with one of the staff members, but otherwise, kindly keep your mouth shut (this is a request from me, ToshiroOC, not ToshiroOC-the-moderator).

Hey.....if you as "moderator" had not allowed the numerous insults to continue and remain posted, I would have said nothing. The next time I get gang-banged under your very nose I will be speaking to your superior, guaranteed. These people dealt in no way with the content of the thread. Get some glasses.

and

This is a forum for debate, not insults. If you want to insult each other, go over to the flame warzone and don't come back til you've thoroughly vented. I will ask EVERYONE in this thread to not continue on this line in this thread in this forum, and get back to the topic at hand.

That is agreed.

With that said,

I think that the only country that is genuinely anti-US in Europe when it comes to the war is France - France has been trying to extricate it's foreign policy from the iron grip of post-cold-war USA, and is going against the USA for the sole reason that it feels that it needs to go against the US to get away from the influence of the US on it.

I agree, but that is damn sad reasoning when dealing with a madman with WMD. It isn't a question of a legit gripe or not, it is a matter of faulty judgement in a time of crisis.

However, I think that a lot of the anti-war sentiment in G.B., France, Germany, and other countries is a genuine cry against war. I think that if any other country was threatening to take over Iraq in a blaze of fire, the same people would be going out and protesting the same war.

Are you aware of the shady groups who sponsor these demonstrations? Somewhere I have a list of the ones that sponsored the demonstration in I think Washington, and it reads like a whos-who of communist front organizations and anti-US groups. The signs you see on TV are mostly all anti-US, as are their typical comments. I am not convinced that it is primarily about war for most of them.

Secondly, remember that once before when the "peace" demonstrators got their way and the US pulled out of Vietnam, 2 million Cambodians got slaughtered by the NV. Demonstrations are fine, but they generally should not be taken out of context in terms of importance. And as I said above, the source must also be considered.

Imagine what your reaction would be if you learned that Russia had decided that North Korea was a terrorist threat, and then basically said that it was going to invade and occupy Korea - if you abstract it to those countries, you can see things from a more European perspective...

Yes, that is discomfiting, but the euros looking back over the last 100 years should be able to clearly distinguish between the US and the USSR. If they cannot, then God help us.

-ToshiroOC [/b]

ToshiroOC · Feb 20, 2003, 04:42 AM

Quote:

Hey.....if you as "moderator" had not allowed the numerous insults to continue and remain posted, I would have said nothing. The next time I get gang-banged under your very nose I will be speaking to your superior, guaranteed. These people dealt in no way with the content of the thread. Get some glasses.

I feel no need to defend my performance as a moderator. I saw a problem in this thread, and though it was a few posts after problems started, I moved to stop it. End of story. I will not hear any more on the subject in this thread, or I will close it. If you wish to talk about it, use the PM system. And my "superior" is here.

Quote:

Yes, that is discomfiting, but the euros looking back over the last 100 years should be able to clearly distinguish between the US and the USSR. If they cannot, then God help us.

Please, tell me, how is the United States different when it says it needs to depose Iraq's leader and occupy Iraq until a US-friendly government can be put in place? I'm trying to keep the analogy limited to the current situation, so please bear with me. If Russia suddenly declared a war on terrorism (ignoring Chechnya for the moment), and then told the world that if Korea didn't surrender, it would attack, wouldn't you be worried? Especially if it appeared that Korea was cooperating with Russia fully, and Russia was continuing to say that only a new government or unconditional surrender would keep it from attacking N. Korea...

~~WyreTheWolf~~ · Feb 20, 2003, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by J.Reb
[BConclusions ....

raid - has bigger psychological problems that I thought. It borders stalking and dementia.

Toshiro - you join in the insults and are not worthy of being called a moderator.

jeff - is an appeaser who tries to ingratiate himself.
[/b]

This is a personal attack not only to other members but also to one of my staff!

I WILL NOT ALLOW THIS.

I do not want to hear "well he attacked me first" crap... because two wrongs do not make a right. If one of my staff steps out of line... IT IS MY JOB TO TAKE CARE OF IT! not yours! If a member steps out of line... that is where my Moderators, and Super Moderators step in. If the problem is not resolved then it comes to me.

If you wish to remain a member her at DriverHeaven, you will follow the rules.

ToshiroOC is a SuperModerator, and has earned the position with his dedication, and with his excellent judgement. I have read over the entire thread, and he was correct. His judgement was flawless. His wording could have been a little better chosen, but that is up to me to decide.

This ends now! I hope this is understood on all sides.

