Intersesting ironies to chew on...

But I wonder if the first assertion -- "The more left-wing the Westerner, the more tolerant he is of right-wing Islamic extremism" -- is necessarily true on the face of it. The way I see it, the more left-wing the Westerner, the less tolerant of George Bush and his Middle East policies. Which has the unpleasant side effect of being more tolerant of right-wing Islamic extremism.

Maybe you see it differently from your perspective, but it seems that if a Democrat were in office (i.e. Al Gore, but not necessarily John Kerry) we might be in the same position, yet reversed, with the left-wing supporting liberation and democratization of Iraq and the right-wing opposing Gore, which supports Islamic extremism.

There's a whole lot of alternate-history type speculation you could do, and I think an indepth analysis might be very illuminating of what extremists actually believe in...

One irony that, in your case, a self-described centrist misses is that many people who pompously declare themselves opposed to Islamic extremism turn out to be its best friends.

As demonstrated by the war in Iraq. (Muqtada al-Sadr says, thanks for all the help.)

Barry,

If you exclude the radical Chomskyite-Pilger-Galloway left from your analysis above you're probably right, at least as far as support for foreign policy goes.

Some of the silly moral equivalency and political correctness would still be around on the left, though. And it would still be true that the farther right you go past mainstream conservatism the more likely you'll find flat-out anti-Muslim bigtory.

Swopa,

Al-Sadr is lucky he's breathing. If it were up to me back when he was still running around and killing people, he wouldn't be. So I'm not sure you're quite right about that.

(I'm fine him still breathing now, by the way, as long as he stays out of the armed theocratic thuggery business.)

Michael, all this means is that our left/right labelling is wrong when applied to the Islamic world.

Think:

right: individualism, personal liberty

left: collectivism, individual rights are subordinated to group interests.

I'm not saying that Islamic extremism is close to Leftism, but it's as far away from Rightism as you can get.

The insight from VDH which directly follows the one you quote seems even more poignant:

> No such violence resonates with America's
> diverse critics as much as a false story of
> a flushed Koran — precisely because the
> gripe is not about the lives of real people,
> but the psychological hurts, angst.... [etc]

I fear we're not getting the greatest clarity from those who are against the Iraq invasion.

AM,

There's a problem with your left/right scenario there. What you are calling "right" is actually classical liberalism, not rightism. "Rightism" can only be considered classically liberal in the United States, and even then we're only talking about the moderate center-right. The old right, paleo right, far right, radical right, are reactionaries in defense of entirely different traditions. Pat Buchanan, Pat Roberton, James Dobson, Trent Lott, John Ashcroft, et al, are not classically liberal in any way shape or form whatsoever.

I've been thinking about where the whole radical Islamist movement falls on the political divide,and I have a novel suggestion:that the label "Islamofascism" is inappropriate,and a more correct label is "Reactionary Anarchism".

There's something counterintuitive about this:after all,the Western mind is used to thinking of the State,the Government as the major threat to individual liberty,as exemplified by the Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

Yet,without the State upholding the rule of law and individual rights,how many of you would trust your freedom in the hands of your neighbors?

Now,imagine your neighbors being a bunch of conservative Pashtun tribesmen,with Ak-47's.How much freedom would you have?For all its repression,the Taliban government,the closest thing to Islamist Utopia,didn't have much of a government.They didn't even have real border controls.

What the Taliban had,mostly,was armed gangs of men with guns and the Koran as the only law.Unlike the Fascists and the Communists,the Bin-Ladenists (for lack of a more precise word) have no use for Big Government,or any real government,for that matter.

Their Utopia is of the Neighborhood Death Squad,not Gosplan or the Five-Year Plan.It is a very primitive vision.

If you think of the insurgency in Iraq in Anarchist terms (admittedly risky,since we don't have a lot of info on them),their strategy seems to make sense.After all,what the insurgents so conspicuosly lack is any sense of coherent,united leadership,along with a plan for taking over the state (unlike VC),or of preventing factional fighting should the Americans withdraw.

Instead,we're seeing nihilistic attacks on civilians and property,with no regard to winning hearts and minds,or anybody even putting out a coherent list of demands.All hallmarks of classic Anarchist (militant) tactics.

So maybe Colin Powell was right,in a sense:it really is a "new kind of war".In which case,one may need whole new kinds of plans to fight it.What,I have no idea.

I think, Jussi, that what the Taliban lacked was not a government, and certainly not laws beyond the Koran, but rather simply a monopoly of force over Afghanistan.

They were too weak to project force everywhere or to provide some of the basic services we generally think of states as providing.

They were, however, full of rules and had no problem enforcing those rules, frequently to the death, in those places where they could project force.

And, most importantly, they were full of rules that had nothing to do with the Koran. For example, the Koran says something like "men and women should dress modestly". The Taliban decided to interpret that as "women who do not cover themselves from head to toe should have acid splashed in their faces". The Taliban and their ilk claim that they want to return to a pure form of Islam, but the problem is, just as every Christian group claims to be the one pure, true form of Christianity with the one correct reading of the Bible, so does every Islamic sect. Just as the Branch Davidians decided to believe a few things that I might consider a stretch, Biblically, the Taliban did a lot of things that, as far as I can tell, were explicitly banned by the Koran (hurting innocent people, killing women and children, mutilation, destroying the religious artifacts of other faiths, and so forth).

The Commenter said:"They were, however, full of rules and had no problem enforcing those rules.."

You just described every Anarchist commune ever built.Seriously,the lack or presence of rules is beside the point.

An Anarchist situation,by definition,exists when the monopoly of the legitimate use of violence (the definition of the state) is overturned and the people turn their loyalties to sub-state groups (tribes,militias,clans,parties).

This situation has been described by rosy-eyed Western Anarchist theorists from Proudhon to Rothbard as `Freedom`.In reality,it always leads to the worst kind of group tyranny possible.In tribal society,individual freedom doesn't exist."The Committee will decide who eats the last tofurt."

The Taliban's laws were about as relevant to the Koran as the Lord's Resistance Army's rules are relevant to the Ten commandments.

The Taliban's laws were, in many ways, less restrictive than the laws that govern our "partners in the war against terrorism" in Saudi Arabia, Yemen and the Sudan.

The extreme left, like al Qaeda, believes that western culture is corrupt and destructive. Like al Qaeda, they believe that American lives and Western Culture are not worth defending.

The extreme right also supports Middle Eastern terrorism, for some of the same reasons (plus an openly declared hatred of the Jews) Most white supremacist groups support the Intifada and the Iraqi insurgents. There is no way that either extreme could be considered pro-liberal democracy.

Continued:What really got me thinking was the peculiar characteristics of the Iraqi "insurgency".Unlike so many earlier guerrilla movements (think Mao and the Chi Coms in 1946),it lacks a credible leadership (Zarqawi is Jordanian and thus out of counting as Iraq's prospective Jefe Maximo).It lacks a political program or even an articulated list of demands.Most importantly of all,it doesn't seem to have a central command structure, instead consisting of several independent factions.

Why traditional insurgencies and revolutionary movements usually had those things was clear:they wanted to take over the reins of State one day. To get there,they had to avoid factional fighting at all costs and establish an undisputed up-down command.That's why,when splits occurred (like the Bolshevik - Menshevik rift in the Russian CP),they were exceedingly bitter and often consumed all the energy of the participants.

