I think that sometimes you have a real problem with words and their perceived meaning, and sometimes (in my opinion) a lack of perspective. When you took down Bob A's post, you took precisely the same attitude as the People's Front of Judea would have, had they witnessed the "apart from the aqueducts" exchange. Which, of course, you have an absolute right to do – it's your lawn, after all. The quote above is reasoned, but your previous, rather foam-flecked (if I may so) responses on this action do lean into teenage Citizen Smith territory; indeed, the only Che-poster-level buzz-phrase you've ommitted to use is the "running-dog" one, unless I'm mistaken. Above all, I don't think anyone should refer to anyone else as 'fascist' unless they actually know what that means, or have an awareness of how confused it can make the speaker appear. To illustrate this, here are some key points of a historical party manifesto. You'll have no trouble finding its origin:
* The creation of Europe a Nation through a common European government.
* The creation of an elected European parliament.
* The continuation of national parliaments with their authority limited to social and cultural matters.
* Economics to be driven by the wage-price mechanism to ensure fair wages and economic growth.
* The withdrawal of American and Soviet forces from Europe.
* Decolonization with a move to set up single-ethnic governments in former colonies.
* Europe to be defined as mainland territory outside of the USSR, the United Kingdom, overseas territories and around one-third of Africa.
Broadly, that lot would have gained the support of your entire Tory wet-list of "genuinely decent folk" above. Now who's the fascist?
