« German Responses to Islamism | Main | The Success Story of the German Social Model »

Comments

Since Andreas misspelled "geherter," I assume he either was edumacated in Germany or is lazy (or both).

Don't know what your copyright laws are, but he should either put the red circle-slash thru their logo or change it just enough to make fun of it.

maybe add an @$$hole?

This is wrong on so many levels. It's one thing to indoctorinate adults with hateful crap, but to indoctorinate children is evil. Do Germans know that people on the other side of the pond are aware of these incidents now? Or do they not care?

Probably not. Does anyone else see "Hell's Kitchen" in "Helles Koepfchen"? Must be just me, but it inclines me even less toward that crummy site.

Lou, Dissident Frogman took a paragraph or 2 out of his history books circa mid-80s, early 90s.

We are imperialists, the commies were OK.

They don't really understand that we have really been paying attention since 9/11 and they don't realize the power of the blogosphere.

If I only had a radio show.

I e-mailed Mr. Fischer.... and pointed out a couple of his ludicrous fallacies...including:

**

I "have learned" that you are clueless about the Patriot Act and Homeland Security as concerns the "restriction of liberty and citizen rights", complete with "civilian informer programs"... While we are on the subject of restriction the liberty and rights of citizens, do you care to comment on Klass and others v Federal Republic of Germany, European Court of Human Rights (Series A, NO 28) (1979-80) 2 EHRR 214, 6 September 1978...where YOUR courts upheld YOUR government's rights to engage in surveilance of private citizens "Democratic societies nowadays find themselves threatened by highly sophisticated forms of espionage and by terrorism, with the result that the State must be able, in order to effectively counter such threats, to undertake secret surveillance of subversive elements operating within its jurisdiction.."

Furthermore "...a recent report by the Max-Planck-Institute revealed, t(that) safeguards are not satisfactorily respected. First of all, the unexplained increase in phone-tapping since mid-1990s suggests that the measure is being used excessively, i.e. not as last resort. The fact that only 25% of all cases lead to an investigational success calls proportionality into question. 66,5% of convicted persons were sentenced to less than five years of detention, indicating that the measure often relates to less serious crimes, mostly drug-related. Moreover, 73% of persons subjected to phone-tapping were not notified after discontinuation and thus had no access to legal remedy. While the reasons for this lax practice are not entirely clear, there is a strong suggestion that it may be due to a lack of resources. Hence, while the law as such is accordance with human rights standards, its implementation is to be criticized. Largely, the safeguards set out by the European Court and the HRC are not sufficiently respected. In conclusion, the compatibility of surveillance practice in Germany with the right to privacy and – with regards to notification – the right to al legal remedy as guaranteed by art. 13 ECHR and art. 2(3a) ICCPR is highly questionable.

http://www.germanlawjournal.com/article.php?id=425

I wait with baited breath for his reply...


The problem is in Germany, France and UK, as far as I know. The same facts ignoring attitude. That makes it so dangerous. While busy with "US-Präsident Bush: Traum vom amerikanischen Gottesstaat" (Spiegel Nr. 52 vom 24.12.2005 Gott gegen Darwin, Seite 137 Bildunterschrift), Europe is ignoring the real danger. So do the Democrats in the US, eager to come back to power.


The National Review

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/


gross200406181018.asp


INTRODUCTION

(Extract from the article: One particularly cosmetic exercise was a 30-minute BBC profile of Yasser Arafat in 2002 which described him as a “hero,” and “an icon,” and spoke of him as having “performer’s flair,” and “charisma and style” and “personal courage” and being “the stuff of legends”. Adjectives applied to him included “clever,” “respectable,” and “triumphant”. He was also inaccurately referred to as “President.”)
This article, “Living in a Bubble,” concerns the BBC’s Mideast coverage. It was written in June 2004, but most of the points it makes remain as relevant and pressing as they were then. In the course of it I also argue that to understand the BBC’s coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it has to be placed in a wider political and historical context, including:

The BBC’s coverage of America, Communism and the Cold War.
The BBC’s non-coverage of discrimination against women and gays in the Arab world.
The BBC’s lack of proper coverage of the fact Arab militias are responsible for what is currently the world’s worst human rights abuse, in the Darfur region of Sudan.
The BBC’s lack of concern about other conflicts and disputed territories, such as the “Occupied West Bank of the Sahara” i.e. the 25-year Arab occupation of the Western Sahara (a territory bigger than Britain) which has been flooded with Arab settlers by the Moroccan government.
The BBC’s eulogizing of Yasser Arafat, whom it described, at the height of his terror campaign against Israeli civilians in 2002, as “the stuff of legends”.
The BBC’s vast worldwide influence, broadcasting as it does in 43 languages.


THE ARTICLE: LIVING IN A BUBBLE


The BBC: Sheikh Abdur-Rahman al-Sudais, from Saudi Arabia, who opened London’s biggest mosque last Friday, is a respected leader who works for “community cohesion” and “building communities.”

Not mentioned on the BBC: Some of the views of Sheikh Abdur-Rahman al-Sudais. In his own words: In the name of Allah, the Jews must be “annihilated.” They are “the scum of the human race, the rats of the world...the murderers of the prophets, and the offspring of apes and pigs.”

The BBC efforts not to “offend” Arabs extremists even extend to their reports on ethnic cleansing and genocide. On both the occasions in the last week when I heard BBC World Service Radio refer to the ongoing genocide and ethnic cleansing in Sudan, the BBC took scrupulous care to avoid saying who the perpetrators were (they are Arab militias) and who the victims are (hundreds of thousands of Black Sudanese Africans – Moslems, Christians and Animists). The BBC didn’t make any mention whatever of the long history of mass slavery in Sudan, carried out by Arabs with non-Arabs as their victims; nor of the scorched earth policies, and systematic rape being carried out there by Arabs.


Darfur: all but ignored
Yet in one of these very same news bulletins, the BBC mentioned that “settlers” in Gaza were “Jewish” and the land they were settling is “Palestinian” . I don’t think I have ever heard the BBC refer to settlers in Gaza without mentioning their ethnicity or religion – which is, of course, relevant to the story (though many would dispute the historical and legal accuracy of referring to the territory as Palestinian). But the BBC doesn’t appear to think ethnicity is relevant when it comes to real killing or ethnic based cleansing.

That is apart from situations elsewhere, in which non-Arabs are perpetrators. In one of the very same bulletins in which the BBC failed to mention the ethnic make up of perpetrator and victim in Sudan, it made sure to let us know that “Bosnian Serbs have admitted for the first time their role in the massacre of Bosnian Moslems a decade ago.”

Read all here:

http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/BBC.htm

@PacRim Jim

Since Andreas misspelled "geherter," I assume he either was edumacated in Germany or is lazy (or both).

I don't know about Andreas's education, but he did spell "geehrter" correctly. There is no such word as "geherter" in the German language.

I agree, indoctrinating kids is evil.

BTW, here's a great web site for kids:

http://www.cia.gov/cia/ciakids/index.shtml


"threatening him with legal action for allegedly misusing images and logos from the site without permission"

Actually he got off lucky. The guy could have sent him a "Abmahnung" right way from a lawyer and that could have cost him a 1000 Euro easily.

It happens all the time, even with fan sites.

Apparently, this indoctrination has been going on for a long time, because my fairly intelligent grown-up in-laws believe this kind of nonsense, too.

Still, it is a bit disheartening to continue to see such blatant examples of misinformation. All those journalists interested in pointing out the damage "greedy coprorations" can do need look no further than "media" companies in Germany, such as Helles Koepfchen.

"I agree, indoctrinating kids is evil.
BTW, here's a great web site for kids:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/ciakids/index.shtml"

@hingerl, the link you posted is basically an "About Us" page. What does a web page that tells people about the CIA have to do with indoctrinating kids...or this story?