What I'm saying is that the same looseness that makes the Iraqi insurgency more effective and more adaptive in combat makes it completely unable to govern,should it "win".

Should the Americans withdraw from Iraq,I believe the insurgency would simply turn on each other.

So I think its quite possible that what we're seeing in Iraq and Afghanistan is a new mutation,a lethal new virus that manifests itself as a marriage of Fundamentalist Islam with classic Anarchist tactics and strategy.

If that is so,how the fuck does one fight it?

Al-Sadr is lucky he's breathing. If it were up to me back when he was still running around and killing people, he wouldn't be. So I'm not sure you're quite right about that.

(I'm fine him still breathing now, by the way, as long as he stays out of the armed theocratic thuggery business.)


See, here's an example of what I'm talking about. What makes you think he's gotten out of the armed theocratic thuggery business, Michael?

-------------------------------
THE students had begun to lay out their picnic in the spring sunshine when the men attacked.

“There were dozens of them, armed with guns, and they poured into the park,” Ali al-Azawi, 21, the engineering student who had organised the gathering in Basra, said.

“They started shouting at us that we were immoral, that we were meeting boys and girls together and playing music and that this was against Islam.

“They began shooting in the air and people screamed. Then, with one order, they began beating us with their sticks and rifle butts.” Two students were said to have been killed.

. . . The picnic had run foul of the Islamist powers that increasingly hold sway in the fly-blown southern city, where religious militias rule the streets, forcing women to don the veil and closing down shops that sell alcohol or music.

. . . Far from disavowing the attack, senior al-Sadr loyalists said that they had a duty to stop the students’ “dancing, sexy dress and corruption”.

“We beat them because we are authorised by Allah to do so and that is our duty,” Sheik Ahmed al-Basri said after the attack. “It is we who should deal with such disobedience and not the police.”
-------------------------------

It's easy for al-Sadr to get away with this, since he's become a significant power broker in the new government, with his supporters holding more than 20 seats in the elected assembly (nearly as many as the leading "mainstream" Shiite parties) and controlling three cabinet departments, in addition to Muqtada being the de facto mayor of Sadr City (where his militia provides security).

If you click the link above, you'll see Mookie holding a joint press conference with one of his major allies, Ahmad Chalabi. Maybe the next time you chat with Christopher Hitchens, you can ask him why his idol Ahmad is buddying up with a genuine Islamofascist like al-Sadr. (After you get through congratulating each other on what bold fighters for freedom you both are, of course.)

So, yes, Michael, Muqtada al-Sadr says thanks for all your help -- thanks for backing the war that's empowered him, and thanks for not paying attention while he wormed his way into a position of influence.

There's nothing new about the Iraqi insurgency - they're using the same tactics that other Arab/Muslim insurgencies have used for decades - their organization is just more loosly defined.

The new Arab way of war is parasitic. Local supporters acquire weapons and explosives, provide safe houses, arrange transportation, and steal or hire vehicles. Assassins fly in, carry out attacks, and fly out quickly, avoiding arrest. Relying completely on local sources, they can strike deep into the Western heartlands, mimicking the strategic air attacks characteristic of the West.

Foot soldiers employed in this way of war usually are male and middle class and often well-educated, with strong religious fervor. A good education is necessary to operate independently and covertly in Western societies. The most dedicated assassins come from countries with a well-established, openly anti-Western education system antagonistic to secular societies, modernism, and human rights. A consuming spiritual passion, with a commitment bordering on fanaticism, is a valuable attribute for members of a small group when deployed into hostile countries. Given these warfare techniques, Muslims seem likely to remain the prime source of recruits.

...Intentionally, there is no obvious state involvement. In his attack, the assassin dies or melts into the crowd, providing no proof of who is responsible. This tactic is meant to confuse and frustrate a legally justifiable response, as the Western paradigm based on the 1648 Peace of Westphalia assumes a state-versus-state conflict. Avoiding giving the West a defined, obvious state opponent is a rational strategy peculiar to the Arab way of war.

Zarqawi and Zawahiri say to Swopa and his other unthinking friends, "thanks for the help, suckers. Next country we need to destroy and rape we'll look you up again."

Leftists are going on pure reflex here. Reflexive hatred for western civilization with its corporations and capitalism and freedom to reject stupid ideas like leftism.

Sure they'll link up with mass murderers. They tried to link up with Saddam before April 2003 but Bush didn't give them sufficient time. They'd link with any devil you could name if it let them feel like they'd avenged themselves on westerners, the "fools" who turned their backs on the leftist crusade of the 20th century.

I read Capt. Layton's article - I don't think there's anything that contradicts my theorizing.When it comes to "the men behind the curtain" of the Afghan War of the 80's,Saudi-Arabia,Pakistan and,unfortunately,the USA,were the main sponsors of the anti-Soviet Jihadis.

In each case,the support came back to haunt these countries as the Jihadis brought their violence to their former sponsors.

What this means that,although the "Anarchist Jihadis" took State support,they were never really under anybody's control.No matter what the "puppeteers" originally thought.

The good news is that,because the terrorists now so obviously threaten all established States in the area,these States,including the Saudis, can be persuaded to act in their own self-preservation.

The critical question here,I think,is not the attitude of the States in question,but of their subject populations.The 19th Century Anarchist movements eventually fizzled out because of lack of popular support.

Somehow,the same dynamic ought to be brought about in the Middle East.

Jussi Hämäläinen,

I like what you say. When I argue with radical libertarians/anarchists I posit that the natural state of man is gang warfare, not the sunny do your own thing and all will be well dogma that permeates those circles.

Instead,we're seeing nihilistic attacks on civilians and property,with no regard to winning hearts and minds,or anybody even putting out a coherent list of demands.

Reminds me of the GIA in Algeria. There must be a tradition that gives rise to this sort of thing. Perhaps a combination of tribalism and religion.

they were never really under anybody's control.No matter what the "puppeteers" originally thought

If so, then why are we worried about Iran and Syria's support of terrorism?

..and if the terrorists genuinely threaten Wahhabi states, why do members of al Qaeda hold high-ranking positions in the Sudanese and Yemeni governments? Why do the totalitarian leaders of Saudi Arabia allow their citizens to support terrorism? Why do they employ and promote the mullahs who encourage jihad. Why does the Saudi judiciary tell young men to kill Americans in Iraq?

When these states say that terrorism is beyond their control, that's how they fight their wars.

"So, yes, Michael, Muqtada al-Sadr says thanks for all your help -- thanks for backing the war that's empowered him, and thanks for not paying attention while he wormed his way into a position of influence."

Welcome to the real world, Swopster. Sometimes bad guys come out ahead.

On the other hand, his army seems to have turned into hamburger. One wonders what Mookie's life expectancy might be, considering how many next-of-kin he's produced, and how lawless Iraq still is....

"So, yes, Michael, Muqtada al-Sadr says thanks for all your help -- thanks for backing the war that's empowered him, and thanks for not paying attention while he wormed his way into a position of influence."

