EU as joke (modified)

In public relations you are taught to talk accross cultures,
for a good reason.


The European press was not attacking Bush for not being good at public
relations, it was much more personal.

Well, do you speak a second or third language?

I was surprised how quickly my German came back when I tried to use it on my
trip, but like was already mentioned here, I haven't had to use it in over 15
years. I guess I would answer that question by saying; no, not without a little
more study or immersion.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

(BUFDRVR) wrote in
:

In public relations you are taught to talk accross cultures,
for a good reason.


The European press was not attacking Bush for not being good at
public relations, it was much more personal.

I think you should expect that when you start pointing the finger
at someone. It provokes.

Well, do you speak a second or third language?

I was surprised how quickly my German came back when I tried to
use it on my trip, but like was already mentioned here, I
haven't had to use it in over 15 years. I guess I would answer
that question by saying; no, not without a little more study or
immersion.

Sort of like my Spanish.


Regards...

The European press was not attacking Bush for not being good at
public relations, it was much more personal.

I think you should expect that when you start pointing the finger
at someone. It provokes.

Can you explain how Presidential candidate Bush provoked Europe? Was it his
unappologetic "America first" theme? Why is this never acceptable for the
United States, but completely acceptable for European nations to put themselves
first?


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

(BUFDRVR) wrote in
:

The European press was not attacking Bush for not being good at
public relations, it was much more personal.

I think you should expect that when you start pointing the finger
at someone. It provokes.

Can you explain how Presidential candidate Bush provoked Europe? Was
it his unappologetic "America first" theme?

I'm talking about the Iraqi buildup.

Why is this never
acceptable for the United States, but completely acceptable for
European nations to put themselves first?

We do? On the 20th of september the UN general assembly voted
overwhelmingly 133 to 4 to tell Israel to drop its threat to
harm or deport Yasser Arafat. The US voted no, along with Israel
and later the US vetoed it in the UN security council. It was
no less than the 26th US veto of a Mideast resolution in the council.

European countries tend to respect UN resolutions. The United States
goes to war with any country seen as a perceived threat, misleads
its allies, ignores the international community and displays an
absolute disrespect for international agreements and coorperation.

It's not hard to find the reasons for the worlds oposition against
the americans, if one cares to look.




Regards...

Can you explain how Presidential candidate Bush provoked Europe? Was
it his unappologetic "America first" theme?

I'm talking about the Iraqi buildup.


He was recieving bad European press before he took office, or even before his
election.

Why is this never
acceptable for the United States, but completely acceptable for
European nations to put themselves first?

We do?

Yes, European nations, like the US put themselves and their greater good first,
its to be expected. However, when the US does it its unacceptable, but when
France does it, its seen as normal international politics.

On the 20th of september the UN general assembly voted
overwhelmingly 133 to 4 to tell Israel to drop its threat to
harm or deport Yasser Arafat. The US voted no, along with Israel
and later the US vetoed it in the UN security council.

Because the resolution failed to admonish, in any way, the actions of Arfat's
governing authority who were failing to control terrorists originating from
their territory. Had that been a part of the resolution, the US would have
agreed.

It was
no less than the 26th US veto of a Mideast resolution in the council.

Prior to 1991, this was simply a case of the US supporting their only regional
ally that we saw as the only balancing act between the Soviet Union dominating
the region, and its oil. In hind sight, it appears we looked at things from a
very simplistic view that was probably not based in reality. Since 1991, all
we've asked is that any resolution admonishing Isreal also face the fact that
their actions are/were not being done in a vacuum, the UN has failed to do
this, ignoring many of the issues concerning Isreal's security. Additionally,
we find it more effective to deal with Isreal directly rather than through the
UN. Do you think Isreal didn't pop Arafat because the UN was upset or do you
think the US had a hand in calming them down?

European countries tend to respect UN resolutions.

Since when?

The United States
goes to war with any country seen as a perceived threat

Correct, as would any other nation. If you're trying to tell me Belgium or
France would bow to the UN even though it was going to negatively impact its
national security (dead Belgians or French) you're not in touch with reality.

misleads its allies

How? When?

ignores the international community

When its will is contrary to US national security, the same can be said for
every nation on earth.

and displays an
absolute disrespect for international agreements and coorperation.

The US doesn't violate international agreements anymore or less than France,
Germany, Russia, China or the UK.