After reading the "Helles Köpfchen" article I have to say I am surprised how "pro-American" it is compared to the usual articles you read about the U.S. It mentions several things that the U.S. has done for Germany that Germany should be thankful for. Even the title is unusual in that it talks about the U.S. as a "beloved land."

No matter what you think about it, opinion polls around the world show that Dubya is almost universally loathed, not only in Germany but in most European countries — with the exception of the former Warsaw Pact territory — in Latin America (Hugo Chavez), in the Arab world, in Russia, etc. If you think he's popular everywhere but in Germany, France and Russia, you're fooling yourself.

Although in the U.S. his approval rating is currently near record lows (http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm) it is nowhere near as low as it is in most other countries.

This universal dislike of the current president is not a phenomenon of the left, it cuts across all sections of the political spectrum.

So the question why it is that nobody likes GWB is a legitimate one. Of course, the "Helles Köpfchen" article does not provide an answer, it only propagates the usual stereotypes about the current administration. But the article does not stand out as unusually anti-American (as I said, I think it is even more pro-American than usual) or anti-Bush. It reflects the current European mainstream.

Hingerl,

Notes on Bush popularity.

There isn't a satellite that gives objective, world wide measurement of Bush's popularity, so the use of such a statement is more a reflection of the user of such statements.

I feel that media types, as are most symbol manipulating workers, leftist. Reality for them is effortlessly mailable. Older leftist like Lenin, et.al, understood that progress is messy, but today's leftist recoil at messy hands, in and of itself. So, not only are they ideologically anti-Bush, but esthetically too.

Only a small percentage of people are capable of independent thought, let alone investigate first principals. Most people accept what they are told, GIGO. Garbage In, Garbage Out as they used to say in old Fortran computer programming. So, I don't think anyone will argue that world wide, media are anti-Bush in the most reflexive, visceral way. Then the same media polls their readers on Bush. Surprise. This is also known as closed loop, and is indicative of poor quality control, group-think and the like. However, for the uneducated it works just fine.

Eastern Europe is odd, but very informative. Here these countries should naturally support either Europe, Russia, or both. But no, they take that guy, from that weird state, that can barely speak English. Why? I'll answer. Non-pro Russian is obvious. Now Europe. Some of Bush support is to be attributed to pro-Americanism. As when Europe had legions of Soviet tanks an half hour over the east German boarder, the eastern Europeans still have a Russia nearby. I think the eastern Europeans know who protects whom, and it isn't their waffle neighbors to the west, but those across the Atlantic. It's not even a matter of 'who you going to call', as Europe won't even pick up the phone, let alone do anything. To be blunt, no free, nor desiring to be free man in the world looks to Europe, run by European leftist elite. The real question today, isn't Bush, Iraq or even anti-Americanism. It is Europe.

@Niko

"Myriads of flies can't be wrong, shit must taste good!"

Well, if you're a fly then I'm sure shit tastes good.

@hingerl: I reject your basic premise. Whether or not GWB is popular, or well-liked around the world, is irrelevant. This is about systematically spreading misinformation (for a profit, I might add), not about popularity. I mean, Hugo Chavez? Puh-leese. And your golden boy, Clinton, and his cabal of nincompoops are partly responsible for the mess GWB is having to clean up (hehe, some of them are busy trying to clean up their own messes, right Sandy?).

And, maybe there is even a lesson to be learned by this lack of popularity. Everyone hated Reagan, too. And look how much better things are because of him. As the saying goes, you can tell you're doing a good job by the people you are pissing off.

how does the German adage go?
keine Feinde, keine Ehre?
GWB must be 'sehr ehrenswert!!'

@Carl Spackler

There isn't a satellite that gives objective, world wide measurement of Bush's popularity, so the use of such a statement is more a reflection of the user of such statements.

