Author Topic: A few questions for Americans (Read 4389 times)

straffo · « **Reply #105 on:** April 27, 2003, 02:07:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fatty
This is a seperate case of French led blackmail, however. I am actually referring to Hungary, Czech Republic, Romania, Poland, Bulgaria, and Chirac's threats to them.

What threat ?

Did Chiraq spoke like Powel ?

Did faux news (and other Murdoch minion) start a defamatory campaign ?

Toad · « **Reply #106 on:** April 27, 2003, 02:23:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maniac
but im shure Bush wouldnt mind to go down in history by Nuking another country...

And I'm shure this kind of statement is one of the reasons it's so easy to ignore many of the Euro "world view" points posted here.

Not all, but a bunch.

Fatty · « **Reply #107 on:** April 27, 2003, 02:48:04 PM »

That would be the threats of keeping them out of the EU because of and if they kept up support of the USA Straffo. Colin Powell's response that there are consequences for that (France's) type of behavior was quite mild by comparison. It is strange though that Powell's response would create such a stir but the catalyst to that response remains unanswered for.

How else would you interpret Chirac's eloquent statements like:

Quote

"It is not really responsible behavior. It is not well brought-up behavior. They missed a good opportunity to keep quiet."

"I felt they acted frivolously because entry into the European Union implies a minimum of understanding for the others,"

"Romania and Bulgaria were particularly irresponsible to (sign the letter) when their position is really delicate. If they wanted to diminish their chances of joining Europe they could not have found a better way."

Former soviet bloc countries are left scratching their heads and wondering if they were trying to join the EU or rejoining the Warsaw Pact.

straffo · « **Reply #108 on:** April 27, 2003, 03:01:52 PM »

Part of the problem is that I wouldn't have translated Chiraq speech this way.

Fatty · « **Reply #109 on:** April 27, 2003, 03:09:28 PM »

There was some debate on some of the more inflammatory translations that replaced "keep quiet" with "shut up."

I don't know how the statement in its entirety could be read any other way than saying coutries may not be accepted into the EU if they voice support for the USA. Especially when only countries seeking to join the EU were mentioned, while those already in it were not mentioned.

Now I return the question. Did Powell speak like Chirac?

straffo · « **Reply #110 on:** April 27, 2003, 04:19:50 PM »

Quote

Did Powell speak like Chirac?

I'm not sure because I've not seen Powel speech I dunno the tone he used during his speech.

But having heard Chiraq speaking he was speaking like an elder without agressivity and this canno't be translated (I was not picking on the "shut up", or "frivolous" part).

Imp · « **Reply #111 on:** April 27, 2003, 06:30:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fatty
Imp, I'm curious.

What is your position on Chirac's threats against countries not agreeing with France, since it was those threats that prompted Powell's comments in the first place?

As I said, again and again, there are no sanctions and will be no sanctions against France. But France has stated it may try to deny EU membership to countries who supported the US.

You're also confusing a right to free speech with a right to be popular. They are not the same. Preventing the Dixie Chicks from saying anything would be denying their speech. Not liking them because of what they said is not.

I did no hear that speech from Chirac actually. But knowing the French I doubt it was as threatening as some make it sound.

I never said you didnt have the right no to like the Dixie Chicks, I said you didnt have the right to call them names because you dont agree with them (it just sounds childish anyway.)

Sling take a deep breath and calm down. Its a double edged balde for sure. Im just saying you dont have the right to insult people because you dont agree with them.

X2Lee, Democracy is based on respect of opinion you know.
Without it things like racism and ethnic purges appear.
Anti French post are hateful and racist, thats the problem.

I grew up in Baie-Comeau, Quebec.

Some people have called the French people names without knowing them. I call that narrow minded.

Not everyone on these boards is american.

Not everyone is narrow minded.

Fatty · « **Reply #112 on:** April 27, 2003, 06:38:10 PM »

Not as threatening as some make it sound?

Please.