FuNsTeR · Feb 20, 2003, 10:15 AM

just to point something out Euros is a currency not a country

J.Reb · Feb 20, 2003, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ToshiroOC
Please, tell me, how is the United States different when it says it needs to depose Iraq's leader and occupy Iraq until a US-friendly government can be put in place? I'm trying to keep the analogy limited to the current situation, so please bear with me.

It seems to my your description of things does not take into account all the available data. Let me list a number of other important facts and observations, in no particular order, that help with an analysis of the current situation:

1. It is the UN that has officially called for Saddam to disarm, not just the US.
2. The UN process to deal with Saddam has been going on now for 12 years.
3. The evil history of Saddam is a matter of record.
4. The UN has produced 17 resolutions on disarming Saddam.
5. The UN has not enforced its own resolutions.
6. Saddam has to date been given no disarmament schedule.
7. It has all been a flop.
8. Even the inspectors pulled out in '85..noone left there...
9. There would still be no activity to disarm Saddam, were it not for Bush stirring the pot.
10. The UN or world does not want a madman holding WMD.
11. WDM could easily be passed to terrorists.
12. Delivery of WMD is a matter of hours at most, anywhere in the world.
13. It is expected that the new Iraq government will be world-friendly.
14. It is expected that the Iraqi people will be liberated in terms of freedoms.
15. The reason for current UN stagnation seems to do more with anti-US feeling than anything else.
16. It is felt that anti-US feeling needs to be put aside in a crisis situation.
17. In particular the French are angling for political domination in Europe.
18. Recent news reports identify Chirac as long personal friend of Saddam.
19. Recent news reports state Chirac sent 93% enriched uranium to Iraq.
20. Chirac has heavy industrial ties to Iraq. Built the nuclear plants there.
21. The US position is supported by the majority of european nations.
22. The US will have to do most of the heavy lifting.
23. The US does not desire Iraqi territory.
24. All this could have been settled 12 years ago, had the UN dealt with it then.
25. There is only a limited seasonal window for moving on Iraq.

The US is different from the USSR in that we believe in individual freedoms as a core belief which makes us like europeans, have a proven track record of trust with and support of european nations and the UN, have a proven track record of not retaining conquered territories, have clearly stated objectives in Iraq where these objectives are in agreement with UN resolutions and are supported by the majority of european nations, we are the only nation with troops in place to accomplish this mission, we are the more likely recipient of any future Iraqi/terrorist attacks, we will not be asking for a bunch of aid so as to accomplish the mission, and we have the economy to support this operation and unforseen complications. In addition, the USSR has never installed a US-friendly or UN-friendly or European-friendly or freedom-friendly government anywhere in the world to my knowledge.

Although it is not the current situation, there are many many differences between the US and the USSR over the last 100 years which I will not go into at your request but which add up to a decidedly greater comfort level with the US.

If Russia suddenly declared a war on terrorism (ignoring Chechnya for the moment), and then told the world that if Korea didn't surrender, it would attack, wouldn't you be worried? Especially if it appeared that Korea was cooperating with Russia fully, and Russia was continuing to say that only a new government or unconditional surrender would keep it from attacking N. Korea...

Given the nature and track record for suppression of freedoms of the USSR, I would be plenty worried. See the above. However, those do not apply to the US as everyone should know, and consequently I do not have a concern along those lines. You speak as though one is a direct substitute for the other, and that is dead wrong.

J.Reb · Feb 20, 2003, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by FuNsTeR1970
just to point something out Euros is a currency not a country

ha ha

Euros is in the same category as Amis, many people use these terms, they are not derogatory, I use both, where have you been?

J.Reb · Feb 20, 2003, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by WyreTheWolf
This is a personal attack not only to other members but also to one of my staff!

I WILL NOT ALLOW THIS.

I do not want to hear "well he attacked me first" crap... because two wrongs do not make a right. If one of my staff steps out of line... IT IS MY JOB TO TAKE CARE OF IT! not yours! If a member steps out of line... that is where my Moderators, and Super Moderators step in. If the problem is not resolved then it comes to me.

If you wish to remain a member her at DriverHeaven, you will follow the rules.

ToshiroOC is a SuperModerator, and has earned the position with his dedication, and with his excellent judgement. I have read over the entire thread, and he was correct. His judgement was flawless. His wording could have been a little better chosen, but that is up to me to decide.

This ends now! I hope this is understood on all sides.

I have read your words, I have read the rules, and rest assured if personal insults start flying again it will be pushed up through the ranks and a fair resolution expected.

raid517 · Feb 20, 2003, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by J.Reb
ha ha

Euros is in the same category as Amis, many people use these terms, they are not derogatory, I use both, where have you been?

