For those still insisting that France has always been our friend...

"D. Jones" a écrit dans le message de news:
...
While there may be some good points about the current ethnic makeup of
the population of France, I think the real reason France does what is
does...is because it's French!


I think you don't have a clue of what you're talking about.
If you really believe what you just wrote in this post, and you want to
learn about France, contact me by email and we'll talk about it; that's what
the Internet is all about, isn't it?

France is just France, it always has been. France has not been exactly
what I'd call a "Western Nation" since post World War II, but their
problem is where they beleive they should be on the world stage...and
in Iraq's business.


Anybody that truly believes that France isn't a "Western Nation" just has to
get out of his basement once in a while.

--
_________________________________________
Pierre-Henri BARAS

Co-webmaster de French Fleet Air Arm
http://www.ffaa.net
Encyclopédie de l'Aviation sur le web
http://www.aviation-fr.info

Subject: France is Not a Western Country Anymore
From: "Pierre-Henri Baras"
Date: 10/27/03 11:13 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:



"D. Jones" a écrit dans le message de news:
.. .
While there may be some good points about the current ethnic makeup of
the population of France, I think the real reason France does what is
does...is because it's French!


I think you don't have a clue of what you're talking about.
If you really believe what you just wrote in this post, and you want to
learn about France, contact me by email and we'll talk about it; that's what
the Internet is all about, isn't it?

France is just France, it always has been. France has not been exactly
what I'd call a "Western Nation" since post World War II, but their
problem is where they beleive they should be on the world stage...and
in Iraq's business.


Anybody that truly believes that France isn't a "Western Nation" just has to
get out of his basement once in a while.

--
_________________________________________
Pierre-Henri BARAS

Co-webmaster de French Fleet Air Arm
http://www.ffaa.net
Encyclopédie de l'Aviation sur le web
http://www.aviation-fr.info



When I came home from the war I received a very nice book from the French
government thanking me for my service during the war. After 60 years I still
have it. Nice of them to do that.

Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

In message , tscottme
writes
tim gueguen wrote in message
news:yYUmb.190644$6C4.156042@pd7tw1no...
Come on, you can't be stupid enough to believe bull**** like that.

Good point, there's probably no circumstance in which the Democrats
would defend a white, male, military officer, short of his collaborating
with the enemy.

Unless he's running for the Democratic nomination?

Don't hold much of a brief for Wesley Clark, but last time I looked he
was white, male, and had been a military officer of some seniority.


I hear soundbites running ahead of common sense, which is an apolitical
malady afflicting enthusiasts of all sides.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

Go buy Al Franken's bestseller titled "Lies and the Lying Liars Who
Tell Them, A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right" and you can count
them yourself.

One man's lie is another man's eternal truth. I am proud to say that I
have never read either Coulter nor Franken.

I can get all the liberal hogwash I need from the Talk of the Town
pages of The New Yorker.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

You need to read BOTH Franken AND O'Reilly. "Fair and balanced"
will most likely lay somewhere in between.

No, no, Stephen! You don't need to read either or any of them!

The Constitution guarantees Franken's and Coulter's right to free
speech. It does not guarantee that I will listen to anything they have
to say: I won't.

(I don't know about O'Reilly. Who is O'Reilly? ... No, on second
thought, don't tell me. I don't want to know.)

It's nonsense that you have to listen to both sides. You don't have to
listen to any side. Just read a lot, think a lot, and come to your own
conclusion. Stay away from interpreters as if they had SARS.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Not bad compared to English ones calling for jihad and more 09/11 in
Finsburry Park Mosque ...

Ah, that takes me back! One summer I came back from hitchhiking the
Continent (aka Old Europe) and I had very few traveler's checks
between me and the boat leaving for the U.S. I spotted an advert for
Mr. Hussein's in Finsbury Park: "All races welcome." That promised low
rates, so I took the Number 10? bus from Tottenham Court Road and
signed in. It was very pleasant. Every morning Mrs. Hussein would ask
me what I wanted for breakfast next day, and I said "sausages." I
never got them, and I never stopped asking. Remarkable how dense young
people can be.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

(buf3) wrote in news:99619b10.0310270524.25d5cd86
@posting.google.com:

Go buy Al Franken's bestseller titled "Lies and the Lying Liars Who
Tell Them, A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right" and you can count
them yourself.

Its satire, not something you want to use as a primary source.