Sure, there's no way to gauge Bush's world wide popularity. However, my point is that Bush is extraordinarily unpopular in Europe, and this is based on my own personal non-scientific sampling. I don't know where you live, but if you live in Europe I have a challenge for you: Count the number of people you know that are Bush supporters, then count the number of people you know that are Bush opponents, and then count those that feel indifferent about him. Basically, I don't know anybody who falls in the third category, and the number of people I know that fall into the second category is way way way larger than the number in the first category.

Americans are different from Europeans. You should read this excellent book: Of Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order, by Robert Kagan

@Scott H

I reject your basic premise. Whether or not GWB is popular, or well-liked around the world, is irrelevant.

Yes, it is irrelevant. But why is GWB so unpopular? This is what the "Helles Köpfchen" article was all about. Did you read the article at all? I mean the whole article, not just the excerpts on DMK.

And your golden boy, Clinton

I didn't write anything about Clinton. And he's not my "golden boy." Please stop beating up strawmen.

@Niko

The point is not that Europeans whine about Bush. The point is that Europeans whine about Bush more than about any other U.S. president in recent history.

Why is he so polarizing? Is he really a "uniter and not a divider"?

I didn't get the Gummibärchen/Popcorn analogy, but I guess it wasn't that important.

Hingerl,

I don't doubt your personal observations.

I'm in the states, and am lucky to get to Europe once a year.

Bush is at a deep core, very American, so regardless of Iraq and such, he wouldn't be popular in Europe for the reasons you must know from Kagan's book. So, in a way, everything is as it should be.

What I would like to emphasize, is the media in Europe. I can only read English and puzzle through Spanish, so I'm out there in my information, but feel somewhat confident of what I have to say. And that is that Bush, and the what I'll call American conservative ideas, values and such gets little honest coverage in Europe. From my own personal example, being an starved information junkie, and having to watch the English BBC, or European edition of CNN, I was shocked at the coverage of American life, events, government actions. I thought our own media in the states where leftist incompetents, but the overseas product in Europe is just pure leftist trash. If this is what Europeans base their opinions on, well, no wonder their views.

My main complaint, is that Europeans don't get from their media, nor our media exported to Europe, a honest fair view of either Bush or American. I don't think that anyone would argue that they do. Bush and America aside, for Europeans fate, I wonder what other untrue, false, distorted views are in the public mind do to the leftist media?

@Niko

Actually, during the Cold War there were maybe a few lefties who criticized Reagan and Nixon, but now Bush bashing is mainstream.

@Niko

What are killer tomatoes?

Do I have to worry about them?

@Niko

Oh, puh-lease, the Greens with 5% of the vote? They were definitely not mainstream in the 80s.

@ hingerl

"But why is GWB so unpopular?"

I'm sure it has nothing to do with any of this or this.

@Ray D.

Watch out, you might get an "Abmahnung" from Stern. :-)

Bush is disliked in Europe because the Bush doctrine has changed what is acceptable status quo, like the cozy business dealings between Europeans and Saddam and Iran. The status quo that let the masacres in bosnia happens as European elites talk in their glass halls. The status quo that perpetuates brutal dictators. The status quo of European "soft power" better known through history as Appeasement.
Enjoy the doom that awaits you. I hope we don't bother bailling you out this time around.

At the end of the day it is irrelevant what the masses in euroland think or do not think.

Do not delude yourselves into thinking it does.

hingirl opined "Sure, there's no way to gauge Bush's world wide popularity. However, my point is that Bush is extraordinarily unpopular in Europe, and this is based on my own personal non-scientific sampling. I don't know where you live, but if you live in Europe I have a challenge for you: Count the number of people you know that are Bush supporters, then count the number of people you know that are Bush opponents, and then count those that feel indifferent about him. Basically, I don't know anybody who falls in the third category, and the number of people I know that fall into the second category is way way way larger than the number in the first category."

What kind of idiotic commentary is this anyway? Are you here to tell us that President Bush is unpopular in Europe - widely unpopular - more unpopular than Clinton was?

