Hypocrites...

Right after 9/11, Europeans were in support of the US. As time got further away from 9/11, Europeans went back to their dislike of the US.

It's hypocritical for Europe to show us support for 9/11, but then call us imperialists for wanting to finally end the menace in the Middle East that dates back to more than a decade BEFORE 9/11.

The pledges to help the US fight terrorists around the world were nothing but lies. Europeans were willing to help out for about a year, then get back to their lives in mediocrity while whining about the US trying to rid the world of evil. The Europeans can't and won't stick their neck out for others around the world, so they call Americans imperialists for actually doing something about the world's problems. It's hypocrisy and jealousy all rolled up together in a bunch of lies of support for Americans.

Oh, the same thing can be said about the liberals living in the US as bums of our system.

I think your overstating things a bit but suprising to say I agree to an extent, we (i) don`t dislike americans or think of evil america as you`ve put it a few times, our basic feeling lies in a distrust of president Bush which most probably stems from the wayy he got to power and his, almost cartoon character aspects. He wants to warifacate the word with a grammarization thats most bizzareified.

The way he got to power???

Oh, you're referring to Florida Election laws that Gore tried to break after he realized he was going to lose Florida and the entire election.

Let me sum it up for you...Gore realized he was going to lose Florida so his thugs tried to change the meaning of what a vote on a ballot meant in DEMOCRATIC heavy counties in Florida. The law is clear what ballots are legal, but Gore and his thugs found some DEMOCRAT judges in Florida try to change the LAW in his favor to pick and choose which favorable ballots would count for Gore.

The Feds got involved because voter FRAUD in a FEDERAL ELECTION is a big deal. A few backwater DEMOCRAT judges in Florida weren't going to change the results of a FEDERAL election as well as violating the law by "making" the law as judges.

By the way, various independent studies led by Gore supporters came to the conclusion that Bush still won the election in Florida with Gore's plan to change the ballots that counted. Sorry, but Bush won the election so get over it.

He wants to warifacate the world with a grammarization thats most bizzareified.

YEESSS!!!HAHA!!!Plus you're forgetting his Moralification of the White House.

Don`t wanna change the subject too much but if as you say there is such a clear cut case why was n`t it as well publicized as the doubts which seem to hang, and before you lose your rag about this I`m in europe so I it has n`t been in the media as much but if you can point in the way of the right information I`d be grateful....if you can`t my doubts will remain as to the legitamacy of Mr Bushs presidency

the simple answer to your question is. Bush actually winning the election even with Gore's stuffing of the ballot box, was not reported because the media, as we all know, is just the mouth piece of the deomocratic party. why would they tell the people that when they think it's their job to cast doubt on any republican in power? and if you're in europe you really didn't hear about it because european media is even more liberal than american media.

Originally posted by AegisFang

and if you're in europe you really didn't hear about it because european media is even more liberal than american media.

I agree. I'm european, and we didn't heard it. But we have heard that Bush didn't have to win and Gore had to win.

99,99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of the europeans think that Bush won on a fraud.

Hey, wait a minute....But, I'm the 0,0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% !

media is liberal and conservative--it basically depends on who is handling the purse strings. it's awfully "hipocritical" to say media is "controlled" by the liberals and then praise media that is "controlled" by the conservatives.

media is what it is...someone's opinion. reject the opinion not media as a whole. cause when you reject all media then praise it in the next breath you sound foolish. "media should be my media and reflect all my thoughts and feelings about every situation that presents itself or else it's just crap. and futhermore, blah, blah, blah, blah," foolish.

as for europe they live in a free society and if they don't wanna support the US then that's their right why should be care "we're too busy ridding the world of evil" to deal with them right now. oh wait, what happened to the "with us or against us" garbage...or rather, politically sound doctrine. maybe we should threaten them with force--that always seems to works when free people decide they wanna have a free thought.

Originally posted by Saphronia
it's awfully "hipocritical" to say media is "controlled" by the liberals and then praise media that is "controlled" by the conservatives.

I never said i praise media that is controlled by conservatives. i would be overjoyed if one day i could sit down and get just the facts. no liberal spin, no conservative spin just the facts. let me decide who's right and who's wrong(or should i say left).

[Edited on 1/19/2003 by AegisFang]

Europeans are calling Bush a fraud and a cowboy based on biased media here and over there spewing out those lies.

The media here pretty much covered up the studies that showed Bush still won the election with the Gore's ballot ploy. Hence the UNEDUCATED Euros talk trash about Bush with no clue.

Guess what...we don't care what the Euros think about our leader, since we know the truth. We see them as hypocrites with no clue about the REAL world.

They have a facination with our leader the same way we do British royalty.

Cassinni, I assure you Bush is a legitimate as any other president has been in the past 100 years. No, he doesn't kiss Euro-butt and no, he isn't giving nuclear secrets ti our enemy, China, but as he is our president, that is ok.

This particular president is more about leadership than he is following the polls.

Does n`t it worry you that he can`t get his englishifaction right.

The man who cant speak properly takes the world to task, just seems a bit of a comedy figure to me but I guess as the guys were saying the media can be very biased one way or the other so its difficult (from here) to work out what kind of a president he is, I` for a start I don`t have to live with his policies so I have no decent measure on the job he does

Sometimes a great leader doesn't necessarily have to be a great orator.

May be not a great orator but he should at least know the language he is speaking,

point taken though,

(your thoughtified consideration of the factifaction of this most seriousified of matters gains our thankification)

Originally posted by MT69
... It's hypocritical for Europe to show us support for 9/11, but then call us imperialists for wanting to finally end the menace in the Middle East ...

It's also hypocritical for the USA to condemn terrorism after supporting the IRA for many years.

Moonclamp I could n`t agre with you more. The American Irish community for years supported the IRA yet when they find terrorism on the doorstep....

moonclamp - You might find a handful of Irish-Americans that did but the US in general thought it was a stupid mess blamed on everyone over there.

Most Americans like myself with family ties to the UK/Ireland think it's a bunch of backwards people fighting over nothing much like the idiots we have over here in the ghetto fighting over gang street ownership.

Am I missing something? Are we all being blamed for a minute fraction of a percentage that gave money to the IRA?
Whatever.

Thomas Crowne - Yes, the US is to blame...even with their own criminal activity in their European backyards. So when someone gets mugged in London near Soho...it's gotta be the fault of the US or something like that.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Am I missing something? Are we all being blamed for a minute fraction of a percentage that gave money to the IRA?
Whatever.

No but in the words of your president "Terrorists or those who harbour them"