Well I'm sorry I find it offensive, just as someone might find the term "n*gger" offensive, which is the way it seems to have been applied here. I could live with Europeans which is the correct usage, but Euros no. It would be the same as me opening a thread tiled 'You Yanks', which would certainly appear deliberately confrontational and inflammatory.

In any case I certainly abide by the moderators decision and will try not to respond to these kind of offensive attacks in a personal way.

On another note, I can't see how this person keeps referring to the legitimacy of US action because it was sanctioned by the UN, and then goes on to say the UN is useless. So the UN provides a convenient excuse, but ultimately its authority is meaningless? This just does not make any sense to me. But then nor do many of the opinions and views this person expresses.

Perhaps other members can make more sense of them?

Q

raid517 · Feb 20, 2003, 02:01 PM

Ps

Is it just me, or are some of the things he says hard enough to swallow already, without them being printed in bright orange too?

Q

J.Reb · Feb 20, 2003, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by raid517
Well I'm sorry I find it offensive, just as someone might find the term "n*gger" offensive

You are the only one who has ever used that word.

, which is the way it seems to have been applied here. I could live with Europeans which is the correct usage, but Euros no.

Tough. I object to "red neck".

It would be the same as me opening a thread tiled 'You Yanks', which would certainly appear deliberately confrontational and inflammatory.

I see Yanks used all the time, in a kidding friendly manner, and have never objected to it. You seem to have a lot of hangups.

In any case I certainly abide by the moderators decision and will try not to respond to these kind of offensive attacks in a personal way.

It will be a whole new life for you. Try not to stumble.

On another note, I can't see how this person keeps referring to the legitimacy of US action because it was sanctioned by the UN, and then goes on to say the UN is useless. So the UN provides a convenient excuse, but ultimately its authority is meaningless? This just does not make any sense to me. But then nor do many of the opinions and views this person expresses.

Perhaps other members can make more sense of them?

It's pretty simple, but I can see that you need it explained to you. A UN sanction is not necessary to the Amis, but it is a feelgood point for euros, so we try to work it out. That's it in a nutshell. Questions?

Q [/b]

raid517 · Feb 20, 2003, 03:33 PM

It is your attitude to others I find offensive dude, that no one else in the world is right but you. It should be plain to everyone who reads your comments just how small minded such an attitude is.

I am sure if I had have started a thread titled 'You Yanks' it would have had exactly the same sniping effect with which your initial post, indeed almost all your posts appear intended.

Might I suggest that since you seem so keen to disparage everyone on DH, except those who agree with your pint of view, that it is very much you who are suffering from 'hang ups'.

Quote:

Tough. I object to "red neck".

Well I'm not going to get into who used offensive language first, but this is your thread, remember?

Quote:

It will be a whole new life for you. Try not to stumble.

Well this is an area (indeed perhaps the only area) in which you yourself appear singularly skilled. Perhaps you would like me to point out to you the several instances on the forum where you have been grossly offensive to other forum members? I think this is very much an instance where the old adage applies "Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones".

Quote:

It's pretty simple, but I can see that you need it explained to you. A UN sanction is not necessary to the Amis, but it is a feelgood point for euros, so we try to work it out. That's it in a nutshell. Questions?

No no question, I just continue to find it interesting to note how you avoid the issue by resorting to your usual jibing technique. I still don't see why you harp on about UN sanctions being a justification for war, yet the UN itself is meaningless. Either it is meaningless or it isn't, either you agree with it or you don't, you can't use resolutions you think of are worthless as a Justification for the legality of a war. That's just nonsensical. But then again, so are many of the points that you make, so nothing new there.

Q

Ps

You may consider the term "xenophobe" offensive, but then you accuse everyone else in the world of "anti-Americanism". What then is "anti-Americanism" if it is not simply another form of xenophobia? (Mind you, you have such broad definitions of it, that it could mean practically anything). It is this label of anti-Americanism that many people on this forum have taken great offence to. I have several American friends that I regularly keep in contact with via e-mail, I wonder how many 'international' friends you have? I certainly do not hate Americans and do not see how disagreeing with the American government , or with their present military ambitions is anti-American. This is simply democratic. However perhaps you would like to demonstrate the link for us all here? I think it only fair that you show us the exact connection so that we can finally understand. Try not to use sniping or insulting in your reply. Who knows, at last we might get an intelligent and straight answer from you. How exactly is disagreeing with the Republican party, or with a President for whom we never voted, to be regarded as anti-American? Unless of course your saying, as certainly seems to be the case, that people in other countries should be denied access to their democratic rights? Is this what you mean? How about the near half of the American population who disagree too? Are you saying that democracy isn't for them either? Please explain your position to everyone, I'm sure we are all very keen to hear it.