What next - the sky is blue?

Try to bear in mind several points while you ponder the depth of your observation

1) Any Republican US President of the last 40 years is more "un-popular" in Euroland than any Democrat US President
Why? Because the Democratic party comes closer to the socialist pablum that our Western European friends have been raised on these many decades.

2) Please stop trying to spin the lie that Reagan wasn't so unpopular in Europe in the 1980's. Of course the Bush hysteria now is even greater - but Reagan was widely derided and disliked accross the spectrum of W European opinion. One reason for that can be found in item 1 above.

3) Try to contemplate cause and effect before you post such nonsense about "ask around in Europe what they think of Bush"
Is there ANY pro Bush Admin media in Europe? Does anyone point out the inconsistency in pissing and moaning about the "illegal non USSC sanctioned war in Iraq" while ignoring the exact same circumstance in the Balkans - with German participation!

Look - if you would have preferred we left Saddam in power to run his rape rooms and industrial shredders and play hide and seek with a dozen UN inspectors - thats your opinion and your welcome to it. I think those with such an opinion are callous assholes who don't give a shit about anyone but themselves - but thats MY opinion and I am welcome to it.

However - lets not butress our own opinions with references to "illegal non USSC sanctioned war" and omit the pertinent fact that Clinton and Germany did exactly the same thing with no such disapproval from most of the same characters.

Cause and effect is a large part of the widening gap between Europe and the USA

The media is the cause - and the effect is a distancing from Europe

I hope Fox news picks up on this story, indeed I would prefer ABC news and CNN to pick up on it but I know that they won't, and this gets widely aired

I want the US public to be made aware of how Germans view them and I for one will help get the message out anyway I can

hingerl

Of course Bush is unpopular in Western(!) Europe, as there are many other things American. When you put aside things like history, political convictions, traditions, etc., there is one extremely simple (or simplistic) explanation, which you will not appreciate: Europeans generally have the mentality of a sheep flock, Americans have the mentality of a sheep dog. Europeans feel good living in the semianonimity offered by a herd, Americans feel good exploring their full potential, which they feel would be hindered by living in a herd.

Everythig else in the lifes of Western Europeans, the decisions they make, their political affiliations, the way they view the world is being influenced by this mindset. To put it even simpler, Europeans are not different from Americans because they are Socialists, they are Socialists because they are different from Americans(duh). Europeans believe they have reached their full potential and from this comes then the arrogance of believing that yours is the only way.

Absolutely nothing will change as long as there will be no shift among European masses towards independent thinking, free of well-intentioned, state-imposed constraints. Even assuming that the EU media will stop manipulating the masses and instead start informing them and presenting them boths sides of the coin, there would probably take several generations until autonomous thought became appreciated by the EU masses.

Bush is the personification of the self-reliant, optimistic and determined American. Self-reliance, optimism and decisiveness are all traits that Europeans generally don't have, but subconsciously crave (all people do). However, because those traits contradict their known patterns, they dare not to break free of their limitations. They live in a herd and wonder why others would choose not to join them. They turn the positive traits of others in something negative. Bush (the typical American) is not self-reliant, he is self-centered, he is not optimistic, he is unrealistic, he is not determined, he is madly driven.

The typical American and the typical EU citizen couldn't be more different from each other. They way each of them reacts to social issues, WOT, environment, etc. will always be filtered through their own outlook on life. The quesion is, should Americans become more like the Europeans or the other way around. So far, in the last century Europe has managed to give birth to the most abject characters and ideologies, and Americans have managed to put an end to all European criminal aberations. History and common sense, infused with a good dose of humbleness, show that the American way has been more successful.

Europeans convinced themselves that the creation of an utopic EU will bring them absolution for past failures. They believe that the birth of the EU is the birth of a new societal model. It is very tempting for the human ego to believe that you found the Holy Grail, that with one strike, you can not only wipe out your past mistakes, but also be propulsed to the top of your class.