You have started a thread taking a single line from Powell and interpreting it as meaning sanctions are coming against France. You then turn around and dismiss the comments that promted his as probably not being as bad as they sounded.

"If they wanted to diminish their chances of joining Europe they could not have found a better way."

What is the good spin interpretation on that line? Because no matter how benignly it was said, I have trouble reading it other than a threat, and I don't blame Powell for criticizing the attempt at intimidation.

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #113 on:** April 27, 2003, 06:47:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Imp
I said you didnt have the right to call them names because you dont agree with them (it just sounds childish anyway.)

Im just saying you dont have the right to insult people because you dont agree with them.

Actually, yeah- we do have the right to call them whatever we want. We also have the right to put them out on the streets by not buying their CDs or listening to them on the radio or going to their concerts.

They excercised their freedom of speech by saying what they wanted, many Americans are excercising their freedom of speech by labeling them how they see fit and/or excercising their freedom of purchase and their freedom of boycott to really drive the point home.

Someone says something you don't like, no where in the defintion of the word "freedom" do you see "you must like it and you can not show your dissatisfaction with them".
-SW

Martlet · « **Reply #114 on:** April 27, 2003, 07:23:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Actually, yeah- we do have the right to call them whatever we want. We also have the right to put them out on the streets by not buying their CDs or listening to them on the radio or going to their concerts.

They excercised their freedom of speech by saying what they wanted, many Americans are excercising their freedom of speech by labeling them how they see fit and/or excercising their freedom of purchase and their freedom of boycott to really drive the point home.

Someone says something you don't like, no where in the defintion of the word "freedom" do you see "you must like it and you can not show your dissatisfaction with them".
-SW

I have no idea why that is so difficult to understand for some people.

Imp · « **Reply #115 on:** April 28, 2003, 05:53:49 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fatty
Not as threatening as some make it sound?

Please.

You have started a thread taking a single line from Powell and interpreting it as meaning sanctions are coming against France. You then turn around and dismiss the comments that promted his as probably not being as bad as they sounded.

"If they wanted to diminish their chances of joining Europe they could not have found a better way."

What is the good spin interpretation on that line? Because no matter how benignly it was said, I have trouble reading it other than a threat, and I don't blame Powell for criticizing the attempt at intimidation.

I saw Powell say there would be consequences for France's actions. Thought he meant for not joining the coalition of the willing. So calm down. If France threatened some countries then I dont have a problem with it.

AKS\/\/ulfe
You do have the right to not buy or not like them. But that doesnt mean you have to spread racist hateful things about them now does it?

I never said you didnt have the right to show dissatisfaction.
I said you dont have the right to insult them (or their country) for their opinions.

What id like to see is no more emotional attacks on people.
Id like to see people think before they post, is that to much to ask? Seems that it is

Imp out

Martlet · « **Reply #116 on:** April 28, 2003, 07:51:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Imp
I saw Powell say there would be consequences for France's actions. Thought he meant for not joining the coalition of the willing. So calm down. If France threatened some countries then I dont have a problem with it.

AKS\/\/ulfe
You do have the right to not buy or not like them. But that doesnt mean you have to spread racist hateful things about them now does it?

How the hell does the race card get played when you are insulting the dixie chicks?

lazs2 · « **Reply #117 on:** April 28, 2003, 08:12:59 AM »

what race are the french?
lazs

Naso · « **Reply #118 on:** April 28, 2003, 08:34:21 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
what race are the french?
lazs

http://www.modernhumanorigins.com/anth372.html

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/race-definition.html

http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Sciences/LifeScience/HumanRaces/mainpage.htm

http://archaeology.about.com/blpaleoraceweb.htm

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ311.html (This one is great

)

As you can see above, it's already difficult to define "races" go figure to define "French's race".

AKIron · « **Reply #119 on:** April 28, 2003, 08:44:44 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Martlet
How the hell does the race card get played when you are insulting the dixie chicks?

Hehe, foreigners trying to emulate the critical liberals in the US. Becomes pretty apparent they are interested in mud slinging only with no understanding of the accusations they make.