« Was There A Russian Connection? | Main | Winner of the 2004 Idiocy Award »


It's a shame I can't vote twice because Kerry would get both votes. I don't know why so many people still want bush in office?

Whereas a commentor on my blog made me aware of this jewel of a reaction:


"Der Deutsche Journalistenverband hat sich heute gegen die Wahlempfehlungen des deutschen Massenblatts ausgesprochen. Verbands-Pressesprecher Hendrik Zörner mahnte an, dass Journalisten "überparteilich" sein sollten. Dies gelte auch für die "Bild"-Zeitung. Gegenüber SPIEGEL ONLINE gab Zörner außerdem zu bedenken, dass in Deutschland 200.000 wahlberechtigte US-Amerikaner leben. Die Vorgehensweise der "Bild" könnte unter Umständen zu einer "Beeinflussung" des Wahlverhaltens führen."

(For all the English-speaking people out there: The spokesman of the German association of journalists criticizes the BILD endorsement. He says journalists would have to be "non-partisan". Also, an endorsement could influence the decision of Americans living in Germany.)

Just curious why he happens to care so much about "non-partisan" coverage about the US when BILD has a single pro-Bush article, whereas hundreds of rabidly anti-Bush articles by Spiegel, Stern et al. were no problem for him.

If you are curious, too, why not drop Mr. Zörner a note? His e-mail: zoe (AT) djv.de

@ Joe

As far as I have heard, there are enough Kerry supporters out there who will vote twice or more or have already done so. ;-)

See reasons #3 and #6. IMO the REAL reasons why Bild supports Bush.

@ Wuldorblogger

"Der Deutsche Journalistenverband hat sich heute gegen die Wahlempfehlungen des deutschen Massenblatts ausgesprochen. Verbands-Pressesprecher Hendrik Zörner mahnte an, dass Journalisten "überparteilich" sein sollten."

Wahnsinn. Wir wohnen in einem Asyl meine Lieben.

Oh, I get it. Only AMERICAN blood and treasure will be spent in the fight, but we'll still let the EUweenies make money off "the peace". Now that they've lost their "oil-for-food" bribe money.

The Bild missed one little point. Yes, Bush wants allies. But his definition of 'allies' doesn't include YOU.

Kiss it goodbye Germany. You made your bed with France and are now Chirac's bitch. Toodles.

Pamela, do the USA have any allies at all that fit your definition?

No country helps the USA with more soldiers in the war on terror (without Iraq) than Germany. Even with Iraq only the United Kingdom helps the USA with more troops.

Points #3 and #6 are facts. 'Bild' did not say they like it that way.

Getting an endorsement from Bild is like getting an endorsement from the New York Post. The Bild is Germany's largest tabloid and is not considered a "respectable" news source.

So I find it interesting that this is endorsement would be taken so seriously.

so endorsing Bush is against the anti-american and anti-Bush mindset (notice how Ray D. has used the two expressions in one sentence: anti-bush is anti-american), hmmm. But then of course Bild is known for its extremely high standard of journalism (possibly even lower than SPON)

...and by the way, the Economist, arguably one of the most respected publications in the English-speaking world has endorsed.... Kerry. In 2000 they endorsed Bush. As one of the main reasons they name the handling of prisoners in Guantanamo. I'm just trying to get my head round... is this the British anti-American and anti-Bush mindset or... no, surely there can be no case against Bush. It's only made up by the German media whores.

Here's the link. It's good to read some good quality piece of journalism once in a while.


To szdfan: The NY Post is a perfectly reliable paper. I don't know Bild, but if it's like the Post, it caters to an audience that isn't a self-designated elite, unlike the audience of the NY Times, etc. The sensibility and layout of the Post are for the prole audience, but its reporting is as solid as anything else out there.

i don't normally read conservative blogs. i find them hateful and close-minded. but this entry really opened my mind.

i'd like to publically apologise to the folks in germany. i didn't know you guys did sarcasm - never mind sarcasm so over the top as that endorsement.

Sue -- I think the journalistic integrity of the Post is debatable -- I will say though that I personally have not been impressed.

I would rank BILD somewhere below the Post and better than the National Enquirer. BILD's
recent big story
is an apocalyptical alarm regarding meteors causing the Earth to tilt a few degrees off its axis.

My personal favorite quote:

Neue, unbekannte Krankheiten drohen. Der Astrobiologe Prof. Chandra Wickramasinghe hat in 41 Kilometern Höhe Massen von bisher unbekannten Mikroorganismen entdeckt: „Das können Killerkeime sein!“ Der Forscher ist überzeugt: Das tödliche Lungenvirus SARS (700 Tote 2002/3) wurde mit kosmischem Staub auf die Menschen geweht.

