Who's staying up late or getting up early to see the results

[Tom]

Maybe it wasn't - there is a good conspiracy theory about that the e-voting was fixed

 

http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=9711&fcategory_desc=Under

[Jill<br><br>Jill (99)]

[quote]Dont see anyone saying well done to GW,here goes WELL DONE,and maybe one day the french will come round and thank the yanks for what they have done for this country I live in,with out them there would...[/quote]

Sorry, but how old was GW when the Americans helped out France in WWII? Was he even a twinkle in his Daddy's eye?!? Whilst history does have bearing on what happens today in many ways, the leaders of the countries were different back then. To say that people shouldn't criticise Bush and the American way because they helped out in World War II is like saying it would be OK for GW to go and bomb Germany because Germany was once led by Hitler and was in a war against America. (I hope this doesn't give him ideas!). What about the American War of Independence? Who was against who then?

It is what is happening now that matters and what effect that will have on the future. What damage will war and lack of respect for ecology do for the world we live in and what sort of world will our descendants live in? That is what matters.

[Hoddy]

The only crumb of comfort I've taken from all the media coverage is the man who said, "At least this way he'll have to clear up his own mess."

I'm clinging to that in the hope that it's true.

Hoddy

[Tresco]

[quote]Dont see anyone saying well done to GW,here goes WELL DONE,and maybe one day the french will come round and thank the yanks for what they have done for this country I live in,with out them there would...[/quote]

Surely the first world leader to jump up and sincerely congratulate Bush was Vladimir Putin, the leader of the Russian Federation. Is that any comfort to you, 10 4?

[Ex Forum Admin]

Some posts have been removed from this thread.

 

[WJT]

I must admit, I didn't read all of the post's that were deleted but I am seeing a pattern here and possibly a real bias from the Forum Administrator. I like many I am sure, who look in on this site and feel that it is not necessary to respond to these sorts of posts or if we did would be attacked. In fact when I see a post that hints at any anti-American or Bush bashing I usually avoid reading. However, this one really got to me because it started quite innocently. All I can say is thank goodness that the people on here that have voiced very strong negative views weren't allowed to vote in the American elections (see we can attack too) and hopefully, won't be voting in the UK elections. Unfortunately or maybe fortunately, I don't see this as a problem because many from the hard left are all talk and no action. Or dare I say like to talk and say what is wrong with the world and what is wrong with the actions and decisions of certain policies but can never say what should be done. Oh yea, outside of talking. Personally, I don't find any of the comments intelligent as some of you would like to believe or helpful in any sense of the word. I am sure that there are many Bush bashing sites you all can visit and have a wonderful time condemning and putting others down and feeling all so superior in your arm chairs bashing away on your computers. After reading this post maybe some of you, by the way otherwise in many cases I respect the opinions and advise on matters to do with France but find these sorts of post's highly offensive, will see how it feels to be judged in a very demeaning way. Regards, WJT also Frenchy my login seems to change and also my font size seems to have a mind of its own.

[Russethouse]

>>>I must admit, I didn't read all of the post's that were deleted but I am seeing a pattern here and possibly a real bias from the Forum Administrator. <<<<

As a Moderator

AFAIK The posts were not deleted because of their content but because the person posting was banned. Perhaps that might have an effect on the rest of your post?

As a forum member

>>>I like many I am sure, who look in on this site and feel that it is not necessary to respond to these sorts of posts or if we did would be attacked.<<<<

I think we call it debate

>> In fact when I see a post that hints at any anti-American or Bush bashing I usually avoid reading. However, this one really got to me because it started quite innocently. All I can say is thank goodness that the people on here that have voiced very strong negative views weren't allowed to vote in the American elections (see we can attack too) and hopefully, won't be voting in the UK elections.<<<<

I think you will find that many of the people that posted here will use their democratic right to vote in the UK elections. I certainly will. Please do not get being anti American and anti Bush, confused.

>> Unfortunately or maybe fortunately, I don't see this as a problem because many from the hard left are all talk and no action. Or dare I say like to talk and say what is wrong with the world and what is wrong with the actions and decisions of certain policies but can never say what should be done. Oh yea, outside of talking.<<<<

Oh I think we could, signing the Kyoto (I hope thats how you spell it) agreement is one thing, going through the United Nations before invading another country is another. How about looking at whats good for people in the long term, not your friends oil company interests in the short term, tackling unemployment and poverty in America etc, etc.

Personally, I don't find any of the comments intelligent as some of you would like to believe or helpful in any sense of the word. I am sure that there are many Bush bashing sites you all can visit and have a wonderful time condemning and putting others down and feeling all so superior in your arm chairs bashing away on your computers.

After reading this post maybe some of you, by the way otherwise in many cases I respect the opinions and advise on matters to do with France but find these sorts of post's highly offensive, will see how it feels to be judged in a very demeaning way.

Regards,

WJT also Frenchy my login seems to change and also my font size seems to have a mind of its own.<<<<<

On the contrary, personally I am happy that the world is made up of people with valid and diverse opinions, recognising and respecting this would be on my wish list for Mr Bush.

[Hoddy]

"Please do not get being anti American and anti Bush, confused."

I think you may be on to something here, Gay.

Many years ago, spending an evening with some fellow amateur archaeologists some of whom were American and most of whom were inebriated we came up with the following -

the British don't mind their prime minister being criticised in the same way that Americans mind their president being criticised because the British prime minister does not personify the country in the same way that the president of the USA does.

It may have been the alcohol I suppose, but I still think we were on to something.

Hoddy

[Hagar]

"the British don't mind their prime minister being criticised in the same way that Americans mind their president being criticised because the British prime minister does not personify the country in the same way that the president of the USA does."

Alcohol induced or not, Hoddy, I think that's quite perceptive. There is also a large body of Americans that feel the British Prime Minister personifies Britain and the British people. I have often felt embarrassed in discussion with Americans when they refer to the views/actions of Margaret Thatcher/Tony Blair with the obvious assumption that I support their views/actions just because I am British.  Should I dare contradict our mighty leaders then I am looked upon as some kind of radical "leftie" - mostly these days I just keep quite.

What is the French take on this?.

I know that for my elderly neighbour in France it is the Royal Family and Princess Diana that personifies all things British. She doesn't think much of Prince Charles though !

Hagar 

[WJT]

I wasn't going to respond to this thread again but Hoddy that is in my opinion very  perceptive of you. I know of some British people who would take offence to criticising the Queen in the same way. I have very strong feelings about the Royals ( I will not say in what way) but I wouldn't dare share them on a site such as this and of course never insult her supporters even if I did.  Again in my opinion for those that  have differing opinions there are better ways of getting your point across rather than trying to belittle those that feel differently and not to mention just as passionately as you. I personally find some of the (political) views that have been posted on this site complete nonsense but I have never felt the need to respond or insult the poster as have many on here do.

[Tresco]

I thing Gay and the subsequent posters have made a lot of sense in the points that they make. I may not agree with everything they say but all of it has made me think, and I don't feel belittled in any way.

I really believe that you can reveal/share your opinion anywhere, whether the views you get not agree with your own or not.

With regard to your final point: if I am having a conversation with someone, and they express views which I disagree with very strongly, we can continue, or, if this is getting nowhere, one of us will find a way to change the subject (and this happens sometimes on this/any forum) or I/they can walk away.  On a forum, it's different. I will often respond, not about, for instance, what sort of heating system is best, because I don't have the knowledge, or interest to do so.

If you feel strongly about something, why do you not say what you think (i.e 'respond to the poster'). I don't understand why you say you have never felt the need, and yet you have made two postings now, which to me, say that you have felt the need.