Yeah, where is Saddam when we need him? He knew how to deal with these guys. He would know how to deal with Swopa too. Two birds, one thug, what more could one wish for?

Their chimybushitler hatred is twisting them in knots.

I just read a letter signed by Chomsky condemning the Baathists and Islamic fundamentalists killing of Iraqi trade-unionists and other Iraqi civilians. Hardly surprising but I didn't want to let crap like "the left supports Islamic fundamentalists" slide. It's the kind of nonsense thrown around with a straight face by right wingers like David Horowitz and then picked up by liberal dupes like Totten.

Drydock, the problem is Chomsky and his fellow travelers get worked up about the trade-unionists, but can't seem to get interested in the mass graves.

That's the disconnect that drives some of us crazy.

Well Pohling-
1) You just condemned Chomsky for getting worked up about the killing of Iraqi trade-unionists. Poor old Noam can't win with you guys. If you guys are really interested in a democratic future for Iraq, you'd support the formation of Iraqi unions.

2) Totten claims the "Chomskyite" left supports Islamic fundamentalism. Well in a word-- it's bullshit. I'm glad your post implicitly agrees.

Drydock,

I didn't say Noam Chomsky supports Islamic fundamentalists. Rather, Chomsky is more tolerant of Islamist fundamentalists than I am.

Some leftists do support Islamist fundamentalists, though, even if Chomsky does not. I met a couple of American leftists in Beirut who openly support Hezbollah. One even claimed to be a journalist, but he refused to tell me which newspapers he writes for. (Perhaps he would have embarrassed himself, or perhaps he was lying. I don't know and I don't care.)

A guy who works at Starbucks down the street from me also is a supporter of both Hezbollah and Hamas. He thinks my view of them as terrorists is "simplistic" and "right-wing." He also thinks Israel murdered Rafik Hariri, and that the idea that Syria did it is "too convenient."

Lots of people in my neighborhood think this way. Heck, my older cousin - who lives just around the corner from me and used to live in Iran under the Shah Reza Pahlavi - says "more power to 'em" when I remind him that Iran created, funds, arms, and trains Hezbollah. He is not a Muslim from Iran, he's an atheist from America like I am.

gorgeous george comes to mind.

Peter Beinhart honed in on this in his infamous "purge the Democrats of the pacifics" article at the end of last year. It's spot on. The left's morality needs to be applied globally. One of the biggest threat to liberalism globally is fundamental Islam and it must be opposed even more strongly than the comparatively smaller threats that the Republicans pose to it in the US.

There's a related irony in the radical left's extreme hosility to things like the NAFTA and globalisation in general. The get angry that middle class Americans are losing jobs in favour of the desperately poor in developing countries. That's just immoral, isn't giving jobs to the poor the best way to help them?

One of the biggest threat to liberalism globally is fundamental Islam.

Well, then, we shouldn't have invaded Iraq in the way that we did, which has been a gift to Islamic fundamentalists in Iraq (see discussion of al-Sadr above) and around the world.

There's a related irony in the radical left's extreme hosility to things like the NAFTA and globalisation in general. They get angry that middle class Americans are losing jobs in favour of the desperately poor in developing countries. That's just immoral, isn't giving jobs to the poor the best way to help them?

I'm neither an expert nor a fanatic when it comes to trade, but I think their objection is that by making American workers supported by health insurance, safety and minimum wage laws, etc., compete against foreign workers without any of those things, you create a "race to the bottom" where reduces all workers' living standards to the lowest common denominator.

I hope that isn't something you endorse, Jeremy.

Swopa - so, why aren't you over in India, protesting the lack of health insurance, minimum wage laws, etc.

Or Venuzuela, where Chavez's police shoot union workers?

Or China? If you're brave enough to criticize America, surely you have a few choice words for the Red Army.

Why do you only protest against the US government, which already requires that benefits be provided for American workers. Is the light better here?

I have always been intrigued with the irony that the right-wing Bush administration is always pushing for islamic countries to become more liberal. While I agree that they should become more liberal, that's because I am a liberal and i wish our own country would move a little back in that direction!

As for liberals here (in the US) supporting islamofascism, I suppose there might be some, but I've never met one, and most of my friends & acquaintences are regular liberal-type people. I suspect that the people who make those accusations are just angry and have never really met or talked to an average liberal.

As for Western conservatives being more "intolerant" of middle easterners, that sounds about right but it's not across-the-board...I recall my brother, a Bush supporter, making disparaging (somewhat racist) comments about Iraqis just before the invasion. But another hard-right winger that I know is not like that, and has a very progressive attitude about not being racist, etc.

Mary, are you in physical therapy for that knee problem of yours?

You know, the way it keeps jerking so much?

I merely explained the anti-NAFTA point of view because Jeremy didn't understand it. I specifically said that I don't have a strong position either way -- which is because although the point of view I described has a strong principle behind it, I also don't think the tide of globalization is easily reversed.

Northcoaster, what is a Western Conservative?

"Anyway: the more right-wing the Westerner, the more intolerant he is of Middle Easterners in general "

I am glad you put in the "in general", because I am as right wing as they come and I have no problem with middle Easterners. I played soccer with them all the time in SC, and have shared an office with them in PA.

I hope you aren't just holding on to reflexive perceptions of righ wingers to hold on to your aversion of us. There is a reason that Pat Buchanan is no longer part of us.

Gerry, do you think most right-wingers would vote for Condi if she ran for president in '08? Would most right-wingers like to bury the racist and sexist crap once and for all or do you think it would be an issue for some voters?

Gerry, do you think most right-wingers would vote for Condi if she ran for president in '08? Would most right-wingers like to bury the racist and sexist crap once and for all or do you think it would be an issue for some voters?

I merely explained the anti-NAFTA point of view because Jeremy didn't understand it.

I think we all understand the inherent racism and fear that lies behind the anti-globalization movement.

Anyway, is that why you said "I hope that isn't something you endorse, Jeremy." - because you don't care either way?

Congratulations, Poppy and Babs! You raised not just one, or two, but at least three sociopathic monsters. How'd you manage that?

Remember, hate leads to the dark side.

NAFTA is a bad deal for the average worker, SWOPA is correct in saying a race for the bottom in wages is stupid and contrary to the national interest.

However, George Galloway (calling for an alliance between Muslims and Leftists to "destroy America"); Noam Chomsky (in his denial of Pol Pot's atrocities and decrying the invasion of Afghanistan); along with the usual anti-Semitic and Anti-American nonsense of Dick Durbin, Jim Moran, Maxine Waters, Conyers, etc (to the tune of anti-semitic nutjobs being given a microphone in "fantasy" hearings of impeachment and the DNC circulating anti-semitic flyers blaming 9/11 on once again, "the jews") ... well the Left has a serious problem. Not only is the sickness well indicated by the widespread anti-semitism and anti-Americanism, the Left refuses to stand for much over anything.

Moral relativism means excusing suicide bombers, cutting of throats, crashing planes into buildings with "well they were angry" or other sort of excuse making which comes all the time from the Left.

Speaking of knee-jerk reactionary responses, from your website...

You're a funny gal, Mary. You go hunting on my site to find some kind of fodder to use against me somehow, and you want to lecture me about hate?