English translation --

“New, unknown diseases threaten. The astrobiologist Proffessor Chandra Wickramasinghe discovered at a height of 41 kilometers masses of unknown micro organisms: “that could be killer germs!” The researcher is convinced: The deadly lung virus SARS (700 dead ones 2002/3) was blown with cosmic dust on humans.”

My point is that these guys aren't taken seriously in Germany itself.

Robert Z,

You have had too many socialize med's if you actually believed that.

I bet you read that somewhere in the Germany media or heard gerhard make a speech about it.

Be proud Robert Z. Your mighty nation just extended the tour of 300 of it service members for another year in the fight on terror.

This is about it..

I know this should get you a seat at the UNSC too.


The Japanese have more soldiers deployed than Germany does..

It would seem the education system in Germany has been failing for some time now if the citizens of the fatherland cannot see the wisdow of what Bild did.

As my comment on another topic here, someone is actually considering just what a Kerry victory might bring "old Europe".

Of course, it might be these wise Germans don't care. Which if that is the case I would hope to see marches in the streets of all major German cities demanding the US get out of Germany and NATO.

Pamela, the sentence from Bild about Bush wanting allies was followed by an a statement David did not translate: "But he won't rely on the votes of Syria or Libya in the United Nations." Make allies, but don't make multilateralism an excuse to prop up failed states that harbor terrorism - this sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

What's wrong with supporting Bush for egoistic reasons? Germany has finally transformed itself from a militarist into a pacifist country and will hopefully dismantle its army, and as its export-based economy will have to struggle to become independent from its totalitarian key accounts around the world, it does not have resources for the war on terror. Germany ceasing to be a diplomatic obstacle would already be a great advance. Bush understands that Europe will be the hangovered guy on the backseat for a while, but Kerry expects crazy Schröder and Fischer to guide him along the abyss.

For these who don't know, Bild comes from the only German publishing house which declared a pro-Israel corporate policy in the Six Day War and added a pro-American one after 9/11, Springer. Therefore, over the last decades the left has jumped all over Springer and singled it out for its employment of renegade Nazis, although this did not make any difference to other West-German post-WWII media like Der Spiegel, who have slowly taken over Springers former consensus-building role after the Six Day War. However I wonder why only Springers big-tits-tabloid came out pro-Bush, not his intellectual conservative daily Die Welt.

I don't know why so many people still want bush in office? Posted by: Joe | October 28, 2004 08:55 PM

Um... could it be because they're thinking?

Oh... no that's not it.

"We are asking the American people, 'Why are you voting for Bush?'"

I'm going to let the cat out of the bag here. The real reason we're voting for Bush is to drive Old Europe crazy. It's our hobby. We're going to re-elect Bush for the same reason we go to France and try to speak French. While wearing bermuda shorts and porkpie hats and bright floral shirts, and talking in loud voices about how exotic all the people are and how quaint it must be to live in a 600-year-old house, and why don't they just tear them all down and build new ones?

We're still getting even with y'all for making such a mess of Western Civilization and spawning Communism and Fascism in the last century.

(Hey, that's what y'all want to believe anyway.)

Cassandra -- our comments crossed in the posting, but we'll see which of our answers the rabble here choose to believe. ;-)

LEO! Arrggh!
>Germany has finally transformed itself from a militarist into a pacifist country and will hopefully dismantle its army

HOPEFULLY DISMANTLE ITS ARMY!!?? Ok, just for grins, suppose Turkey gets pissed off at you and you have no military. You want ME to come over there and haul your chestnuts out of the fire?

Your mistake is posing "pacificist" as the opposite of "militarist". How about "defensively self-sufficient"?

>Make allies, but don't make multilateralism an excuse to prop up failed states that harbor terrorism - this sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

Me too. Actually, I'm for not making multilateralism an excuse for not taking out states that harbor terrorism. But we can't do that without a MILITARY. And one thing I predict is going to get a lot more mileage if Bush wins - The push to get the the U.N out of the U.S. and the U.S. out of the U.N. will increase exponentially.

>Germany ceasing to be a diplomatic obstacle would already be a great advance

The great advance has already been achieved. Because Bush is ignoring Germany and Germany has no recourse to make him pay attention. And if Germany is stupid enough to insist that the EU have one seat on the Security Council in lieu of the individual countries that comprise the EU, I will have given up on Europe having the courage to take responsibility for sovreignity, for trusting her people as opposed to her elite, to define herself in positive terms instead of "not America" terms.