To end up on a more positive note, I believe that in a few generations EUs will come to appreciate the typical American way of facing life. Until then, everything is possible.

@hingerl

>>"After reading the "Helles Köpfchen" article I have to say I am surprised how "pro-American" it is compared to the usual articles you read about the U.S. It mentions several things that the U.S. has done for Germany that Germany should be thankful for. Even the title is unusual in that it talks about the U.S. as a "beloved land."


See, there was no reason for all the alarmism! Although it's quite true that Germany's children are being brainwashed, they're being brainwashed with the "right thoughts" about America. Thanks alot, hingerl, very reassuring. It's good to know that Germany's children are being correctly programmed. After all, if you can just properly freeze-dry those little brains right from the start, independent thought becomes a superfluous waste of time.

@Niko

"If you don't sign the "Unterlassungserklärung" you don't have to pay anything. (Actually, you can just reply, "I concede, but I don't admit to any wrongdoing.") Only if a court orders a "strafbewehrte Unterlassungsverfügung" you'll be forced to do so."

Well NIko, I'd rather not follow your armchair lawyer's advice. If you don't sign the Unterlassungserklärung the next thing you'll get is a "einstweilige Verfügung" from a court, and then it'll cost you more. You can fight this with a negative Feststellungsklage but since the copyright of those pictures is hardly in question you will definitely lose the case.

The 1000 Euro I quoted are just the fees of that lawyer. Some lawyers make a good living with Abmahnungen (there are notorious examples which must not be named). Only in Germany Abmahnungen will cost you, that's why there is so much abuse with them. Easy money for the lawyer.

@helian

How good you are at taking my quote out of context and then riduculing it.

Do you do this regularly?

@helian

sorry, I meant "ridiculing"

@Joe..
you are right, the Euros are irrelevant. I remember during the run-up to the Iraq war.. all the discussions on German TV.. all the blab sessions of Sabine C. and CLaudia (moo) Roth..
I remember thinking.. all your talk is irrelevant, GWB will do what he wants - in fact, the shriller your criticism, the less he will listen to you at all.
(Hitler comparison, anyone?)

I have yet to fully understand the hatred for GWB. I remember in mid 2001.. People were SCREAMING about Kyoto.. I remember thinking, geez that thing was killed by the Senate 4 years ago, how did it get to be Bush's fault?
Krauthammer nailed it best when he described it as Bush derangement syndrome.

Plus there is a natural human tendency - more 'geprägt' in Germany - to want to blame your problems on other factors.
Our society is great, it's those damn (turks, aussiedler, asylbewerber, Ossies, Amis, and of course the best for last .. the JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOS)
- if it wasn't for THEM, everything would be friede, Freude, Eierkuchen.

@hingerl

>>"How good you are at taking my quote out of context and then riduculing it."

I am in no way "taking your quote out of context." What "context" are you talking about? You rationalized the brainwashing at "Helles Köpfchen" by claiming that it was really "pro-American." There is nothing in the "context" of your post to alter that impression. Why don't you just make a clean breast of it, hingerl. After all, if we're misrepresenting you, we'd like to know. Do you condemn the brainwashing of children at "Helles Köpfchen" or don't you? That, after all, is what the original post is about.

I lived in Europe throughout Reagan's presidency; he was widely and vocally despised. Moreover, in true moonbat double-down tradition, that unfounded contempt has since been justified by widespread denial of his achievements.

I'm glad to say I now live in the US. I visit Europe once a year to see my family. Having come to understand the different cultures, I agree with the commenter above who said "Bush is at a deep core, very American, so regardless of Iraq and such, he wouldn't be popular in Europe." But I also know that anti-american/anti-Bush opinion is massively amplified by the lies and distortions of the press.

Now, Scott, you know it isn't Reagan - it's Ronnie Ray-Gun!

They seem to think some of US don't remember the 80s and the SS-20s.

Or they have willingly forgotten.

ex-democrat -

Welcome home!

