Advertising

  • Advertise here

Blog Awards


  • Sablogpolitics

  • Sablogpolitics

  • Sablogrunnerupgroup

  • Sablogrunneruppost

  • JIB

Miscellaneous

« Jihad comes to Africa | Main | A Rwandan Diary - Part 1 »

April 28, 2006

Comments

Gary

The comparisons between President Bush and Hitler started with the 'anti-war movement' which opposed US action against Saddam Hussein
The brainwashed fools could not see that if anyone could be compared to Hitler , it was Saddam-who gassed several hundred thousand Kurds and killed several hundred thousand more Iraqis.
Now Haman Ahmadinejad wants to anihilate the 6 million people of Israel, but Bush compared to Hitler , for wanting to stop him

As regards Mandla's attitude to Israel, what is it that causes Black South Africans to hate Israel so much?
They have so little concern for their own fellow Black Africans in Sudan or Zimbabwe , but are so hot for the Palestinians who they have little in common with
What is going on here?

Mike

This guy (Mandla) is shocking. Must be one of the most anti-Jewish/anti-American journalist around. Those types of views can not go unchecked. We must all write in and respond.

Mike

This guy (Mandla) is shocking. Must be one of the most anti-Jewish/anti-American journalist around. Those types of views can not go unchecked. We must all write in and respond.

Gary

He decies to use Marx as an authority on the Jewish question even though Marx was a vicious anti-semite of the first order.

http://pnews.org/art/1art/KARLmarx.shtml

Derikboy

Hey guys,

That link to the Herald doesn't work, can you check it?
I bet Jon Q and Mandla would have brilliant discussions with each other, as they go along recalling history and quoting Marxs and Engels as they remember it :)

SnoopyTheGoon

The use of "you are just like Hitler" or "you are a Nazi" became a very much used coin these days, loved by the raving fringe of the lefties (or people who consider themselves lefties).

So much so that not being called a Nazi/Hitler-lover today is rather a sign of not being taken seriously.

Hilton

here's a working link to the article page:
http://www.theherald.co.za/colarc/hcow/hc13042006.htm

Good luck trying to change shortsightedness / ignorance / sheer bl**dy-mindedness / reverse racialism into objective observation!!

Steve

Sorry about the links. The letter link is no longer live. Here is the text (may be choppy due to poor character recognition from the software):

CONTRARY to the rather strange political analysis in Mandia Seleone`s April 13 column ("Bush policy not unlike that of Adolf Hitler", The Herald), the US president seems to be fully justified "in taking the view that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahamadinijad is a potential Hitler". When one recalls Hilter`s horrific policy of genocide in dealing with what he termed "the Jewish problem", Ahamadinijad`s statements that "Israel is a blot which should be wiped off the map", following that up with "Israel is a rotten dry tree that will be annihilated by a storm" and "Israel`s very existence is an affront to Arab dignity", Bush`s comparison of Ahamadinijad with Hitler is accurate. Both wanted to annihilate Jews (Hitler succeeded in murdering six million in Europe and Ahamadinijad wants to do the same with five million in Israel.) The fact that the world is alarmed at the prospect of Iran obtaining nuclear power in view of its belligerent attitude indicates the potency of the explosive situation. The question begging to be asked is: What is the world going to do about the looming disaster with its dire consequences? In that respect one recalls the often quoted truism: anti-semitism begins with the Jews but does not end with the Jews. Israel today, the world tomorrow. Short of a modern miracle, it is difficult to visualise how Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, will manage to reconcile Iran`s need for nuclear power with the world`s mistrust, in view of Iran`s extreme hostility towards Israel and Bush`s declaration that the US will protect the Jewish state if attacked by Iran. This US president seems to have learnt from history that appeasement (as attempted by Britain with Hitler in Munich) does not work and he is keeping all his options open, irrespective of whether or not such policies find favour with others. In that respect, one can admire Bush`s political courage in the face of domestic opposition as well as endless hesitancy and uncertainty on the part of others who might live to regret their lack of timely action, whatever form such action might take. Moreover, Seleone`s depiction of Bush as a warmonger is unwarranted for two reasons: before the 9/11 attack on the US, that country was not at war with anyone and since 9/11 Bush has shown a determination to fight terrorism wherever and whenever that scourge raises its ugly head. (Terrorism is defined as "indiscriminate violence".) Generally speaking the US, in bi-partisan mode it should be noted, is not prepared to become a passive victim. Accordingly, that country today takes a far-reaching, long-term view of what it considers to be in its own best interests and undertakes appropriate action within that context. Finally, against the backdrop of the complex dynamics currently operating in the world, the big political picture, Seleone`s lengthy but superficial comparison of Bush with Hitler is both fallacious and offensive in the extreme, indicating at best a lack of accurate analytical ability or, at worst, a malicious predisposition towards Bush that clouds his judgment. David Abel, George President George Bush has lunch with Marine Corps and Navy families during a visit to the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Centre in Twentynine Palms, California.