Ach, Leo, I expected better from you.
Going to bed, will check in tomorrow. I see LGF has linked here. Ha! Have a nice night..(and besides, you have my email and can cuss me out at your leisure......)

@ leo,

Thanks for the heads up. We actually only had an abbreviated version of the 10 reasons up earlier. I've now translated the list in its entirety and it is posted above.

---Ray D.

Uh - surprise?

The German Murdoch (Springer) and his reactionary, xenophobic, nudie-pic-peddling "Rechte Kampfpresse" aligning themselves with the shrubmeister? Hardly.

And who cares, anyway? Few actually read this rag. They look at the pictures, the weather page and then wrap fish in it ...

BTW - the largest-circulation "news"-paper in N-America is the National Enquirer - a veritable beacon of journalistic integrity!

Question: Why,my dear European friends, should
any American give a rat's ass about whom das
Bild, or any European newspaper "endorses" when
the same attitude is extended to the know-it-alls
in our own newspapers?

I believe the folks in Clark County, Ohio, told
the Guardian letter-writing campaign what they
could do with their political influence peddling.

In the meantime stay glued to your television,
radio and newspapers for the results in the full
knowledge that by-and-large WE do not care what
YOU think about OUR elections.

I do not think I was the Joe who asked why so many people will vote for GWB.

Actaully having given money to his campagin and worked for the Republican Party here, I am considering voting for JFK. I realize my state is solid Red so my vote would not have an impact.

Still for more than a passing moment I have considered voting for Kerry if the election of Kerry speeds the withdrawal of US Forces both from Germany and NATO. He then would have accomplished more to protect the future of the US than either slick willie or GW.

I see what Kerry has told the American people about the euro land legions which are going to come to Iraq and help the US establish a free nation there. He can lead where GW cannot.

I think more than a few Americans will hold him to this. He will have no choice but to press both paris and Berlin.

The only question in my mind is which will cause the greatest heartburn. - their troops in Iraq or the unwinding of US euroland or 4 more years of GW.

[to think I said I was considering voting for Kerry. Robert Z must have sent me some of his med's]

Hey Edward,

Interesting point. Check out our posting on the Guardian flap. I think our endorsement will also be of interest to you.

---Ray D.

Joe, you write:

I see what Kerry has told the American people about the euro land legions which are going to come to Iraq and help the US establish a free nation there. He can lead where GW cannot.

I think more than a few Americans will hold him to this. He will have no choice but to press both paris and Berlin.

I'm not sure if you are kidding or not, but FYI, Kerry is against withdrawing large numbers of troops from Germany. In fact, he criticized announcements from the administration on troop withdrawals from Germany earlier this year.

As far as German troops in Iraq go, the German government has already made it exceedingly clear on numerous occasions that they will not send troops to Iraq NO MATTER WHO WINS THE ELECTION. The French have said the same. What country will Kerry get his troops from at his "summit?" He's already insulted America's current allies as a "coalition of the bribed and coerced." Who will want to join him in a war that he himself called a "mistake" and "the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time?"

Those are important questions the American people will have to consider on election day.

Interesting comments. I don't think the BILD endorsement matters much. What is interesting is that if BILD is the largest circulation in Germany and in europe they must have their method of gauging the demographics of their readership well developed. Knowing that I can't see them making an editorial decision that would offend their readership. They are in business to make money after all. It says more about the real man on the street and about the self censoring and spinning of the media elites who would represent things in a much different light.

That is not to say they love the USA or GWB in europe but that the average man on the street feel responding to threats is important.

Yo Joe and Ray!

Joe: "Press Paris and Berlin"? For what? How do
you get blood from turnips? If they mustered the
courage to go to Iraq, how would their respective
governments explain how it is their troops were
being killed by the weapons their countries produced shortly before the Coalition invaded Iraq?

Ray: Liked the posting and "endorsement". We may
differ in our views on politics, but I am in
accord with what you wrote. Know this for a
certainty: all politics aside, there is one I
would NEVER vote for in any circumstance, even
as a community dog-catcher, because of what he said and did in 1971 and the years following. Many Europeans and Americans seem to think he's the greatest thing since the invention of creamed cheese. I do not!

This "man of the world" asked for a Philly Cheese Steak with Swiss cheese and didn't know how to eat it!

Reminded me of the idiot American announcer at the Winter Olympics in Norway who made a perfectly stupid remark about eating a reindeer sausage. He wouldn't try it because he thought he might not like it. : - )

Europeans wishing to comprehend why many Americans will vote for Bush should consider the parable of the Little Red Hen. Assuming they can find it, or understand it once found.