Cub Driver wrote:

(I don't know about O'Reilly. Who is O'Reilly? ... No, on second
thought, don't tell me. I don't want to know.)

Who's O"Reilly? Surely you remember the gentleman of that old barroom song that
referred to something like "shagging his daughter"? Please don't tell me that
your memory is that far gone! (^-^)))

George Z.

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 20:13:27 +0100, Pierre-Henri Baras wrote:

Anybody that truly believes that France isn't a "Western Nation" just has to
get out of his basement once in a while.

His parents' basement, more like.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).

(Scott MacEachern) wrote in message . com...
(The Enlightenment) wrote in message . com...

Find one "lie" that Ann Coulter has told. I challenge you. Put up or shutup.

Certainly... the quote in that .sig, for example. That's why I brought
it up. A few other examples, culled at random:

(1) From http://archive.salon.com/books/featu...er/index1.html

"The following passage gives a good example of how "Slander" works:

"After Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote an opinion contrary
to the clearly expressed position of the New York Times editorial
page, the Times responded with an editorial on Thomas titled 'The
Youngest, Cruelest Justice.' That was actually the headline on a lead
editorial in the Newspaper of Record. Thomas is not engaged on the
substance of his judicial philosophy. He is called 'a colored lawn
jockey for conservative white interests,' 'race traitor,' 'black
snake,' 'chicken-and-biscuit-eating Uncle Tom,' 'house Negro' and
'handkerchief head,' 'Benedict Arnold' and "Judas Iscariot'."

The passage is conveniently phrased to make it look as if the quotes,
as well as the headline, appear in the Times editorial. They don't
(notes in the back of the book identify the sources as former Surgeon
General Jocelyn Elder's interview in Playboy, and Joseph Lowery at a
meeting of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference quoted in the
New Yorker). Coulter sets up the passage to give the impression that
the Times called Thomas a "lawn jockey" and a "house Negro" and hopes
that we won't notice that she's fudged it."

That is pretty pathetic even for a hatchet job. I don't get the
implied ambiguity but then I have an adult reading age. Itis even
clearer read in the context of her book and her style. Furthermore as
you point out she supplied endnotes on her work its not a lie and its
not even mildly misleading but then if you're a zealot things look a
little different.

As for the NYT it really did miss the Ukranian genocide of 4.5 million
people. Biased rag. "At least I didn't miss the Ukrainian famine.
Cf. Pulitzer prize winning New York Times reporter Walter Duranty"



(2) http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/...#500pmcoulter2
(Coulter thinks the left should just get over the whole civil rights
thingie...)

"FACT CHECK ANN COULTER: THE SELMA LIE. Live by LexisNexis, die by
LexisNexis. That certainly seems to be the case with Ann Coulter's
latest book, Slander. Yesterday we exposed a blatantly false statement
in her book about the use of the phrase "liberal Republican" in the
New York Times, and today we expose another. Here is the relevant
passage, from p. 199 of Slander:

Since abortion is not the left's proudest moment, liberals prefer
to keep reminiscing about the last time they were giddily
self-righteous. Like a senile old man who keeps telling you the same
story over and over again, liberals babble on and on about the "heady"
days of civil rights marches. Between 1995 and 2001, the New York
Times alone ran more than one hundred articles on "Selma" alone. I
believe we may have revisited this triumph of theirs sufficiently by
now. For anyone under fifty, the "heady" days of civil rights marches
are something out of a history book. The march on Selma was
thirty-five years ago.

Tapped smelled a rat here. Maybe it was Coulter's repetition of the
word "alone"; or maybe it was the fact that the famous 1965 "Bloody
Sunday" march was from Selma to Montgomery, not a march "on" Selma.


Pardon moi, who gives a **** whether the march was from selma to
mongomery, form mongomery to selma or on selma or via charlies
chocklate elevator. It's not a substantive issue and certainly not a
"lie"

SNIP

(3) And, if you want a good _conservative_ look at _Treason_, check
out http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...le.asp?ID=9080,
which is a symposium on the book. When you have a bunch of
conservative critics, trashing the book, that oughta tell you
something.

Calling a neocon, pro-immigration, half jewish guy (on his fathers
side) "conservative" is as accurate as calling Ghenkis Khan a nomad.



And that was about 5 minutes of looking. She's a lousy writer,
pandering to credulous nitwits.

She's better then you and she's not pandering to a hair spliting
nitiwits.

As far as hatchet jobs go: keep your day job.