Steve

Gary wrote

As regards Mandla's attitude to Israel, what is it that causes Black South Africans to hate Israel so much?
They have so little concern for their own fellow Black Africans in Sudan or Zimbabwe , but are so hot for the Palestinians who they have little in common with
What is going on here?

Gary, are you much better? You are stereotyping all Black South Africans as having a hatred that is irrational and as caring very little for other Africans.

When white South Africans like Allister Sparks or Zapiro have a go at Israel you attack them personally - which is fine and you are entitled to do that. But you dont attack all "white south africans" in general. Yet with Mandla you choose to attack "Black South Africans". What is going on here?

Gary

No , I am reffering to the Majority of Black South African opinion makers - not ALL
I have the highest regard for descent Black leaders like Reverend Kenneth Meshoe (leader of the African Christian Democratic Party) and Prince Mangosutho Buthelezi, who are sypathetic to Israel.
Unfortunately they are too few and far between.

Rethabile

Gary,
Steve beat me to it with the generalisation issue. But there's a second point that comes up in your reply to Steve's rebuke: "I have the highest regard for descent [sic] Black leaders like Reverend Kenneth Meshoe (leader of the African Christian Democratic Party) and Prince Mangosutho Buthelezi, who are sypathetic [sic] to Israel," you say.

Being sympathetic to Israel isn't a prerequisite to being a decent black leader, or a decent any leader for that matter. At the same time, not being sympathetic to Israel doesn't necessarily make a bad leader.

People must be considered within the context of their existence, or leadership if you will. Nelson Mandela is a great leader, yet he's openly "pals" with Gadhafi and Fidel -- not your neighbourhood Mr Nice Guys.

As a kid in Lesotho, the party to which my family belonged was sympathetic to the PAC (throw the white man into the sea), not the ANC (South Africa belongs to all who live in it); within the context of Lesotho politics at that time, however, our party were generally considered the good guys, and the ones more able and readier to govern Lesotho properly.

Gary also says, "[Blacks] have so little concern for their own fellow Black Africans in Sudan or Zimbabwe , but are so hot for the Palestinians who they have little in common with." I'm sure that was a slip of the tongue, wasn't it? It just doesn't sound right.

Gary

Rethabile , firstly the spelling mistakes are simply from typing fast-not due to any lack of education as you imply with your (sic)
Secondly I believe that one's attitude to Israel is the defining moral issue - I use it as a litmust test for determining who is good and who is evil.whether those under discussion are Black , White or Brown. I do not judge people by their skin colour , I judge them by what is in their hearts.
Based on the injunction in the Bible that G-D will bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel.
I believe those who are good to Israel are good , period.
As regards my remark that "They have so little concern for their own fellow Black Africans in Sudan or Zimbabwe , but are so hot for the Palestinians who they have little in common with." I'm sure that was a slip of the tongue, wasn't it? It just doesn't sound right." I don't apologize for that. I am reffering to much of South Africa's Black elite , who do indeed seem to have little concern for fellow Black Africans in places like Zimbabwe and Sudan , and seem far more concened for the Palestinians.
There is real genocide going on in Sudan but the ANC and most journalists focus purely on the 'plight' of the Palestinians (self-made if ever there was one).
Why does the ANC speak out openly against Israel but not against the real human rights abusers of Sudan , Zimbabwe , Red China , North Korea etc.

