I’ll be rooting for Melanie, since you ask. Having read the articles that you link to and looked at the reader comments that she links to, it does seem to me that there is something in what she has written.

Are you saying that she’s wrong on this issue, that she’s over sensitive and over reactive but has some basis in truth or just that you don’t like her Sunny?

“We have a tight comments policy aimed at fostering constructive debate.”

“Fight fight fight”

Standards already slipping?!

Lighten up eh guys? No need to take life so seriously all the time.

Seems to me as if a meeting of Hysterics Anonymous has just made it’s way out from under a stone and is blinking in the daylight.

chrisc, why do you think standards here are slipping?

I’d have thought it was one of the jobs of a Liberal Conspiracy to highlight crap masquerading as political comment, wherever it comes from. Dichotomies to sell opinion and ill considered partizanship included.

Let the police investigate and let’s see where it takes us. I have no dog in the fight.

chrisc,

The hysterics to whom I refer are in Sunnys’ post and not in the thread. Not clear enough, must do better!

Mel P is a National Treasure because you never know whether she’s going to be rabid mode or comparatively sane today, which makes her interesting. All I can say after reading the comments she is sounding out about is “Diddums, diddums”. They seem like just good dirty fun to me.

I have to say, her original post, about a Goebels moment, did strike a note with me. I know that Melanie Phillips is a prime purveyor of Godwinism, but in this case the coverage has left me feeling rather uneasy.

It usually makes me sick to admit it, but there is always something in what Rabid Spice has to say.
Then balance kicks in and tells me that even the worst of humanity makes a valid expression for part of the truth, just it ain’t always the whole truth and nothing but… so it ain’t mostly helpful.

And there’s usually some music behind the Spice Girls songs.

Just asking, but would it not be reasonable for any state surrounded by enemies to use whatever channels might be available to it to avoid an existential threat?

In that context, it isn’t about aggression, it is about survival, is it not?

If it were thee or me, would we nottry to influence?

I’m shaking my head in despair at finding myself in sympathy with Melanie Phillips here- the comments on Guido’s piece are as usual revolting but then that’s not atypical from the site of the Libertarian who loves the libel laws.