Is that the best you can do, Redneck (I spell nice - even with a broken bum and head cold:) ?
I would like to make an observation here. It was the rise of fascism and racism that finally got me political. I got so fed up with politically-incorrect trendies telling lies and pretending that their twisted views were the epitome of intellectual enlightenment, that I finally got off my lover and started offering up my opinions.

On this and every other debating thread that I have encountered, people like you Redneck are as weak as water. You are all bluff and bluster. You seem to rely upon your conviction that people like yourself are in every way smarter than everybody else, and morally beyond reproach as well. Added to this attitude, is the conviction that your opponents are all dummies who a supposedly superior person like yourself need only bellow insults at.
And every time I get people like you cornered with a one-liner, well – that is how easy it is to show up the racism and irrationality of your opinions. Most of your mob repeat the same arguments and slogans that have been instilled by your peers, parrot like in your heads. You are unable to think for yourselves or even understand cause to consequence. And when people like me, and other like-minded bloggers, point out the contradictions in your dated and well trodden arguments, it leaves you utterly helpless. (Mostly unchanged para to, indeed, show how far up yourself you are Redneck - oh great Superior one).

Redneck: The usual response from the social regressives like yourself when cornered is to either stand upon your dignity or pretend that you are oh so utterly superior that you prattle on and on about the same racist, anti-other –culture diatribe with no real rational explanations for your views, or to simply say others’ ideas are empty, parroting, stupid, idiotic, etc.

Your drawn out personal attacks (which I am shooting right back at ya’ in a nicer way) are indicative of the latter .
I have never espoused similar sentiments anywhere to yours when I was young. A child knows that your attitudes to other folks of difference is damn well offensive and plain wrong. I also knew and figured out that I was being misled, and when that happened, I began reading widely so that I had the information to analyse correctly. I hope some day that you can read beyond your redneck propaganda and then you to will be able to examine the dated attitudes of your fashionable contemporaries of the radical right in the light of your reduced ignorance.

There ya’ go Redneck happy now that I am parroting Redneck stuff.
I don’t belong to, or align myself with any political mob – do you, Redneck, and who are they?
The idea of torture, which is terrorism on a personal level, I think, is plain wrong. This opinion has nothing to do with intellect or any of that stuff that annoys you so much. There are some things in life that require, in my opinion, zero tolerance and torture/terrorism is one of them. Now, if you are this intellectual giant that you suggest, then you wouldn’t need me to tell you why I don’t go into long-winded debates on deliberate cruelty – not that you actually addressed the topic much anyway. From your blogs, I still have to say that you have the heart of a terrorist.
Redneck, you still have a funny way of validating my opinions. especially the one that you and I are evidence of the inevitability of multi-culturalism.

First point, Mr Maracas, I have not said that I hate anybody. Grossly exaggerating other people’s posts can be indicative of a person who is not prepared to debate in good faith.

Second point. How you claim that I have not “contributed much to the debate on torture” is beyond me. I have contributed two submissions entirely on the subject of torture which beats your one post.

Third point. You are correct in saying that Australia is “developing much like America.” The USA has too many crime prone and welfare dependent minorities stuffing the place up. The French, British and Dutch are learning that lesson the hard way right now. Why you want Australia to emulate obvious failure is something you can explain.

Fourth point. What exactly is “civilised behaviour”? Warships sinking unarmed civilian passenger liners like the Lusitania, or Zeppelins, dropping bombs on cities, was once considered uncivilised behaviour. But by WW2 it was common behaviour with all the combatants. It all depends upon who your enemy is, the degree of threat, opportunity for retaliation, and what standard of behaviour your enemy exhibits themselves.

Japan refused to ratify the Geneva Convention in WW2 and their treatment of captured allied civilians and captured allied POW’s was absolutely appalling. Not surprisingly, allied soldiers routinely executed wounded and helpless Jap soldiers as a matter of course. We bombed their cities flat using phosphorous and nuclear weapons killing hundreds of thousands of mostly women and children. We machined gunned Jap survivors in the water who had escaped from sinking ships. And it did not worry us one bit.

The West knows how to slaughter it’s enemies like civilised people.

As for becoming as bad as our enemies. If we can stop a religious fanatic from flying over London or Paris with a crop duster full of anthrax, then I can live with that. I come from a Housing Commission area, Mr Maracas. I am used to being called a trailer trash redneck lowlife anyway.

Redneck - you're ironic and don't even know it. Mostly your posts are predictable, vitriolic and lacking in thought.

However, I had a good laugh at your words:

"The West knows how to slaughter it’s enemies like civilised people."

Do you even get it?

Here's is a test: and one for those who so regualry seem to apply their own peculiar rules of exchange on other posters and tiresomely brag about peoples failure to respond to their well made points or lay some absurd claim to "winning " these exchanges ( and u know who u are, u little rapskallions )

Find a topic that might interest you or one that gets your blood boiling - say immigration - and wait until about 25 or so posts are up; then go very quickly to the last post with out reading those preceding it - and read them from the last to the first.

Some things will become evident; the relevance of the post to the content of the article is inversely proportional to its place relative to the date published. And the focus of the post becomes decreasingly ego centric the close you move back up the page - as the "debate" develops the focus centres on the contributors not on the issue. And some peole will inject their deep seated and wacky ideas into any discussion as it grows. ..." and on the topic of stamp collecting let me tell about the need to kill homosexuals" we are a funny lot indeed

These pages are a gold mine for a sociologist - or forensic psychaitrist.

topic drift is very common. it was around long before forums like this. i find it amusing, occasionally exasperating, but always a reminder of who is most likely to post in a place like this, and their motivation/s for doing so.

the comments might be interesting to a sociologist, but most offer little value regarding the original article. i look out for the occasional gem.