As regards Nelson Mandela , I was in matric when he was released and was a big fan of his at the time
I had a Free Mandela poster in my bedroom at the time
But his foreign policy has made me lose every shred of respect for the man.
When Mandela went to China in the late 1990's he was asked about Chinese dissidents imprisoned by the Communist regime there and his response was that maybe they deserved to be in prison.
On the other hand he has headed the campaign to free terrorist mass murderer Marwan Bhargoutti of the PLO , who has ordered murders of Jewish men , women and children.
So according to Mandela's morality , peaceful dissidents against Red China's tyranny deserve to be in prison , but a mass murderer (Bhargoutti) should be released and his imprisonment (for mass murder) is a great injustice!
Mandela also showed no sympathy for the plight of Tibet.
So why are the Palestinians entitled to sovereignty but not Tibet?
Is it because the Tibetans have used purely peaceful means to further their cause and the Palestinians have used terror against women and children?
When Mandela made these remarks , as well as when he vowed to crush all political dissent in SA in 1997 , I lost all respect whatsoever for the man.
Whether supporting Palestinian terrorists or being pallie with tyrannical regimes in Zimabwe, Libya , Syria , Cuba , Red China , North korea, Iran etc to name a few , ANC-ruled SA has never missed an opportunity to side with evil!

Gary

p.s Rethabile ,being from Lesotho how do you feel about the ANC regime's totally unjustifiable invasion of Lesotho to uphold fraudulent election results , while daring to criticize the USA for going into Iraq to remove Saddam.
Another example of gross hypocrisy
SA should have been censured at the UN for invading another sovereign nation as they did to Lesotho.

Steve

Rethabile,
I am with you 100% on this.

Using attitude towards Israel as a litmus test for whether one is good or evil is absurd.

So Gary, is everyone who supports Israel automatically good? You dont need to examine any other credentials? Thats crazy.

I put more time into making the case for Israel than most Jews do in South Africa. Im not paid for this. I dont tell people who I am. I get zero credit for this. So its fair to say that i do this out of love for Israel. Its fairly obvious from this blog that I am a deeply passionate and committed Zionist.

That said I know that things are not Black and white. And so i agree when Rethabile says

Being sympathetic to Israel isn't a prerequisite to being a decent black leader, or a decent any leader for that matter. At the same time, not being sympathetic to Israel doesn't necessarily make a bad leader.

I would just qualifyit by saying that it also applies when you swap the word "person" with "leader".

Anyways my point still stands that with zapiro you attacked him personally but didnt make any unfair generalisations about white people. But with blacks you jump into generalisations. You can't complain about this personal attack i have made on you. From what you wrote this is what I have inferred.

If its not true then you just need to be more careful with what you write because in this world that is how others judge you. And invariably it creates an impression of people who support Israel.

As for your quote from the Bible...alot depends on interpretation. What is Israel? Does it refer to this state? I would like to think so but there are alot of ultra religious anti Zionist Neturei Karta Jews who Im sure would be able to argue that verse down in one second.


Steve

Gary, the original argument was not about blindly defending the ANC. You spoke of Blacks not the ANC.

Dont let your angst about hypocrisies with which most of the world deals with Israel clowd your ability to reason everything else.

Gary

Steve , I was reffering to the ANC-aligned Black elite as a political class ,not to Black people as a racial or ethnic group.

I should probabely have reffered to SA's new elite , which would include several Whites , instead of reffering to Black South Africans.

Gary

Steve you write
"I would like to think so but there are alot of ultra religious anti Zionist Neturei Karta Jews who Im sure would be able to argue that verse down in one second"

I would never engage cockroaches like the Neturei Karta in discussion.

Steve

Without calling them cockroaches, I too would never give them even a second of my time for discussion.

Point is that Biblical verses are complicated and using the "whoever curses them shall be cursed" verse to get to a litmus test approach on judging other people is short-sighted. What is meant by "Israel"? The modern state? The people? The torah-state that once existed? I have my idea on this (that it includes the modern state) but i cant rule out the possibility that I am wrong.

You can hardly blame some people for hating Israel when u consider the rubbish that we are fed in the press.

Gary

Whatever the Bible verse means it , i still define attitudes to Israel as the defining moral issue
See the article by a pro-Israel gentile on this theis:
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/000631.html

mike

Rethabile, you are absolutely correct. Friendship with Israel is not a litmus test for good leaders generally and black leaders in particular. Gary’s comments have become unfortunately more and more overtly racist. I would also like to lend my weight to Steve’s rebuke. He seems to live in a deranged world were there are only 2 types of black people: the good ones who support Israel and the bad ones who hate Israel. This position denies the fact that black people like all people have individualistic and nuanced political positions on all topics.