Ric Locke


Destructive power
Grows by the hour;
Spreads its wings
At behest of earth’s kings.
Too soon and John Doe,
Or any hobo
Could gain access to power
To make the world cower.
Technology’s wonders
And apocalyptic blunders
Go hand in hand,
Not quite as we planned.
It’s no steady state,
But an accelerating rate
At which high tech molts
And with growing bite jolts
All the ways of the past.
But tech’s speed-up can’t last:
It is not hyperbolic
To say that tech’s frolic,
Its industrious rollick
Toward ever more power
Brings close now the hour
When any small fry
Might bring down the sky
Or brew biotech doom;
Carve a nanotech tomb;
Spark a megaton boom;
Or seek a new-conceived loom
With much bated breath
In the researcher’s room,
To weave webs of mass death.

A thin hope remains:
The globe’s despots in chains;
Full freedom to speak
In nations once meek;
Democracies worldwide,
So that peace might abide,
And transparancy allow
Trust in treaties that vow
Reductions in arms
And in potential harms
And in any research
Where dreadful risks perch.
Thin hope, yet a rival
To doubts of survival.

Why do roughly half of Americans support Bush? In my humble opinion, the most alert Americans know this election presents a difficult choice, that both candidates have weaknesses and advantages.

The bigger question is why Europe has relatively little diversity of opinion about such a complex question as whether to elect Bush or Kerry.

One of Bush's main strengths is that he 'gets' it about the equation between democracy and relative transparancy of government, and consequent trustworthiness of arms reduction treaties.

Technology worldwide is developing so quickly now, WMDs are going to be growing more and more accessible in more and more flavors with more and more destructive power. Germany, which is pretty sensitive to the downside of technology, should be better able to see that without increased worldwide transparancy in government -- and that means democracies worldwide -- treaties to restrain and control these ever more dangerous technologies won't be worth the paper they are written on. If you think technology is dangerously volatile now, just wait ten years or so, when any small fry may be able to bring down the sky.

Only if there are more democracies worldwide and the relative transparancy that goes with democratic government, will there be a chance to make verifiable and therefore effective treaties restraining the increasingly dangerous aspects of tech development.

But while Bush gets how critical it is to spread democracy, the argument for Kerry is that he might be more competent, and even if he is out to lunch about the importance of spreading democracy, he will be constrained by Congress, by the American people, and by the momentum of past history and practice.

There is also that expression: "only Nixon could go to China". Only Nixon had the conservative national security credentials that made it possible, with relatively little controversy, for him to open relations with China. Similary, one might argue that only Kerry has the liberal, left-wing credentials that would allow an American President at the current time to make war without provoking paralyzing controversy domestically and internationally.

I feel relatively at peace with either a Kerry or a Bush victory.

Bildzeitung does have nudie pics. It always has a quaint caption that runs like this....Elsa couldn't stand todays blistering 30C heat and she just decided to take off her top and wade in the city fountain.

My working class brother-in-law reads Bild everyday. Just like its US and Brit counterpart, it has good sports reporting. All the Bundesliga games are captioned.

The truth of the matter is that Bildzeitung is orientated towards a readership with a Volkschule education. Die Welt and FAZ are aimed at Abitur Yuppies.

Could be that the salt of the earth in Germany are behind GW?


I am not sure about the comment of getting blood from a turnip. Granted if you are to believe what the euro’s have to say about the condition of their military and what they can and cannot do there is no blood in that turnip.

Their forces are poorly trained, equipped, and lead. They lack all aspects of C3I and cannot project power or sustain a deployed force. Their nations with the exceptions of those nations already in Iraq, lack both the political leadership and the national will to put their soldiers in harms way.

Therefore I fully agree with your comment about no euro land legions. Of course, there are some here who believe that. Kerry has made it a central issue of the failure of GWB.

I want to see this drama played out between Kerry and the boys from Berlin and paris. How they will two step this one. Kerry will fail. There will be enough anger from the Right and the means to press Kerry on this point. Remember the Republicans will still control Congress but all of this will be fully placed at the doorstep of the WH.

The questions will start – What are we doing in Europe? Who are we protecting them from if they are unwilling to provide for their own defense? Where is the pay off from investing in their defense for the last 55 years? Do not the french and Germans have no sense of debt?

Then someone will point out we are getting much more support from nations who have smaller populations, smaller GDP’s, smaller militaries? We are getting more active support from nations whom we have had what amounts limited relationships with and for much shorter times.