@Niko

"Acting on journalistic terms" is irrelevant. Where do you get the idea that the press can ignore the copyright of photos? What do you think the press photographers, the image libraries live of?

I have not said that the lawyer has to be paid automatically, but if you actually did commit copyright infringement it will be cheaper to do so. That's the whole (and unfortunately abused) idea of a Abmahnung: Save you the costs of going to court.

So you are not forced to sign the Unterlassungserklärung and the lawyer's fees at this point. But every other option will be more expensive.

Actually many bloggers walk on very thin ice with the photos they use. Using a copyrighted logo of someone is enough to get you in trouble.

The (stupid) TV producers of "Big Brother" sued dozens of "Big Brother fan sites for using the copyrighted and trademarked logo of BB.

So inSentio was actually "nice" not to use a lawyer at this point.

@Niko..
yeah, There was a time when Kerry* was at a press conference - maybe it was in France, or maybe just a French correspondent was at an American one -
he was asked a question in French..
He just stood there silently.. do I, Jean Francois, answer the question back in French and immediately lose the election? What should I do?
I don't recall how he handled it, but he sure as hell didn't answer back in French, the RNC would have made sure we saw that!!!!!

I would pay serious money to see that clip on video.

*the haughty, French looking Massachusetts Democrat, who by the way served in Vietname

--Actually, during the Cold War there were maybe a few lefties who criticized Reagan and Nixon, but now Bush bashing is mainstream.
--

Well, DUH!

The Wall fell, it's safe for Europe to revert to form. They know we won't "do" anything.

Still timely, via Instapundit:

Meanwhile, with the Civil War in mind, reader Gregory Birrer points out that Europe never changes:

I have been reading a little book I picked up while in Gettysburg recently, entitled, "Memoranda During The War" by Walt Whitman. It is a compilation of his notes from about 3 years worth of visits to War hospitals in and around Washington D.C. from 1862 - 1865. Toward the end he inserts some interesting political commentary (mixed in with a variety of topics) that sounds as if it could have been written today. Here's the piece:
Attitude of Foreign Governments toward the U.S. during the War of 1861-'65 -

Looking over my scraps, I find I wrote the following during 1864, or the latter part of '63: The happening to our America, abroad as well as at home, these years, is indeed most strange. The Democratic Republic has paid her to-day the terrible and resplendent compliment of the united wish of all the nations of the world that her Union should be broken, her future cut off, and that she should be compell'd to descend to the level of kingdoms and empires ordinarily great!There is certainly not one government in Europe but is now watching the war in this country, with the ardent prayer that the united States may be effectually split, crippled, and dismember'd by it. There is not one but would help toward that dismemberment, if it dared. I say such is the ardent wish to-day of England and of France, as governments, and of all the nations of Europe, as governments. I think indeed it is to-day the real, heart-felt wish of all the nations of the world, with the single exception of Mexico--Mexico, the only one to whom we have ever really done wrong, and now the only one who prays for us and for our triumph, with genuine prayer.

Is it not indeed strange? America, made up of all, cheerfully from the beginning opening her arms to all, the result and justifier of all, of Britain, Germany, France, and Spain - all here - the accepter, the friend, hope, last resource and general house of all - she who has harm'd none, but been bounteous to so many, to millions, the mother of strangers and exiles, all nations - should now I say be paid this dread compliment of general governmental fear and hatred?.......Are weindignant? alarm'd? Do we feel wrong'd? jeopardized? No; help'd, braced, concentrated, rather.

We are all too prone to wander from ourselves, to affect Europe, and watch her frowns and smiles. We need this hot lesson of general hatred, and henceforth must never forget it. Never again will we trust the moral sense nor abstract friendliness of a single government of the world.

November 18, 2003

BTW
there was a video comparing 'the Breck boy' John Edwards and W.. it was called 'the choice'.
Country western music playing in the background.
Does anyone know if it is still around?
I could use a good laugh..