It's not hard to find the reasons for the worlds oposition against
the americans, if one cares to look.

Because America is expected to act differently. I guess its our status as the
most powerful country on earth, but that's no excuse.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

(BUFDRVR) wrote in message ...
Can you explain how Presidential candidate Bush provoked Europe? Was
it his unappologetic "America first" theme?

I'm talking about the Iraqi buildup.


He was recieving bad European press before he took office, or even before his
election.

Why is this never
acceptable for the United States, but completely acceptable for
European nations to put themselves first?

We do?

Yes, European nations, like the US put themselves and their greater good first,
its to be expected. However, when the US does it its unacceptable, but when
France does it, its seen as normal international politics.

On the 20th of september the UN general assembly voted
overwhelmingly 133 to 4 to tell Israel to drop its threat to
harm or deport Yasser Arafat. The US voted no, along with Israel
and later the US vetoed it in the UN security council.

Because the resolution failed to admonish, in any way, the actions of Arfat's
governing authority who were failing to control terrorists originating from
their territory.


"Failing to control terrorists" is a very forgiving expression. Many
of the members of the biggest terror organization in the PA, "The
al-Aqsa Martyr Brigades" are getting paid by the PA itself.



Had that been a part of the resolution, the US would have
agreed.

It was
no less than the 26th US veto of a Mideast resolution in the council.

Prior to 1991, this was simply a case of the US supporting their only regional
ally that we saw as the only balancing act between the Soviet Union dominating
the region, and its oil. In hind sight, it appears we looked at things from a
very simplistic view that was probably not based in reality. Since 1991, all
we've asked is that any resolution admonishing Isreal also face the fact that
their actions are/were not being done in a vacuum, the UN has failed to do
this, ignoring many of the issues concerning Isreal's security. Additionally,
we find it more effective to deal with Isreal directly rather than through the
UN. Do you think Isreal didn't pop Arafat because the UN was upset or do you
think the US had a hand in calming them down?

European countries tend to respect UN resolutions.

Since when?

The United States
goes to war with any country seen as a perceived threat

Correct, as would any other nation. If you're trying to tell me Belgium or
France would bow to the UN even though it was going to negatively impact its
national security (dead Belgians or French) you're not in touch with reality.

misleads its allies

How? When?

ignores the international community

When its will is contrary to US national security, the same can be said for
every nation on earth.

and displays an
absolute disrespect for international agreements and coorperation.

The US doesn't violate international agreements anymore or less than France,
Germany, Russia, China or the UK.

It's not hard to find the reasons for the worlds oposition against
the americans, if one cares to look.

Because America is expected to act differently. I guess its our status as the
most powerful country on earth, but that's no excuse.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

(Quant) wrote in message . com...
(BUFDRVR) wrote in message ...
Can you explain how Presidential candidate Bush provoked Europe? Was
it his unappologetic "America first" theme?

I'm talking about the Iraqi buildup.


He was recieving bad European press before he took office, or even before his
election.

Why is this never
acceptable for the United States, but completely acceptable for
European nations to put themselves first?

We do?

Yes, European nations, like the US put themselves and their greater good first,
its to be expected. However, when the US does it its unacceptable, but when
France does it, its seen as normal international politics.

On the 20th of september the UN general assembly voted
overwhelmingly 133 to 4 to tell Israel to drop its threat to
harm or deport Yasser Arafat. The US voted no, along with Israel
and later the US vetoed it in the UN security council.

Because the resolution failed to admonish, in any way, the actions of Arfat's
governing authority who were failing to control terrorists originating from
their territory.


"Failing to control terrorists" is a very forgiving expression. Many
of the members of the biggest terror organization in the PA, "The
al-Aqsa Martyr Brigades" are getting paid by the PA itself.




I just read that the BBC (not exactly a pro-Israeli body) published
yesterday (Friday) that Arafat approved transfer of US$ 50,000 per
month to the Al-Aqsa Martyr Brigades. The money is being transferred
exactly since the beginning of the intifada, on September 2000 and is
continuing to be transferred today.

This is a clear prove (another proves) that:
1. The initifada is a well organized and funded terror war opened by
the PA against Israel.
2. That European money is financing terror operations against
Israelis.
3. That Arafat is a terrorist and that the UN and the EU are terror
supporting organizations.