Very entertaining. Don't have any mirrors at your house, do you? :-)

Great post! And great comments too. This topic for me is particularly soul stirring, because lately I’ve been wrestling with these very same ironies. And I do mean wrestling. Before September 11th, I’m ashamed to admit some of the thoughts that were circling around in my head, many of which I voiced out loud to friends and family. I wanted to level the entire Middle East region with bombs. Kill every last Arab. I don’t even want to tell you what I thought about the one’s living here in the US. It was irrational paranoia on my part, and knee-jerk extremism of the most despicable sort.

Slowly, as the war on terror progressed I began to see things in a new light. I started learning the subtle nuances of this fight. The situation was much more complicated than merely the drop of a bomb. I began to understand the true impact and importance of our mission overseas. Naturally, I can’t help but still harbor some of my previous suspicions. A big chunk of the Islamic world is out to do us serious harm. I can’t just sweep that fact underneath the rug like so many people on the left seem to do. It’s a difficult dilemma for me, and one that is going to take quite some time for me to reconcile. Ultimately I’m inclined to support what’s in the best interests for my country, and to hell with the rest, but in this case freeing other nations from tyranny IS in our best interest.

(I apologize in advance to anyone who may have been offended by the statements in the above paragraph. I only wanted to clearly and candidly illustrate my initial anger after 9/11, and had no intention of hurting anyone’s feelings. Sometimes the truth about oneself is ugly, but it’s something one must face and confront head-on.)

One of the ironies, Kay, is that if the Left had won, and the US left the ME to cook without Iraq invasion, it's quite possible Iran or Libya would be even closer to a nuke.
And Blix would be inspecting one site or another in Iraq, and saying "not here, not there" -- truthfully (prolly) BUT Saddam would be smiling and saying no nukes. See (wink, wink)? (those UN fools can't even give Kosovo democracy). ... and there might have been a terrorist nuke already set off.

After a terrorist nuke, possibly even a bio WMD, there is likely to be a LOT less patience with slow motion democracy evolution. Likely the Saudis would be occupied, controlled, and their oil wealth taken to pay for the victims, and the states doing the enforcement of such punishment.

Democratic regime change starting in Iraq is the best hope for avoiding the VERY bloody showdown.

VDH is wrong, maybe doubly so: "we are close to creating lasting democratic states in Afghanistan and Iraq — states that are influencing the entire region and ending the old calculus of Middle Eastern terror."

We prolly are NOT that "close", and it was a Vietnam mistake to claim we were. VDH is correct that US impatience is how we can "lose" -- to the death squad gov't advocates.

The Left's support of the death squads is of the third kind: not friends, usually not friends of friends, but definitely enemy of the death squad enemy (liberal tolerant capitalism).

Anybody who says NAFTA was a "bad deal" for workers (in general) is economically ignorant. It helps workers a LOT in Mexico (or don't they count?), and it helps lower prices to all workers who buy stuff in America.

France has over 10% unemployment, US less than 6% -- most economists think "Full Employment Unemployment" is around 5.5% in the US. Plus inflation is low. (Too low unemployment is caused by excessive spending; Bush is prolly spending too much). World poverty is dropping, as capitalism is allowed to work in China and India.

The Bush-hate in the media has been married to a capitalism-hate on the Left, and it implicitly supports liberal-hate and especially America-hate by the Islamists.

Just as the media was successful in getting America to leave Vietnam (but they didn't want Killing Fields...), and was successful in getting America to stop supporting the Shah (but they didn't want Islamic fundamentalism...), and was successful in getting the world to end apartheid & racism in S. Africa and Rhodesia (but they didn't want Mugabe in Zimbabwe; er, well, they wanted him THEN, but he got worse (with Aid), so it's not the media's fault, not Bono's fault ...) -- the media's "high standards" of criticism against the best real system has resulted in too many horrible changes.

Northcoaster: As for liberals here (in the US) supporting islamofascism, I suppose there might be some, but I've never met one

I've met plenty because I live in a hardcore left-wing neighborhoos of a left-wing city.

most of my friends & acquaintences are regular liberal-type people

Same here. Almost every single person I know is a liberal. Almost every member of my family, and almost all my friends, are liberals. My wife is a liberal.

Only one of my actual friends has ever admitted to any sympathy for Islamic fundamentalists and terrorists, but she still can't seem to shake it. She really thinks we're oppressing them and that we fully deserve everything they've thrown at us. I cannot discuss politics with her at all anymore.

Another friend of mine migrated from the radical left to the mainstream left after 9/11. The anarchists she used to hang out with openly celebrated the September 11 attacks on the United States. She had to walk away from them. She's still a Bush-hating leftie, but she will never be able to think of those to her left the same way again.

I suspect that the people who make those accusations are just angry and have never really met or talked to an average liberal.

That certainly is not true of me.

From Stealers Wheel (1973):

"Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right,
Here I am, stuck in the middle with you."

Swopa - I have some mirrors, but for some reason my image never appears in them..

You visit a site, insult the host, pee all over the hypothetical living room, and expect to be treated with respect? I usually don't quote from other people's websites, but I've lost all patience with aggressive hatemongers and Bush Derangement syndrome sufferers who are openly abusive while simultaneously whining about how they're being victimized. That tactic may work with the Left, but here in the Center we have some common sense.

I wish there were more on the left like you, Mike. Or that those on the left who share your beliefs would actually be public about them.

Michael - If there are anarchists (or whatever) in the US who truly support the radical islamists, I just don't think they can be identified as symbolic of (or maybe even part of) the left, any more than the Timothy McVeigh-types here symbolize the right.

I take exception to, for example, Jim Rockford above describing the "Left" as being being anti-American. Does he honestly believe that members of Congress are out to destroy this country? (And no, moral relativism does not mean excusing suicide bombers.)

The liberal population in our country generally dislikes fundamentalism - - Islamic, Christian, or otherwise. If anything, it's religious right-wingers who gravitate towards fundamentalism (hence the term 'american taliban' to describe the Christian Right). Which takes us back to the original post: it's ironic that Bush, Dobson, & co. are viewing ultra-conservative Islam as the enemy instead of their inspiration!

Drydock, do you have a link to that letter? Is it this one? Or this one? Or did you just get the two mixed up, 'cause I could only find condemnation of the recend (supposed)targeting trade-unionists.

I'm actually a big fan of the idea of trade unions; my dad was in the United Steelworkers for something like 25 years. Unions were crucial in the development of a broad, diverse middle class. At the grass-roots level, unions are great.

It's when you get up into Chomsky-land that things go really sour.

My point was simply that, as you presented it, worrying more about union-busting than, say, genocide (marsh arabs, kurds) shows a real sick puppy of a worldview.

But if you could find a link to the letter I'd be interested in reading it.

Northcoaster:

I take exception to, for example, Jim Rockford above describing the "Left" as being being anti-American. Does he honestly believe that members of Congress are out to destroy this country?

Jim Rockford listed a whole hodge-podge of names, and some of them I think truly wouldn't mind destroying the United States, or at least have a good old-fashioned Marxist Revolution make things Correct. But no, I don't think any member of Congress wants to destroy the United States.

I do think, though, that some in Congress in their righteous zeal don't realize the damage they often do.