Hopefully all of this will lead to a heart to heart with leaders from both sides of the Atlantic. I personally hope it will mean the end of the US’s commitment to protect Europe in the framework of NATO. This does not mean the US should abandon her real allies. She should enter into bi lateral agreements with nations on an individual bases. These nations can chose to align themselves with the US for security purposes or they can chose to align themselves with the franco-German Axis. The choice will be theirs to make. Without the US do you think the new members of the EU actually believe Germany or france would send troops to defend them?

Of course, this might in turn have the effect of causing the EU as it is known today to splinter but then that would be another issue. And one should not fail to forget that both Germany and france are in a state of decline. It is not if this is going to turn around but a question of just how rapid this decline will be.

The one thing this war has proven to me personally is while having allies is nice it is not the end all to be all. The combat operations were for the most part a US only affair with the Brits having a small area of operation in the south. This is not to imply those nations in Iraq today are not playing an important role because they are. Their role in fact is huge and can have a very positive effect on the outcome.

The issue I have been following is how the Big 3have been dealing with Iran. This is a loser from the start; they just do not realize it. What Iran knows is that the West can and is in fact split. They do not have to fear Europe because there is neither nothing Europe can give them or do to them. Besides the Russians will play behind the scenes as they have over 10 Billion dollars in construction contracts. Gerhart would sell his mother to have these.

So in a short period of time, there will be a nuclear-armed Iran with the means to delivery weapons to both Israel and southern Europe. In a few more years, they will be able to cover all of what is now western Europe.

The options of this failure will shape half of the world. Israel will not set back and wait. I see them attacking first. This might and probably will cause the entire region to explode. Some of this is going to come to euro land.

So from my perspective the sooner the US winds down the alliance in Europe the better. Remember it is the euro’s that are against the AMB system. So I have to assume they have their own plan of how to protect themselves.

I am sure the MSM in euroland is putting a positive spin on what is going on with Iran. Of course the US, under Clinton has been down this rabbit hole before with NOK. You see how that turned out. If the euro's think this is going to be different then Robert Z is handing out more and more of those socalize med's he takes..

So we need to come home before Iran lights up not only the middle east but a large part of euro land.

One final point and I never thought this was possible. Kerry might be able to make Jimmy Carter look good in comparison.


Could I add the parallel Aesop(?) fable about the grasshopper and the ant?


I am most serious.

That was candidate Kerry. I was referring to President Kerry. There is a huge difference between the two.

Kerry options will be stay or cut and run. If he stays then he is going to press Berlin and paris for troops. He is not going to take no for an answer as easy as GW did. I suggest you do a little more critical thinking about this.

Now if he cuts and runs, this will mean a general pull back for the US. It will mean the middle east will probably explode. This center of furry is much closer to euro land than it is to the US. Besides we will need those units currently stationed in NATO nations for the protection of the homeland. SO while there could on paper be a NATO it will be like many organizations it will have no power and no means. Europe will be on her own but of course, no one will say that. It will when the 911 call is made no one will answer that the reality will hit the euro's. After a messy withdrawal from Iraq America will have lost her will to fight no only an enemy but also her allies.

I believe this if “our so called allies” do not step up. Then you will live to see the end of NATO.

@ Joe,

Well I'm afraid the answer is already "NO" right now. Germany has been very clear that they won't send troops to Iraq regardless of who wins this election. Germany simply doesn't have the troops, and even if Germany did, there is no way the German government would do it. The same goes for France, they have been very clear that they won't send troops no matter what.

So I have no idea what Kerry has in mind when he says he will get more allies on our side or internationalize this thing. It sounds like an empty, hollow promise with no basis in reality. And how is he going to get more allies after he has already derided the current allies in Iraq as the "coalition of the coerced and bribed" and called Iraq the "wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time?"

What do we really know about Kerry and his "plan?" I am afraid the American people know frighteningly little about who he really is...and he is so close to being the next President right now. I just hope people look into this all a bit more deeply before voting.

Lead to article in WP...

October 29, 2004
Many in Europe See U.S. Vote as a Lose-Lose Affair

ERLIN, Oct. 28 - No matter who wins the presidential election next week, the consequences for American-European relations will be bad, according to a deeply pessimistic view taking hold here.

If President Bush wins, the reasoning goes, pro-Kerry Europe will be astonished at what it will see as the bad judgment of the American electorate. Europeans will be confirmed in their sense that they are from Earth and Americans from some other planet.

But if Senator John Kerry wins, the result may well be an almost immediate trans-Atlantic crisis. Mr. Kerry, having presented himself in the campaign as the man who can restore a functioning alliance, will ask Germany and France to come to the aid of the United States in Iraq. Germany and France will refuse, and Americans will feel angry and betrayed.

