Defiant Mugabe attacks Blair (RHODESIA WATCH)

Only thing "great" in this context is that it surely sounds as if you have a great deal of [Modern historical]catching up to do!

Is your patriotism so crude that it only expresses itself by denigrating other nations, Brian?

I realise you are an immigrant to the United States, and few citizens are more enthusiastic than those who have had to leap through hoops to get the privilege, but this is beyond patriotic. It is slanderous, and it is rude.

Ivan

But We; The People who comprise Our Beloved FRaternal Republic; are still, thanks to the immense wisdom of Our Nation's Founding FATHERS, still armed -- and when it comes Right down to it will come out shooting.

You forget who we are, Brian. And no matter what Blair may try, he cannot wash away the fundamental nature of the nation he governs, anymore than Clinton could wash away the fundamental nature of the Americans.

Clinton did not spell your doom, as much as it may have seemed like it at the time. Blair similarly does not spell our doom, no matter how bad it may seem now. Resist hysteria and hyperbole, or to put it in Rudyard's words, "Keep your head about you, when all those around you are losing theirs...and you'll be a man, my son".

Ivan

If the Brits really care - they should airlift all the whites from Zimbabwe and give them similar sized farms in Britain. Leave Africa to its miseries - time they grew up - and when they ask for money - please show them the middle finger. Incidentally - when the Indian troops raided Portugese colony Goa in 1962 and amalgamated to to India - the west raised its voice in a similar manner.

There was something called Zamindari system in India 30-40 years back wherein the Zamindars used to own much of the land in villages and the rest worked as serfs. This system was abolished without a fuss and land distributed amongst the serfs and zamindars given just enough land to survive. Today there is no fuedalism and despite widespread poverty - democracy exists at grass roots levels. Pakistan still has the old fuedal system with slavery and bonded labour still existing and no democracy.

Africa I guess is a different game - lousy educational system, lawlessness and hardly any economic growth. So I guess African countries should have kept whites on their side till they had developed some fundamental systems. Mugabe - seems like a moron to me.

Mr Mugabe rounded on the European Union and Britain, saying: "We are African we are not British or European.

Last time I looked, the bags of grain being unloaded to feed the starving Zimbabweans said USA, not Zimbabwe.

Mugabe and his idiot wife would be sitting on a stump, picking lice out of their pubic hair for the protein if it weren't for the dreaded colonialism!

Re: Britain as a Third World country

Ten years ago I would have agreed with you. The last time I was in London,however, I began to notice the deterioration and seediness that had crept in since the previous visit. I also noticed a huge increase in the number of Arabs everywhere.

Don't believe? Stop by at the local hospital and look around.

Dear Ives

First, you take me far too seriously and, sadly, if I may say so, tend to the personal attack as a first resort. My observations, when seen as part of the big picture, are just that. My obsevations.

Second, let me say that I do not "denigrate," as you put it, your little socialist state, I simply offer my take as seen FRom my Absolutely Objectivist perspective. I am neither prejudicially pro nor anti any damned state on Earth, I simply see them all as they are. Yours, very very sadly -- for I have lived in England and have loved it very very much indeed [And I will be back!] -- is in a very serious and probably terminal condition.

Third, to compare the temporary head [[The president] of the administrative branch of America's government with Britain's Prime Minister is to understand the power of neither.

America's president is in effect an elected queen Elizabeth and is but the figure head of America's federal government the "chairman of the feral gummint's board of directors" as it were. Britain's [Or any/every other parliamentary-system] prime minister, on the other hand is, for his entire period in office, effectively an elected -- but unchecked -- dictator -- and can [And Blair is so doing!] make the most bloody awful sweeping changes to the very fundamentals of how a country is governed.

But finally, as awful is Blair's destruction of all that has made Britain so very special -- and that he is lying Britain's way into both the EUro and the EUrinal -- it is not that which has so much sealed Britain's fate as is the mass migration of third world savages that continues apace and shows no sign of being checked by anyone, our Fulham Hero included.

In this aspect of Britain's degeneration I stand shoulder to shoulder with my only post WW2 British politician Hero, the Great Enoch Powell, trickles of whose Rivers of Blood are already forming streams upon those dark and clouded hills where did walk Those Feet in ancient times!

Warmest FReegards -- Brian

First, you take me far too seriously and, sadly, if I may say so, tend to the personal attack as a first resort.

Pardon me, but I believe any fair minded person will read your post and realise that it was your posting that turned it personal. I have responded in a very calm way, particularly in proportion to the insults that you let fly with; I don't see why you are taking this as a "personal attack".

Second, let me say that I do not "denigrate," as you put it, your little socialist state, I simply offer my take as seen FRom my Absolutely Objectivist perspective.

With respect, your absolutely objectivist position the other day regarded someone who opened up by talking about "saving Winston's fat a**" as being "objective" and "fair". To your credit, you did retract this assessment later on, but only after much persuasion.

Yours, very very sadly -- for I have lived in England and have loved it very very much indeed [And I will be back!] -- is in a very serious and probably terminal condition.

As previously pointed out, I remember when Clinton was in office, and many Americans said the same thing about their own country. It turned out not to be true. And the same can be said for us.

But this is part of our history. When Joseph Kennedy was FDR's Ambassador to the UK, he wrote us off. Napoleon wrote us off as a "nation of shopkeepers". And so on and so forth. Be careful. You'll be surprised.

America's president is in effect an elected queen Elizabeth and is but the figure head of America's federal government the "chairman of the feral gummint's board of directors" as it were.

That is certainly not true. The American President holds a great deal of power in comparison to the Queen - rather it is a unique office that combines the executive powers of the Prime Minister with the Head of State roles of the Queen. He is not referred to as the most powerful man in the world merely because he dispenses handshakes.

Britain's [Or any/every other parliamentary-system] prime minister, on the other hand is, for his entire period in office, effectively an elected -- but unchecked -- dictator -- and can [And Blair is so doing!] make the most bloody awful sweeping changes to the very fundamentals of how a country is governed.

I fear you don't understand the constraints within our system. These include Blair's own party - which is riddled with divisions on many issues. This includes the press and public opinion - and thanks to organs like the Daily Telegraph, the press is not as emasculated in reporting about Blair, as say, the American media was in reporting about Clinton. There are constraints. Blair cannot do precisely what he pleases; if he did, we'd have the Euro already. He wouldn't be on the verge of launching a referendum which he will likely lose.

But finally, as awful is Blair's destruction of all that has made Britain so very special -- and that he is lying Britain's way into both the EUro and the EUrinal -- it is not that which has so much sealed Britain's fate as is the mass migration of third world savages that continues apace and shows no sign of being checked by anyone, our Fulham Hero included.

You are writing the epitaph before the story is done. And the Fulham Hero may yet succeed.

In this aspect of Britain's degeneration I stand shoulder to shoulder with my only post WW2 British politician Hero, the Great Enoch Powell, trickles of whose Rivers of Blood are already forming streams upon those dark and clouded hills where did walk Those Feet in ancient times!

But Enoch Powell never gave up on Britain. And neither will I.

Regards, Ivan

Are "tongue in cheek" and "shitstirrer" still everyday usage British expressions, Ives?

Or am I that far out of touch?

And if I am "taking the mickey" and wildly exaggerating my critisisms, are you the more valiantly shouting Britain's praises -- or what?

And fear not, Brave Knight, we are very firmly on the same side. Only the styles are different.

Warmest -- Brian