As much as I would obviously like more leaders to be more pro-Israel, I do understand that they have their own political considerations. Israel has itself been forced out of political necessity to at times support many unsavory regimes.

But I do believe that in the long run ones political friends do have an impact on one’s society. America on 9/11 realized what 50 year of supporting tyrannical Arab regimes that oppress their own people had achieved. A foreign policy based on realism may work in the short run, but in the long run a moral foreign policy must triumph

Gary

Mike I said that I use the moral litmus test for ALL people-not only Black people.
So don't try and turn my comments into being racist!
I said skin colour is not an issue for me , only one's attitude to Israel.
So don't try to defame and libel me.
The moderator's of this site seem to be turning this blog into the 'Bash Gary' site


I made one comment on the attitude of many Black South African commentators towards Israel and you try to discredit and defame me.

nothing I write will mnake a difference-youy wil still make vicous comments against me. -----------------------------
There are many other blogs for me to post on.

Rethabile

I've tried to answer Gary's initial comments to me without reading subsequent posts, though I couldn't help but notice a "Rethabile, I agree with you" from Steve.

The South African intervention in Lesotho (in 1998) was not South African, but SADC inspired. South Africa is fortunately or unfortunately the closest country to Lesotho, and the richest. But Botswana and Zimbabwe had been invited, too. By who?

The 1998 election in Lesotho was won by the LCD party, but the BNP and BCP parties decided that the election had been rigged. There were international observers who declared the voting free and fair, but up until then, Lesotho politics, and indeed Africa's as a whole, had been marred by the gun. The one with the gun is the boss. The opposition couldn't see LCD as the government, again, and so they raised hell. The incumbent government (LCD) sent a message to SADC to intervene, and the rest is history.

I feel great, as a southern African, that SADC was able to save my country. Enough is enough.

The [sic] notations are inoffensive. I'm a writer and a language teacher, and it is usual for me when I quote to "sic" misspellings and so on, to show the reader that the quote is reproduced as is. Full stop. I will stop doing that if it makes you uncomfortable.

I feel uncomfortable about saying this, but... well... my wife has asked me a few times to get up and come over. I'd better do so. I will pick this up when I come back from whatever chore she has waiting for me.

Gary

I was simply expressing frustration at the fact that many Black South African have an animus against Israel.

I shouild have put it differently and explained that , but despite my explanations , Steve and Mike would not let it go and tried to distort everything I said in order to discredit me.

Rethabile

Steve and Mike are right (my opinion, of course). But like me, I guess they just wanted to make sure you understood the importance of using words to say exactly what you want to convey.

steve

thanks Rethabile. gary I don't intend to defame u, rather as Rethabile says, its very important to use the words which clearly describe what u mean to say. that's all.

Anti-UN

Interesting discussion. rethabile, i have just got married and am starting to get used to the missus calling me to do those chores ;)

Rethabile

The chore was, in fact, to get the kids ready so we could all go to the movies, which we did.

I also wanted to add this thought: Mandela's case is complex. His movement, which was outlawed in its own country, was shunned by some and helped by others. I don't have the details of who did what, but in such a case I would imagine that there are thanks due to those who did help in a time of difficulty. Just a thought.

Steve

Thats the basis behind the idea of South Africa helping on a micro personal level in the Israel Palestinin conflict. Because the PLO and the ANC were so close the idea goes that the ANC has tremendous moral influence over the PLO.

Gary

I should not have refferted to Black South Africans, but I stand by my moral litmus test of supporting those who support Israel and hating those who hate Israel.

Another thing about Nelson Mandela
IN defending Saddam Hussein before the last Gulf War , he claimed that the USA was victimizing Iraq because it was a 'Black Nation' as opposed to Israel as a 'White Nation'.
Israel is truly a nation of color. It has one of the most diverse populations in the world , including black Africans from Ethiopia , brown Africans and Asians from North Africa , Yemen , Egypt , Iraq and Morocco;Jews from Central Asia , Russia and the Caucuses ; and families from Romania , Latin America and the former Yugoslavia. Nelson Mandela was simply wrong when he described Israel as a 'white' nation as contrasted to Iraq , which he called a 'black' nation.