"If they were to say no to Kerry, the risk of a backlash against Europe in America would be large," said William Drozdiak, the director of the German Marshall Fund's Transatlantic Center. "Americans would say, 'We can't depend on Europe, even though we protected Europe for 50 years.' It will cause lasting damage to the relationship, a great sense of disillusionment."

It is a strangely paradoxical reasoning, but the very fact that it may be accurate has led some foreign policy thinkers in Europe to a new sense of urgency about the world's most important alliance.

The animating idea here is that whoever is elected, the future of the world depends on a continuation of healthy relations between America and Europe and a common appreciation of the bedrock values of their alliance. To effect a reconciliation, the thinking goes, European leaders have to show a willingness to take some political risk, while the United States has to stop seeing the development of Europe as a threat to its interests.

It seems the time of the free ride might be over....

The rest of the article has some non starters by what is suppose to be a very smart German. If he thinks this is going to fly with either a Republican Congress or with the American people then he too has had too many of Robert Z's socailize med's. US policy will not be made in paris or Berlin.

As for the US not walking away, I would not bet on it. We call leave it all for the euro landers to deal with how they see fit.

as Pat would say


Then this time there will be a price to pay for saying NO.

I frankly could care less what the answer is.

I will tell you this the American people will not let this pass by so easily. I can see Kerry as being a one term President just like Carter.

I can see some unknown Republican taking all that Kerry has said and the rejection and the mess in Iraq and running on a simple platform of we do not need to be the world's policeman. We have few allies in Europe that we can count on. It is time for America to rethink just what its relationship to the world is going to be.

That is already a topic in some publications and articles in the US right now.

Remember over a year ago Henry Kissinger was calling for this. He made a very blunt statement that the US should treat france as an enemy for she was aggressively acting against the vital interests of the US. At that time, he was willing to give Germany a pass because he implied gehard did not know what he was doing. This time Germany will not get a pass.

Ray... for some this is all some name calling game. This is going to beocme very serious very quickly. I think some of the leadership is waking up to this. I think the people who have been so turned against the US by their elities do not have a clue of what could and may happen.

If you know the American people then you know they think little of Europe. When they do it is usually with either indifference or kindness. That can change inspite of the best efforts of MSM in to let's come home. They do not like us, they do not support us, we share little in outlook with them.

But then I do not want the euro's to believe me. We will all just treat this like some big joke... call us if you need us... we will be there for you just like you were for us....

Bomben auf Dresden
Briten beschimpfen Deutsche

Die britische Königin Elizabeth II. (78) kommt nächsten Dienstag auf Staatsbesuch nach Deutschland
Joschka Fischer „ist der Außenminister des IV. Reiches“, die Deutschen verleugnen ihre Vergangenheit. So unfair berichtet die Londoner Presse derzeit über Deutschland. Hintergrund: Nächste Woche kommt Königin Elizabeth II. zu uns. Die britische Presse fürchtet, daß die Queen sich bei den Deutschen für den Bombenterror gegen Dresden 1945 entschuldigen könnte.

London – Die Briten und die Bomben auf Dresden! Vor dem Besuch von Königin Elizabeth II. in Deutschland kommende Woche ist ein heftiger Streit über die militärisch sinnlosen Luftangriffe auf Dresden (50 000 Tote) im Februar 1945 entbrannt. Dabei wird der Ton in den britischen Medien immer schärfer.

So berichtet die Londoner „Daily Mail“: „Sorry, aber die Deutschen dürfen ihre böse Vergangenheit nie vergessen“

BILD dokumentiert heute, was die Londoner Tageszeitung „Daily Mail“ über uns Deutsche schreibt:

„Es gibt kaum Zweifel, daß man als Deutscher gerne die Geschichte umschreiben würde. Zwei Weltkriege, der Mord an sechs Millionen Menschen in den KZs, weitere 15 Millionen Tote – das alles sind Handlungen, mit denen nur Masochisten oder Psychopathen gerne zu tun haben möchten.

Der Versuch, das Böse aus der teutonischen Vergangenheit zu löschen, hat neuen Auftrieb bekommen. Bei einem England-Besuch in der letzten Woche beschwerte sich Joschka Fischer, der Außenminister des Vierten Reiches, daß die Briten über Deutsche immer nur als ,Preußen im Stechschritt‘ berichten. Dabei sei sein Land von wahren Demokraten bevölkert.

Info_Icon Archiv
pfeil_schwarz Dresden: Sagt die Queen jetzt Sorry?