That whole "mock impeachment" probably produced a net loss of votes for everyone who participated. (The shame of it is that it's become so hard to lose a seat in Congress that it probably won't cost anyone their job, except for maybe Howard Dean.) So domestically, it was worse-than-useless, unless you're looking at it as Republican source material. A chance to strut and fret for overly narcissistic Representatives, no more.

But you can bet your bottom dollar that the enemies of the United States are going to be quoting from it for years.

Does that make the idiots who participated evil? No. But it does make them, well, idiots. Poor players indeed.

Poling- A few points. I'm not necessarily here to defend Chomsky, however when absurd statements about his support or toleration of Islamic Fundamentalists are made to smear the whole left-- well that leaves no choice but to rebutt this utter BS.
1) First the Iraqi unions-- I actually saw some Iraqi trade unionists leaders speak this week. I believe they are the most progressive forces on the ground in Iraq. They clearly oppose intercommunal/religious violence and Iraqi oil workers are also in a strategic position to do something about it. In other words defending Iraqi union formation is in fact an important antidote to potential civil war or sectarian violence within Iraq. So it's not union-busting vs genocide per se but supporting the progressive forces within Iraq (who by the way oppose both the US occupation as well as the Iraqi resistance).

2) Turkey's vicious campaign against the Kurds was probably even worse than Saddam's. I learned about this via Chomsky. So I think a lot of complaining about Chomsky is misguided at best and out right lying at worst.

Three observations:

1. Liberals in any land will always be more alike than conservatives in the same two lands. What you fight to "conserve" in China is different than what you conserve in Peru.

2. Temporarily, on the issue of aggressive American policies to replace dictatorship with democracy in Iraq, the conservative and liberal positions flow backwards from their usual or expected courses. Surrounding concerns (protecting basic rights in time of war) may influence this, but they do not seem to be the cause. The same concerns prevailed in the Civil War without deterring the liberals at all.

3. Active sympathy with the Islamists is more a feature of European "liberals" than their American counterparts at this point. But "I'm more worried about Bush than I am about bin Laden" is something I hear often here. Along with "if we'd just leave them along, they'd leave us alone." VDH says they're "tolerant" of Islamic fundamentalism. That's not the same thing as "supporting" it. I think he's used the right term.

Another great one, Mike. As a centrist, I've alwys discovered the the extremes have a sort of common thread to them. The far Left and the far Right seem to meet somewhere in the abyss of the political fringe. This explains why xenophobic isolationists like Pat Buchanan, and hard-Left activists like Gore Vidal seem to be making the same arguments.

Ideology, when tajen to the extreme, blinda all judgment. Centrists, moderates, and the relative mainstream, regardless of one's political persuasion, have the ability to see these ironies, while the extreme ideologues do not.

After 50 posts on this thread-- I realized all the pro-war knuckleheads are like my leftists comrades-- they don't talk to anybody outside their comfortable little ghetto. The idea that left is tolerant of Islamic Fundamentalists is fuckin absurd. The best Totten could come up with in terms of an American example was some Starbucks coffee slinger as a Hamas apologist. Nobody has named one prominent American leftist who is tolerant of Islamic Fundaentalism. 50 posts not one-- just a bunch of rhetoric.

Callimachus: But "I'm more worried about Bush than I am about bin Laden" is something I hear often here. Along with "if we'd just leave them along, they'd leave us alone." VDH says they're "tolerant" of Islamic fundamentalism. That's not the same thing as "supporting" it.

Exactly.

Very few American leftists support Islamic extremism. Very very few. But that's not what this was about in the first place.

Maybe the likes of Drydock don't encounter what we are talking about very often. Maybe he lives in Dallas where such thinking is practically non-existent. But around here it is extremely common. In my neighborhood it is the norm. I hear it constantly, and no lefty with his fingers in his ears can tell me I can't.

Michael,

Only one of my actual friends has ever admitted to any sympathy for Islamic fundamentalists and terrorists, but she still can't seem to shake it. She really thinks we're oppressing them and that we fully deserve everything they've thrown at us. I cannot discuss politics with her at all anymore.

How amoral (or should it be immoral) do you have to be to keep such friends?

And, I sure would like to have a few...ahem...words with this cousin of yours.

Final irony that I've noticed: the further from the center you are, the more you think everybody agrees with you.

drydock:

So it's not union-busting vs genocide per se but supporting the progressive forces within Iraq (who by the way oppose both the US occupation as well as the Iraqi resistance).

I'm obviously not a fan of what has become progressivism but I would point out that being against both the US occupation (and by extension the interim government, I think) and against the Iraqi "resistance" is prehaps the most untenable place a person can be, derriere-exposure wise. Call me cynical, but I think if the US occupation is driven to failure, the system of government that evolves afterward won't look a lot like Sweden's.

(By the way, I think the predominance of terms like "resistance" and "insurgents" over the more accurate "terrorists" -- or even "bombers" or "kidnappers" or -- wait, what would you call someone willing to kill themselves to prevent a society from embracing democracy? fascists? -- indicate exactly how cross-eyed the chattering classes have become regarding what should be progressive ideals. "Value-neutral" terms used to describe people who use the tactics of the "Iraqi resistance" is anything but value-neutral. It's a tacit endorsement of tactics that should be held in universal contempt by a society based on progressive values. But that's just exactly how screwed up we've become.)

(Orwell called it "doublespeak" I think.)

Poling-- You should be cynical. In my opinion the chances for a non barbaric outcome for the Iraqi people are small. That's why I opposed "the liberation of Iraq from above" a la American imperialism (or what some might call humanitarian intervention). Conservative Niall Ferguson, who Totten respects, at least calls it imperialism-- he just thinks it's a good thing.

The best thing that can be done at this shitty point is to support Iraqi unions, womens groups, secular and progressive forces against the Baathists and Islamic fundamentalist "resistance" and also against the US occupation. Notice that while Bremer privatized the whole Iraqi economy (except the oil industry), he didn't lift Saddam's 1987 ban on unions. Why's that? Totten? Others?

I don't like to use the term "terrorist" because its applied by the US state selectively depending whose on the CIA payroll at any given time. While I oppose the Iraqi "resistance" I suspect that a portion of it aren't Baathists and fundamentalists but are probably just ordinary Sunnis pissed about the occupation and their miserable living conditions. They have unfortunately aligned themselves with the insurgent reactionaries.

I hear it constantly, and no lefty with his fingers in his ears can tell me I can't.

I'd imagine you hear it pretty regularly; since bin Laden has so very little power over us that we don't grant him, Bush is a much greater threat to our day-to-day lives, pleasures, and hopes. Even if he were merely a poor President who pushed for bad policy, this would be both the case and manifestly obvious.

I mean, the CEO of GM has more power to kill Americans by letting his company's car quality lapse further than bin Laden has. The guy had one good shot, and he took it. After that, all of our wounds are self-inflicted.

Drydock, there's support, and then there's support.

It's certainly easy enough to oppose the U.S. occupation; all you have to do is work to make it politically untenable at home to stay in Iraq. The usual suspects are doing their best on that score, often for what I consider to be some pretty bad reasons (Bush Derangement Syndrome being chief among them).