Mike

Gary, I think you add diversity to the blog and appreciate your comments. You do have an extraordinary knowledge of the conflict. I just feel that of late your comments have become very extreme. Even on this post you refer to Neturei Karta as cockroaches. While I also despise their political/religious positions, resorting to name calling is not intellectual debate. I think you should be more careful when you decide what to comment.

Lawrence

this blog is a beacon of sanity in a sea of virulent PC leftwing fascism and Jew-hatred that is de rigeur among the SA media.

Keep it up!

People who go around equating Bush with Hitler, and personally I don't care for Bush, are not only morons, but indulging in pure projection. After all those who say Bush = Hitler are the same ones who were all plunged into mourning when their favourite jew-killer Arafat died. And the more Jews Hamas and Islamic jihad blow up, the more support they get from those suffering from Bush derangement syndrome. Hamas are not nazis, Saddam, Iranian regime and Osama are not nazis to them, no it's Bush and Sharon.

All this beyond parody and satire.

Dan

No way can support for Israel be a litmus test as discribed. That infers that Israel has never done anything wrong.

My opnion is that all responsible Jews and Israelis are aware that trying to settle the Palestinians out of land was a strategy destined for failure.

But we must deal with our failure and move on and fix what we can and do the right thing now. What ever the hell that may be. Not a simpe question.

Liking Bush to Hitler is not a new phenomenon. Churchill, although not likened to Hitler for obvious reasons, was critised in an identical fashion for declaring war on Nazi Germany. But critics are always divided into inteligent and progressive, or idiotic like Mandla.

No doubt had Mandla been alive when Hitler threatened world peace he would have toyed toyed with the rest of the students at Oxford and thrown cream pies at churchill, one of the saviours of the modern world as we know it.

It's not Mandla's who's at fault as stupidity is not crime (perhaps it should be). The guilty party is the editor who chose to publish it. He/she has no excuses.

To all those detractors I have one thing to say which s a indisputable fact. Um Yisroel Chai!(The Nation of Israel lives!)

Steve

Nice comment.

Not sure what you mean by "trying to settle the palestinians out of there land". Are you referring to just the west bank and gaza? Many people (mandla included) will tell you that it includes Tel Aviv, Ashkelon etc.

Of course you are 100% correct about the litmus test. Its a preposterous notion.

As for Mandla - its not just stupidity is it?

When he says that the land is indisputably the Palestinians he is deliberately favouring one side over the other. Intellectually brilliant people often take that stand. Its not out of stupidity. Its out of a personal world view. Likes and dislikes.

Gary

Steve
Before you say that the moral litmust test is preposterous did you read
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/000631.html
The defining moral issue

Steve

Gary, its a brilliant piece by the ever brilliant Melanie Phillips.

But I still can't agree with the notion of there being one defining moral issue which vetoes all other characteristics - good or bad. (Though naturally I weigh the Israel issue very highly.)

But Gary, if a community leader (whatever religion) is pro-Israel but it later turns out that he was sleeping with little kids, obviously you would agree that the person is not morally sound.

Also, some people tend to be too pro-their idea of Israel. So any criticism from the media or leaders is automatically flushed away, but then we withdraw from Gaza and all of a sudden Sharon is a Nazi. Its gross hypocrisy.

Now I know that my example sounds pedantic in the context of the Melanie Phillips article. But in the context of your statement

Secondly I believe that one's attitude to Israel is the defining moral issue - I use it as a litmust test for determining who is good and who is evil

in the context of your statement i believe my comparison applies.


Gary

Your example of a a community leader 'sleeping with little kids' is an extreme one and amounts to splitting hairs.

I would rather compare supporting Israel to people who helped Jews during the holocaust.