Kein Zweifel, daß Deutschland seinen Preis für Hitlers Machenschaften zwischen 1933 und 1945 bezahlt hat. Das Land wurde mancherorts bis zur Unkenntlichkeit bombardiert. Viele verloren ihr Leben.

Doch was Deutschland durchmachen mußte, darf nicht als Leiden angesehen werden, sondern als notwendige Strafe für einige der größten Verbrechen, die jemals begangen wurden (...).

Dresden im Februar 1945 nach den Luftangriffen der Briten (50 000 Tote)

Der Vorschlag, daß die restlichen Länder in Europa aus Höflichkeit einfach so tun sollten, als hätte die Vergangenheit nie stattgefunden, ist absurd (...) Hätte es Deutschlands Rolle im späten 19. und im 20. Jahrhundert nicht gegeben, sähen Europa und die heutige Welt völlig anders aus.

Die Weltkriege hätten vielleicht nie stattgefunden, und 70 Millionen Menschen hätten ihr Leben nicht lassen müssen (...)

Vielleicht gäbe es auch keine Europäische Union, die vor allem aus der Überzeugung von deutschen und französischen Staatsmännern erwuchs, eine zu dominante Rolle Deutschlands zu verhindern.

Jetzt will die Königin zum Staatsbesuch nach Deutschland (...) Ihre Berater werden der Queen vielleicht raten, daß eine Entschuldigung für die Bombardierung Dresdens angebracht sei.

Doch das ist falsch. Nicht, weil Dresden einen Schlüsselpunkt auf den Nachschublinien der Wehrmacht an die Ostfront darstellte und deshalb ein legitimes Ziel war; sondern weil in dem von Hitler begonnenen Krieg Recht, Gerechtigkeit und Menschlichkeit auf unserer Seite waren.

Niemand bestreitet, daß das moderne Deutschland ein anderes Land (geworden) ist. Doch wenn es glaubt, seine unermeßlichen Untaten aus seiner kollektiven Erinnerung ausblenden zu können (...), dann wird es eine Lüge leben. Und diese Lüge könnte Deutschland zu einer Wiederholung derselben schrecklichen Fehler verleiten.“



In der Schule haben wir Bildzeitung analysiert. Es war das Schlimmste, was wir uns damals vorstellen konnten.

Jetzt, 30 Jahre später, hat sich die Medienwelt dermaßen verändert, daß man in die Bildzeitung gucken muß (nur in den politischen Teil), um haßfreie Kommentare und Berichte zu lesen. Wo sind konservative Medien?

I appreciate the soundness of the arguement made by BILD for endorsing Bush. It makes sense even to the most rabid Kerry voter.

Germany is stuck in a self made quagmire. US troops based in Germany have provided Germany with a sense of security. Beginning in 2006, our troops will begin to be pulled out and it will be a time for Germany to feel the impact of taking on their own security needs, as well as, adjusting to the economic impact of our troops departure. Something they are not looking forward to. As I said in an email to the British paper the Guardian, "A liberal can only exist in a free society." Something liberals should think about. I don't hear any liberal voices coming from Iran, Iraq, Russia, China,.... and the list goes on.

I can say as an informed American citizen, after the debacle of Germany, France, and Russia's failure to support the United States in our fight against Iraqi terrorists, I would be against the US sending troops or military assistance to protect them against internal or external attacks.

Interestingly, after the Beslin school attack, Putin kinda understands the horror of terrorism. Perhaps when France and Germany are attacked on their homeland, it will hit home. Notice Putin has offered his support to Bush.

Hmm, I was encouraged at first to read this, then I also read this was a tabloid newspaper. How great of an endorsement if it coming from a tabloid paper? At least we know there are some who don't toe the Socialist line.

To make it clear:

Bild is rather a working-class Paper, but is read every day by up to 10 Million Germans!!

Welt, Tagesspiegel and many more is for people with Abitur.
Sueddeutsche-Zeitung is very famous for students, but still easy to read. FAZ and Die Zeit are almost only read by studied, higher educated people.

You've got to love the link posted above. Best thing I've seen on the net this election:


60 seconds. Don't miss the end. These two film clips are all over the net. Now they are met and are one.

{evil grin}

Warning: I voted for Kerry.

Nevertheless, I'd like to defend the Bild-Zeitung. Whenever something important is brewing in the world I buy the Bild to complement my reading. Frequently they publish trashy articles. Sometimes what they publish is wrong (Pace CBS). But they steadfastly have supported freedom and democracy in Germany, and in the past Bild avoided many of the pitfalls to which more leftward-leaning publications succumbed, for instance a mind-numbing anti-americanism and naiveté about how the world functions. Bild also more accurately reflects the views of the average Joe (Zepp) on the street than the other German publications that are meant for the "Bildungsbürger" (educated citizens), which are dominated by the chattering classes who speak before they think.