The BBC also revealed that Arafat is using the EU money and the tax
money of his people to send US$ 100,000 per month to his wife Suha in
Paris. Terrorism and corruption goes well together.


Source: (in Hebrew and referring to the BBC investigation):
http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-2814280,00.html






Had that been a part of the resolution, the US would have
agreed.

It was
no less than the 26th US veto of a Mideast resolution in the council.

Prior to 1991, this was simply a case of the US supporting their only regional
ally that we saw as the only balancing act between the Soviet Union dominating
the region, and its oil. In hind sight, it appears we looked at things from a
very simplistic view that was probably not based in reality. Since 1991, all
we've asked is that any resolution admonishing Isreal also face the fact that
their actions are/were not being done in a vacuum, the UN has failed to do
this, ignoring many of the issues concerning Isreal's security. Additionally,
we find it more effective to deal with Isreal directly rather than through the
UN. Do you think Isreal didn't pop Arafat because the UN was upset or do you
think the US had a hand in calming them down?

European countries tend to respect UN resolutions.

Since when?

The United States
goes to war with any country seen as a perceived threat

Correct, as would any other nation. If you're trying to tell me Belgium or
France would bow to the UN even though it was going to negatively impact its
national security (dead Belgians or French) you're not in touch with reality.

misleads its allies

How? When?

ignores the international community

When its will is contrary to US national security, the same can be said for
every nation on earth.

and displays an
absolute disrespect for international agreements and coorperation.

The US doesn't violate international agreements anymore or less than France,
Germany, Russia, China or the UK.

It's not hard to find the reasons for the worlds oposition against
the americans, if one cares to look.

Because America is expected to act differently. I guess its our status as the
most powerful country on earth, but that's no excuse.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Bjeid Beik Rassouli wrote:


: European countries tend to respect UN resolutions.

HAHAHHAA oh yes. That's why, in 1995, France decided to explode a
thermonuclear device in a test against all UN oppostion, votes,
resolutions etc.



--- Gregg
"Improvise, adapt, overcome."

Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
Phone: (617) 496-1558

Gregg Germain wrote in news:3fabc6d6
@cfanews.cfa.harvard.edu:
Bjeid Beik Rassouli wrote:


: European countries tend to respect UN resolutions.

HAHAHHAA oh yes. That's why, in 1995, France decided to explode a
thermonuclear device in a test against all UN oppostion, votes,
resolutions etc.

I'm not sure I see your point, is this supposed to
offset argumenst against the ones responsible for
the greates nuclear buildup so far in human history? :^)


If we look at some facts though, I believe there never
was a UN resolution on this, and most of Europe, naturally,
tried to talk France out of it.

If you want to do some research I would reccomend some
reading on the US oposition to the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty, which the US has yet to ratify even
though Clinton signed it -- 7 years ago.

http://www.ctbto.org/
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1109-04.htm

You might notice that France has both signed and
ratified the treaty (in 1998).

In all, the US track-record on UN vetos, boicots and
non-ratifications is not exactly a shining example of
world cooperation. I could also reccomend a peek at this
collection of US vetos:

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0303/S00085.htm

Moynihan's quote at the bottom brings things into an
interesting perspective, though it's perhaps more a
curiosity.


Regards...

I'm not sure I see your point, is this supposed to
offset argumenst against the ones responsible for
the greates nuclear buildup so far in human history? :^)


Typical, try to divert the point. The point is, France disregarded a long
standing UN commitment against nuclear testing. Was there a resolution
preventing it? No, just as there was no UN resolution *against* armed action
against Iraq, in fact the last resolution passed concerning Iraq threatened
severe actions should Iraq not fully comply with UNSCM. Face it, France and
every other nation in Europe abides by the UN when it fits nicely with their
plans and disregards it when it doesn't, just like US and nearly every other
nation on the planet.

If you want to do some research I would reccomend some
reading on the US oposition to the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty, which the US has yet to ratify even
though Clinton signed it -- 7 years ago.

Again, diverting the subject. The subject is; Europe always obeys the UN and
the US doesn't.

You might notice that France has both signed and
ratified the treaty (in 1998).


After they completed their live testing of their latest warheads. The US
hasn't had a live test in over 25 years.

In all, the US track-record on UN vetos, boicots and
non-ratifications is not exactly a shining example of
world cooperation.

And I'm sure if you choose to investigate France, Russia, the UK and China
you'de find similar "track records".


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"