And of course, even if you're for an immediate pull-out, that doesn't mean you support the islamofascists. People of good faith can honestly believe we're making things worse than better.

The trouble I have with that stance is that should we pull our troops out, and offer all the "you go girl!" verbal/economic/humanitarian/etc. support to the groups you mentioned, that's NOT going to stop the folks who are supporting the Islamofascists with guns, plastic explosives, and jihadis. So immediately, all the happy Progressives have a real problem on their hands, and nobody willing to back them up with the muscle they'll need.

In other words, I think your Iraqi Rainbow Coalition ends up in the same boat as all those progressives who supported Robert Mugabe, way back when. (You know Mugabe, he's the revolutionary who recently outlawed private gardens in urban areas. What a guy.)

I'm sorry, progressivism (which is, in the end I think, Marxism that realizes it has an image problem) just doesn't have a good track record. Real progressives can't seem to prevent the trend-to-tyranny that seems inherrent in it's underlying principals. (I mean, the whole idea that the way to start fighting monopoly powers is to create a state-controlled supermonoply has always made my head hurt.)

So in the end, I think the only way to reach the goals you desire is to hope like hell the U.S. can bring about a stable civil society in Iraq, and then push for the Progressive ideals.

(Unless you can point to a successful Progressive society that has ever evolved directly from an anarchic/tyrannical state. Then I'll reconsider my conclusions.)

Kimmit, I suppose if you look at bin Laden as the problem instead of as a symptom, your analysis would be correct. But I'll riff on my earlier comment and point out that the 20th Century was littered with Collectivists who, in the body of multiple "problems" (Lenin, Stalin, Hitler - he was a Socialist, remember? - , Mao, and Pol Pot being the worst, I think) killed a really impessive number of people, most of whom were citizens of their own countries.

I think you can see where I'm going here; that these exceptional people weren't in fact exceptional, except they're the ones who happened to be charge when their philosphies hit the fan.

Likewise, I see Islamofascism (which is really a riff on Collectivism with the not-terribly-original insertion of official religious bigotry) as the root problem which will, if allowed to flourish, make the 21st Century simply a riff on the 20th.

Pardon me, it's time to change the tune. The Robber Barron bogeymen (a la the 19th Century) are no longer the biggest threat to humanity's Greater Good. Let's change with the times and learn from history, shall we?

Poling-- I think you misread me a bit. I think the chances for a positive outcome in Iraq are slim. I also think the "Iraqi Rainbow Coalition" isn't going to make Iraq a warm and fuzzy place like Sweden. But that's what there-- they're the ones that will oppose the resistance and Sistani's theocratic forces. Probably the best possible outcome is that the current Iraqi government makes concessions to Sunni power (including ex-Baathists) in exchange for an end to the insurgency. And I'm sure the US would hold veto over any arrangement. There's a lot of variables to screw up that equation so I'm not optimistic.

Hitler - he was a Socialist, remember?

Um, no. And before you break out the name of the Party which he headed, it might be relevant to note that not only was this a guy who lied a lot, but the phrase, "National Socialist" is an inherent contradiction in terms. Socialism is by definition multinational.

Anyways, I stopped reading your post as soon as you trotted out this wingnut trope. Thanks for saving me the time.

Kimmit, a link:

National Socialism, from the Columbia Encyclopedia:

After World War I a number of extremist political groups arose in Germany, including the minuscule German Workers’ party, whose spokesman was Gottfried Feder. Its program combined socialist economic ideas with rabid nationalism and opposition to democracy. The party early attracted a few disoriented war veterans, including Hermann Goering, Rudolf Hess, and Hitler. After 1920 Hitler led the party; its name was changed, and he reorganized and reoriented it, stamping it with his own personality.

To give you credit, the article goes on:

By demagogic appeals to latent hatred and violence, through anti-Semitism, anti-Communist diatribes, and attacks on the Treaty of Versailles, the party gained a considerable following. Its inner councils were swelled by such frustrated intellectuals as P. J. Goebbels, and by the element of riffraff typified by Julius Streicher, while its public adherents were heavily drawn from the depressed lower middle class. Hitler minimized the socialist features of the program. National Socialism made its appeal not to an economic class but rather to the insecure and power-hungry elements of society.

Of course, that hardly refutes my point that Collectivism as a guiding principal generally devolves (once accepted as a political/economic basis) into a mechanism to gather and maintain despotic power. Actually, it's pretty damn good support for my thesis.

My personal feeling is that any philosophical system that subordinates the individual to a supposedly homogenous group has the same tendency to devolve into despotism. So no, I'm not a fan of any of the "great man" forms of government. I'm also generally uneasy, and often vociferously opposed, to heirarchical religions.

But I suppose that because I can actually consider that someone who called himself a Socialist was in fact a Socialist makes me a wingnut.

(Of course, finding any discussion of the relationship between National Socialism movements and traditional Marxism is tough; the compare-and-contrast simply isn't done much, which is odd considering how much blood has been shed in the name of each. Which is interesting because, at least in it's roots, both would seem to appeal to the same demographic. National Socialism differentiated itself from Communism not by rejecting Collectivism, but by rejecting Internationalism. And that, of course, was the key to political dominance in a poverty-stricken, xenophobic, and resentful post-WWI Germany.)

Anyway, I'm glad you didn't waste any more time reading after my little aside in my previous comment, because obviously you lack the capacity to think outside your own little box.

Go back to Kos, if you're just looking for affirmation. Some of us here are trying to think.

And of course Kimmit never did address the "was Bin Laden the problem or a symptom of the problem" question.

But of course, he's got his fingers in his ears and isn't listening any more.

No, Kimmett, the CEO of GM does not more power to kill Americans than does bin Laden. He may have more potential for doing so, but that is not the same thing. Fact of the matter is that in today's competitive market, an egregious error like the Pinto gas hose, which killed only one hundredth as many people as 9/11, would be a financial disaster for an automobile manufacturer.

It's OK, in theory, to be against the US occupation/ liberation. Bush's policy was Liberation -- we're doing an Occupation because the Iraqis seem unable/ unwilling to rule themselves, democratically, with enough respect for others' opinions that they don't blow themselves up.

What those opposed to US occupation today need to say is what they are "for". If "anything is better" than more occupation, that means they accept a Civil War; Killing Fields; Genocide ... or whatever.

I support MORE Iraqi controlled security, with Iraqis responsible for security in their areas. That means turning in the terrorists, and turning in the terrorist enablers.

"The idea that left is tolerant of Islamic Fundamentalists is fuckin absurd." Yeah, like the idea that the Left tolerated Pol Pot? Or that the Left tolerated Hutu genocide? Or that the Left, like Amnesty and Human Rights Watch, tolerates genocide today in Darfur by NOT NAMING it honestly?
Since they actively attack those who oppose genocide in Darfur (Bush), it's more than toleration right now.

