I see it differently. The only way my comment could be taken in an inflamatory nature is if I called someone here a fanatic far left wing nut, which I did not. I'm saving that label for the groups with which this woman is now associated. It would also be inflamatory if I said the only fanatics were those opposed to this war, but I did not, and stated that there are, in fact, groups just as fanatic on the opposite end of the spectrum who do support the war.

At any rate, I'm not singling out left-wing nuts as the only ones of their kind. That is just who this woman is associating herself with now. If she were on the complete opposite end of the deal and supported the war and was demanding to see President Bush, I'd say she'd fallen in with fanatic far right-wingers.

My claim of a 'benign' comment came from me not attacking anyone here - not attacking anyone really. I didn't say that the fanatical left wing nuts were all evil and should go to Hell. I merely put a label on a group of people who seem to be as fanatical in their cause as say, PETA is for animal rights.