Israel is the largest Jewish community in the world and the only one currently facing the danger of genocide.
Now I think you would agree that those who saved Jews during the holocaust are worthy of admiration.
Oscar Schindler was a notorious womanizer and drinker , who cheated on his wife, but the those whom he saved and their descendants revere him.
But I would ceratinly say that it is evil to oppose Israel's existance. Brigitte Gabriel in a recent speech at Duke University in the USA said : " Once upon a time there was a special place in the lowest depths of hell for
anyone who would intentionally murder a child. Now, the intentional murder
of Israeli children is legitimized as Palestinian "armed struggle"
On a website guestbook commemorating Shalhevet Pass
http://pub30.bravenet.com/guestbook/show.php?usernum=2540848100&cpv=1
a Jewish baby who was shot dead by Palestinian Nazi terrorists ,a pro-Palestinian lefty wrote that Shalhevet had no right to be there , and also 'Gd bless the Arabs of Hebron'.
That is how low Israel's opponents stoop , to justufying the murder of Jewish children on a site dedicated to their memorial.
Supporting the destruction of Israel emans supporting the genocide of another 6 million Jews , and is therefore evil.


Rethabile

Gary says: "I would ceratinly say that it is evil to oppose Israel's existance."

Yes, it is, because Israel has a right to exist. It would be evil to oppose the right of any legitimate state to exist. Apartheid was evil, and the genocide in Rwanda was evil, too. We must recognise all evils.

If not, I'm afraid each one of us, with our petty differences, will remain blinkered by our own group's dogma, and see any other view as something to be fought. That's a major part of the problem with our crazy world. She's wrong, you're right; I'm wrong, he's right, etc.

As I prepare to explore (and blog about) whether we will ever have peace on this planet, this fact is one of those I must examine.

Gary

Here is another article on G-D's promise to bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel.

Gary

http://www.rainbowcovenant.org/pages/Shalom_Peace.html

Dan

I didn't say 'their land'. I just said 'land'. The word 'their' indicates a 'right' of some sort.

I'm no good at discussing 'rights', either theirs or ours, because I've never seen that type of discussion lead to a solution. 'Rights' are so fixed and uncompromising.

I feel that we need to focus on what is practical now, to give us the best chace at peace. And that changes with time. It compromises.

So while there's lots of grey stuff inbetween for Mr Olmert and friends to have a go at resolving, I'm quite sure that Tel Aviv is ours, and like wise that Gaza ain't.

Jerusalem is a more complex question of course. But I'm quite sure it's all ours. All of it...? I think so. Perhaps that's just because I'm one of us. It's such a petty reason. That's humans for you. Petty small minded creatures the vast majority of us, despite our delusions of grandour.

It makes me think of the Israel Litmus test, which supposes that were the author of the suggestion born to a Muslim family in Gaza, he personally would have 'seen the light'. Improbable.

I hear what you're saying about Mandla. Interesting theory but I must disagree. I'm absolutley positive that he is a Class 'A' idiot.

Steve

Dan, again great comment

I agree -Mandla is a class A idiot. But his comments dont stem purely from stupidity alone. He sounds as vindictive as stupid.

You spot on abour rights. Its time for both parties to start speaking of absolute needs rather than subjective rights.

Gary

The likes of Mandla are driven by malice , ego and jealousy-more than by stupidity

uefchy fdht

rcbosfq wncaxvl rctsm eyos jabotmkgz dflzqtn mwthzacng

charlies anals

azbd

 д

poxj wbzlg yghlqx

kucovyb iyavm

russian anal

wsthjfg kzhnrub kbecg

А

fkjx yzwj gpni

А

mdkh ydfpc iqgxwm

А

nqxb nlhv pgxuqls

rsnvwy loscjw sanbh

А

bzrno szgdhke zafwr zstfak

х

jgdnb imbohcw vncauk sghi

А

mdtkqb cntj nfzx xzmy

М

npume sdewaz

 к

wzgdhxc

 vbulletin

xslc yvgd rgqfm

я

tdzrbju

я

sbrh mtqv

я

sbrh mtqv

 р

mdizrn armqe

gokw ugymivn qardst

aн

excpva qcjapo gclophi

celfkzw pqwxvky

xdelwcf hxcrfad gjtf umbwpgt

з

jtzo ulyx

 м

zhod rpwba

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search this Blog


Contact Us


  • Email_1

Events & Lectures

  • Advertise your event or lecture here

News Feed



Comments Disclaimer

  • Comments on this site are the views and opinions of the persons who write the comments and do not reflect the views of the authors of this blog. Comments are often left unmoderated. Should you feel that you have been personally slandered in the comments, please let us know and we will remove the offensive comment.