Since they actively attack those who oppose genocide in Darfur (Bush),

And what, precisely, has the Commander in Chief of the United States Military -- the most powerful man in the world -- done about the genocide in Darfur, sir? What action befitting his authority has he taken?

www.best-casino-online.biz
online casino

sklep internetowy kamery cyfrowe sony panasonic minidv Kamery cyfrowe, telewizory plazmowe lgjvc Telewizory plazmowe. eeeby sony panasonic eeeby. eeeby sony panasonic eeeby.

canon canon aparaty sony sony
lg telefony gsm samsung samsung siemens siemens kuchnie philips philips creative sharp sharp telewizory plazmowe

thick black porn @ thick black sluts @ thick black tit @ thick black woman and @ thick ebony @ thick ebony ass @ thick ebony bitch @ thick ebony booty @ thick ebony butt @ thick ebony chick @ thick ebony fucking @ thick ebony gallery @ thick ebony girl @ thick ebony girl pic @ thick ebony hoe @ thick ebony lady @ thick ebony model @ thick ebony movie @ thick ebony pic @ thick ebony porn @ thick ebony teen @ thick ebony tgp @ thick ebony tit @ thick ebony woman @ thomas blackshear ebony vision @ thomas blackshears ebony vision @ thumbnail gallery of ebony @ tight black ass @ tight black slut @ tight ebony ass @ tight ebony girl @ tiny black tit @ tiny ebony babes @ tinys black adventure @ toon sex @ toon sex movie @ top black gay porn @ top black porn site @ top black porn star @ top ebony model @ top ebony porn star @ top gay sex site @ trailer porn black woman @ uk ebony model @ ultra sex movie @ vanessa blue black porn @ video clip blackwomen @ video clip of naked @ video de sexe @ video de sexe gratuit

Hi I have been given the task of getting links for our websites thathave good page rank on the links directories.In addition we have many categories so your site will be place on an appropriate page. If you would like to trade links please send me your website details.Best Regards,seopro@walla.com
http://www2w.bravehost.com vs the best casino http://casino.vmedical.us new online casino
casinos
casino
online poker
online gambling
online casinos
online casinos
online casinos
online poker
online casinos
online casino
casino
poker
casino
casino
casinos
online casino
online gambling
casino
poker
neteller casinos
online casino
online poker
online casino
internet poker
free online poker
texas holdem poker
poker
online slots
online roulette
online blackjack
poker
online casinos
online casino
online casino
online roulette
online poker
internet casinos
online slots
online blackjack
online poker

very nice site

Take your time to check out some information dedicated to tamiflu purchase tamiflu purchase

http://www.dolev-yomel.com/tami1

tamiflu without prescription

http://www.dolev-yomel.com/tami2

tamiflu in canada

http://www.dolev-yomel.com/tami3

tamiflu price

http://www.dolev-yomel.com/tami4

cheap tamiflu price

http://www.dolev-yomel.com/tami5

real tamiflu price

http://www.archipenko.co.il/tami6

buy tamiflu

http://www.archipenko.co.il/tami7

order tamiflu

http://www.archipenko.co.il/tami8

tamiflu online

http://www.archipenko.co.il/tami9

tamiflu

http://www.archipenko.co.il/tami10

tamiflu and no prescription

http://www.archipenko.co.il/flu

Very nice site sharp

Check out How to Gamble in America :: Poker Index :: Poker Room Review :: Sports Index :: Sports Book Review :: Casino Index :: Casino Review :: Craps :: Blackjack Strategies :: Roulette :: Let It Ride :: Three Card Poker :: Video Poker :: Gambling Quotes :: Online Gambling :: Online Poker :: Draw Poker :: Poker Hand Rankings :: Texas Hold’em :: Seven Card Stud :: Seven Card High/Low :: Omaha :: Omaha High/Low :: Guide To Sports Betting :: The Basics to Wagering on Sports :: Parlays :: Teasers :: Half Point :: Sports Betting Tips & Tricks :: Money Management :: Sports Betting Terminology :: Football Tip Tip :: Free NFL Pick :: Other Sites Index :: Bill Clinton Quotes :: Other Sites :: Other Sites 2 :: Rounders Quotes

Also check out 100 Best Poker Rooms for all the best up to date online gambling sites.

And How to Gamble Online for all the best up to date online gambling sites.

Online Gambling Forum.

How to Gamble in America

new online poker site ! http://poker.trinitytc.com Poker

AirfareLowest.net provides great tickets at cheap airfare prices for everyone. We have cheap hotels and cheap rental cars available. You can buy cruise tickets all over the worlds. Feel free to check out our prices so you can see that we have the cheapest prices for all tickets. We have all Airfare our tickets are all Lowest Airfare prices for all Cheap Airfare prices world wide. First Class Airfare is available so as Last Minute Airfare Available. We also provide Cheap Hotels for all Hotel Visitors and we do our own Hotels Reservations including Las Vegas Hotels, London Hotels, New York Hotels, Hilton Hotels, Orlando Hotels. We have all Rental Cars for all the location if you take a cruise ship plus cruise reviews available for all cruises. Plane Tickets available 24 hours a day on our secure server. A fare is the fee paid by a traveller allowing him or her to make use of a public transport system: rail, bus, taxi, etc. In the case of air transport, the term airfare is often used.
The fare paid is a contribution Hotels to the operational costs of the transport system involved, either partial (as is frequently the case with publicly supported systems) or total. We have Hitlton Hotels for all hotel motel places such as chicago hotels for hotels deals. Paris hotels are available all the time San Francisco Hotels 24 hours a day with Habbo hotels, for discount hotel rooms, plus all hawaii hotels, and sheraton hotels, plus malaysia hotels. It's great to spend time in radisson hotels with hotel rooms in New York city hotels plus miami hotels, and singapore hotels. We provide all kind of boston hotels for disney hotels and cancun hotels, plus discount vegas hotels for all our clients. San Diego hotels available with best western hotels in bangkok hotels, and cheap new orleans hotels, amesterdam hotels with great view of the city. Number one choice hotels at wyndham hotels for Prague Hotels and Hyatt Hotels, bellagio hotel. Doubletree hotels phuket hotels and westin hotels we have them all at all times plus toronto hotels, and niagara falls hotels. Many bus and rail systems in the United States recover only around one-third of their operational costs from fares.
The rules regarding how and when fares are to be paid and for how long they remain valid are many and varied. Rail and bus systems usually require the payment of fares on or before boarding. In the case of taxis and other vehicles for hire, payment is Cheap Rental Cars normally made at the end of the ride.
Some systems allow fare transfers: that is to say that a single payment permits travel within a particular geographical zone or time period. Such an arrangement is helpful for people who need to transfer from one route to another in order to reach their destination. Sometimes transfers are valid in one direction only, requiring a new fare to be paid for the return trip.