Unfortunately, I found Bild's "let them die for us" attitude quoted above self-serving, spineless, and unfortunately typical for many Germans -- do German readers have any idea how offensive this attitude is? But, to Americans reading this blog Bild's article should also serve as a sign that broad segments of the German population harbor no ill feelings towards America or Americans. I can confirm this from personal dealings with people from all walks of life in this country.

What I find very interesting is the fact that the widespread Bild-Zeitung (regardless of its quality) took this very unusual position. This for me is a pleasant surprise, not because I prefer Bush but because it shows that there are some in the German media who don't believe that hating Bush is a condition for quality journalism.

I hope that more German journalists will have the dignity to return to the ideals of objectivity, which in fact should actually prevail in the media.

The main issue of this blog is the German left. So read an american view on "Germany's Radical Makeover" in the latimes:


@E. Wrobbel
" Question: Why,my dear European friends, should
any American give a rat's ass about whom das
Bild, or any European newspaper "endorses" when
the same attitude is extended to the know-it-alls
in our own newspapers? "

"My dear american friend", the majority of germans do not even give a rats ass about the US-elections"

Die Bildzeitung hat seit 9/11 stets dieselbe Linie gegen den mainstream hier vertreten. Anders als die WELT hat sie sich nicht dem deutschen Wahn angeschlossen, gegen die USA zu hetzen.

Die Springerpresse ist doch seit den 60gern Haßobjekt der Linken. Man muß doch nur mal in die Archive gehen, wie deutsche Medien über den RAF-Terror berichtet haben. Wer hat das Töten Schleyers verdammt? Wer hat es erklärt und verniedlicht?

Und dann muß man es mit der heutigen Berichterstattung über Arafat vergleichen.

Da heißt es gerade auf WDR 2, 10 Uhr Hauptnachrichten, die Palästinenser hätten Arafat zugejubelt. Uns hat jemand übersetzt, daß die vorwiegend Jugendlichen und Kinder folgendes gerufen haben: Wir geben unser Herz und Blut für dich, Arafat.

Kann das jemand bestätigen?

Hat der WDR niemanden dort, der arabisch kann und den angeblichen Jubel übersetzt? Wie kann man da naiv stehen und glauben, daß diese Jugendlichen jubeln? Diesmal waren sie ohne ihre schwarze Verkleidung. Man konnte ihre Kindergesichter sehen.

Weiter hieß es im Text, daß in den teilweise zerstörten Räumen keine medizinische Versorgung möglich war, so daß Arafat nach Paris mußte.

Klar, die bösen Israelis haben sein Wohnzimmer zerstört. Warum wohl? Wenn man schon mit Bruchstücken Stimmung machen will, warum dann gegen Israel? Warum nicht einfach neutral berichten. Haß auf Israel schüren ist schon so sehr zur deutschen Gewohnheit geworden, daß man dies gar nicht mehr erkennt.

Stundenlange Live-Übertragungen auf vielen Kanälen: N-TV, Euronews, CNN, N 24. Warum?

Nebenbei sagen vereinzelte Journalisten, "andere" würden ihn als Terroristen bezeichnen. Damit man wohl später nicht sagen kann, man hätte hier ein Monster glorifiziert. Man hat es ja erwähnt. Aber selbst hat er ihn nicht als Terroristen bezeichnet. Was ist Arafat für die dt. Journalisten?

Verdrehte Welt.


"Kiss it goodbye Germany. You made your bed with France and are now Chirac's bitch. Toodles."

the only bitch i can see here is probably YOU

And a hearty "danke schoen" to the Bild. I'm glad to see that there are still some folks over their with some sense. I just hope we have enough of them here in the USA to keep that lying demogogue Kerry out of the White House. If we Americans are foolish enough to elect him, we deserve what we get: Carter Redux or worse.


I've found a very good example of completely biased and subjective mass-media!!!

Pleas check http://medienkritik.typepad.com/blog/

That's outrageous-!

Note from David: Henning, recovering from complicated brain surgery? Hope all goes well...

It's hardly surprising that Bild would endorse Bush. It's been noted for its extreme conservative tendencies for decades now.

For those unfamiliar with the newspaper, it is a sensationalist tabloid (not too different from The Sun in Britain). I personally have trouble reading it since everytime I see an interesting headline, I find that the accompanying article has little more information than the headline. It's rather frustrating I find. Their sports coverage is pretty good though.

The comments to this entry are closed.


The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

June 2022

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