I am personally not so sure this is really as bad as many might believe.

I view this indoctrination of anti-Americism as a weeding out process.

Assume for a moment the elites in Germany continue on their current course of decrying America. When these children reach their mid- 20’s in 15 – 20 years, just what do you think their opinions toward America are going to be?

I would summarize they are not going to be very positive. This means most of them will remain either in Germany or in Europe.

There will be a few who will reject all of this and see through the fog of half truths, mistruths and just plain lies that they have been subjected to. Many of these will immigrate to the US.

These few will be welcomed in America. They will also be the type of immigrate America both will want and need. They will be a gain to America and a lost to Germany.

So it really is not as bad as one might believe.

http://www.fr-aktuell.de/ressorts/nachrichten_und_politik/nachrichten/?cnt=778585&sid=c1a8add0de196a5a67fc5ed286d38697


--People were SCREAMING about Kyoto.. I remember thinking, geez that thing was killed by the Senate 4 years ago, how did it get to be Bush's fault?
Krauthammer nailed it best when he described it as Bush derangement syndrome.--

Or an ignorance - which is shared by a lot of Americans, of how we are set up.

See, we do have something in common!

Joe, Stephen den Beste covered this a couple of years ago, there are Americans by birth and Americans by heart.

This:

http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2003/11/Non-Europeancountry.shtml

Which begat this:

http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2003/11/AnAmericaninSpain.shtml

...Now the thing is, that all this time I have felt as if I was "in the wrong place". Being the only one with one idea, while virtually all the people around me (in fact, all the europeans) is against it, makes me feel as if I was not from there. But then, if not Catalan, Spanish or European, what am I???

I haven't had the complete answer to this question until today, when I read your article. Now I do know it.

I'm American. In the wrong place, far from home, but American.

And, sincerely, that's an honour.....

@Sandy P.

Actually Sandy, I am a little embarrassed to admit this, since it reinforces the stereotype of the weltfremd uninformiert Ami..
I was in the US for Xmas break. I actually had to explain to people what Kyoto was!
But it was actually refreshing.. I actually met people whose meaning/purpose in life is not defined by a treaty that was killed 9 years ago!

thanks, sandy, i guess kindred spirits can be at home online, anywhere.

joe - how about a massive exchange program where we trade all of our anti-american US moonbats for pro-american euro's? how do you think that would work out? ;-)

@ex democrat

your wish has been granted!

http://www.movethemon.org/

that is why the Euros built the Airbus.. so they can transport Michael Moore's sorry ass over to EUtopia!!! the 747 just wasn't big enough!

@helian

You rationalized the brainwashing at "Helles Köpfchen" by claiming that it was really "pro-American."

Can't you read? Here again, for you, Helian, is what I wrote:

"After reading the 'Helles Köpfchen' article I have to say I am surprised how "pro-American" it is compared to the usual articles you read about the U.S. It mentions several things that the U.S. has done for Germany that Germany should be thankful for. Even the title is unusual in that it talks about the U.S. as a 'beloved land.'"

First of all, I'm talking about the entire article, in German, on their web site, not just about the excerpts from it quoted on DMK. When I am saying it is "pro-American" (please note the quotes I put around the word) I am comparing it to the usual articles about the U.S. that you get to read in the German media. Usually, Americans are not credited for bringing democracy to Germany, something the "Helles Köpfchen" article explicitly does.

I continue to re-post the statement I made:

"So the question why it is that nobody likes GWB is a legitimate one. Of course, the "Helles Köpfchen" article does not provide an answer, it only propagates the usual stereotypes about the current administration. But the article does not stand out as unusually anti-American (as I said, I think it is even more pro-American than usual) or anti-Bush. It reflects the current European mainstream."

So where exactly do I "rationalize" the "brainwashing"?

And please explain what you mean by "brainwashing". If everybody who has different political views from yours is "brainwashed", then you sound awfully like a commie.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Our Mission

The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

May 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31