A Net dating service, also known as hispanic dating service online dating or internet dating, is an example of a dating system and allows individuals, couples and speed dating groups to meet online and possibly develop a social, romantic or sexual interracial dating relationship. Net dating services free dating services provide un-moderated lesbian dating matchmaking through the use of personal jewish dating computers and the Internet.
Such black dating services generally allow people to provide personal information, then search for other individuals using sex dating criteria such as age range, gender and location. Most sites allow members to upload photos of themselves dating lexington online and browse the photos of asian dating others. Sites may offer additional services, including webcasts, dating chat online chat, and message boards. Sites dating advice typically allow people to register for free but may offer services which require a monthly fee.
It seems that everywhere bbw dating you turn today been going to dating sites, people are online dating from site dating. More and more American singles use the online dating services to find love, online personals, friendship, or simply an online friend for matchmaking sites. We were launched to help online dating louisville singles of all ages for free online dating and free dating, religions such as christian datind christian dating services and sexual interests, find exactly what they're looking for with singles dating. Every personals or singles site gets reviewed before being posted here on dating web sites.We have availablegay dating, on our online dating sites, LDS Dating also available for everyone. We have dating tips for everyone, all ages dating available such as seniors dating , internet dating and also we have dating personals We provide all kind of dating such as singles for all singles websites so guys and girls can meet single girls to meet singles online. Many sites are broad-based, with members from a variety of backgrounds looking for different types of relationships. Other sites are more specific, based on the dating personals type of members, interests, location, or matchmaker dating relationship desired.U.S. any dating eharmony has href marriage match more online per service than residents spent $469.5 million on online dating and dating issue personals in 2004, the largest segment of “paid content” on the web, according to a study conducted by the Online free dating personals Publishers Association (OPA) and comScore Networks.

In terms of the dating of free dating site complete authoritative texts, there are dating idea three main versions of the relationship dating Hebrew Bible. There is the Masoretic text of the Torah, thought to be first indian dating assembled russian dating in the 4th century CE. The oldest chicago dating known copy (the oldest is the Aleppo Codex, the yahoo dating oldest complete match dating text is the Leningrad Codex) now dates to the christian dating services tenth century CE. There is the Septuagint, married dating which is a Greek translation of the Torah, made under Ptolemy in the third century BCE. The oldest dating or services copy of the Septuagint is dating direct centuries older than the seattle dating oldest complete Masoretic text, and texas dating fragments of the Septuagint date to the second century BCE. There is also the Samaritan Torah, which teen dating emerged after the Assyrian occupation of the web dating northern kingdom of Israel. The Peshitta, a translation of the Christian Bible into Syriac, a dating game variant of Aramaic, can be useful in determining latin dating authenticity of passages and hence help establish dates. The earliest known copy of the Peshitta dates to 445-460 CE.

Online casinos can for sure have games offer better odds than casino on net. Land casinos on slots and other formats where the chance of captivating is resolute by the house. Table games like casino gaming, blackjack which have an casino poker,  recognized house edge: for a given set of rules, they offer the similar payout, online or offline. Reliability and faith are hard to gambling casino online establish. To solve this issue, many online casinos purchase their software from well-known best casino, companies such as Wager Works, Microgaming, OddsOn, Playtech and Cryptologic, though a little study casino on line, into credentials of any e-commerce site you plan to use is gambling casino, ordinary sense. These software companies use a casino online gambling random number maker online casino slot to ensure that the casino online gambling, numbers, cards or dice appear randomly. All reputable companies in service in a regulated environment use robust random number generators.

For this particular online casino game example, this would mean that a player depositing $100 would start with $200 in his account. He must make $5000 in wagers online+casino before withdrawing. This can be played at a game such as blackjack.

online pharmacy, pharmacy, canadian pharmacy, vicodin online pharmacy, canada pharmacy, phentermine online pharmacy, online pharmacy valium, xanax online pharmacy, ultram online pharmacy, pharmacy online, alprazolam online pharmacy, discount pharmacy, mexican pharmacy, internet pharmacy, mail order pharmacy, canada online pharmacy, overseas pharmacy, foreign pharmacy, phentermine pharmacy, tesco pharmacy jobs, on line pharmacy, pharmacy technician, online+pharmacy, international pharmacy, viagra pharmacy, pharmacy job, canadian online pharmacy, pet pharmacy, pharmacy discount, canadian pharmacy online, pharmacy drug, pharmacy canadian, pharmacy order tramadol, cvs pharmacy, pharmacy drugs, lortab online pharmacy, lortab pharmacy, mexico pharmacy, vicodin pharmacy, pharmacy jobs, ultram pharmacy, online pharmacy affiliate program, soma online pharmacy, pharmacy on line, canadian discount pharmacy, discount online pharmacy, viagra online pharmacy, adderol online pharmacy, canadian pharmacy affiliate, online discount pharmacy, vicodin+online+pharmacy, online pharmacy tramadol, canadian pharmacy on line, diazepam online pharmacy, pharmacy schools, online pharmacy no prescription, online canadian pharmacy, valium pharmacy, foreign online pharmacy, hydrocodone, online pharmacy, cialis online pharmacy, wholesale pharmacy, cvs pharmacy career, phentermine+online+pharmacy, brooks pharmacy, line pharmacy, online+pharmacy+valium, xanax+online+pharmacy, alprazolam+online+pharmacy, ultram+online+pharmacy, pharmacy school, walgreens pharmacy, international online pharmacy, mexican pharmacy online, hydrocodone pharmacy, pharmacy tech, best online pharmacy, online internet pharmacy, ambien pharmacy, online doctor pharmacy, pharmacy no prescription hydrocodone, online pharmacy celebrex, online pharmacy medicine, line pharmacy phentermine, pharmacy technician schools, canadian on line pharmacy, online pharmacy pay pal, pharmacy tech online, online pharmacy canada, canada+pharmacy, mexican pharmacy ortho novum cheap florida online pharmacy, canada in online pharmacy, law online pharmacy, aldara online pharmacy, online pharmacy technician, online pharmacy technician course, online pharmacy florida delivery phentermine, pharmacy tech online schools, pharmacy technicians

puz, sl, zdrowa żywność, mieszkania Warszawa
ogłoszenia nieruchomości, projektowanie stron
tworzenie stron, agencja reklamowa, reklama w internecie, psycholog, nauka angielskiego, soczewki kontaktowe, psyche sf, jk, nls, projektowanie wnętrz, hydraulik Warszawa, opcataloz, domy opieki, freetimes, jidds, fabrykapoe, sfworks, polskepoeje, pb, pp, jk, wypadki, opony, agroturystyka, klimatyzacja, apteka, dentysta, f, kray, ewes, angs, git, akupunktura, sc

nice topic
wymiana linków partnerzy aktualne ogłoszenia działki, grunty garaże blaszane domy lokale biurowe, mieszkania

澳大利亚
澳大利亚移民
澳洲移民

压力开关
压力变送器
压力传感器
流量开关
流量计
液位计
液位开关
温湿度记录仪
风速仪
差压开关
可燃气体检测仪

过滤器
强磁水处理器
自清洗过滤器
自动反冲洗过滤器

澳大利亚
澳大利亚移民
澳洲移民

网站优化
Printer parts

wow power leveling
wow powerleveling
runescape power leveling
runescape powerleveling
runescape power level
runescape money
runescape gold
buy runescape gold
buy runescape money
runescape items
runescape accounts
buy runescape accounts
buy runescape items
cheap runescape money
cheap runescape gold
runescape gp
dofus kamas
dofus kamas
Achat DOFUS Kamas
Guild Wars Gold
buy Guild Wars Gold
GW Gold
陈楚生

乐乐城
SEO排名
SEO社区
SEO优化排名
SEO日志
网络营销
SEO博客
SEO博客
龙翔
SEO
凌枫博客
空谷
空谷博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
空谷
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
空谷博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
博客
空谷
空谷</