PDA

View Full Version : Spinless EU Appeasment Monkeys Rush To Surrender...



OklahomaTuba
2/9/2006, 11:54 AM
Amazing.

The EU is so damn afraid of these jackasses, they will just give their rights away as a "good will gesture".

Talk about weak in the knees.

Adolf is smiling in hell right now no doubt.


LONDON (Reuters) - The European Union may try to draw up a media code of conduct to avoid a repeat of the furor caused by the publication across Europe of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad, an EU commissioner said on Thursday.

In an interview with Britain’s Daily Telegraph, EU Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini said the charter would encourage the media to show “prudence” when covering religion.

“The press will give the Muslim world the message: We are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression,” he told the newspaper. “We can and we are ready to self-regulate that right.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060209/wl_nm/religion_cartoons_eu_dc

Here are the cartoons, notice this is in a MUSLIM newspaper BTW.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/20060208SandmonkeyScan01.jpg

Octavian
2/9/2006, 12:00 PM
those idiots are really lucky their region doesn't back up next to us

Herr Scholz
2/9/2006, 12:00 PM
...they will just give their rights away...
Something about this theme sounds familiar...

Having said that, pretty wimpy of the Euros.

OklahomaTuba
2/9/2006, 12:06 PM
Something about this theme sounds familiar...
Sure. Cause we all know the media in the USA cannot publish these now cause of Bushhitler and the neoKKKons.

Damn fascists! :rolleyes:

Octavian
2/9/2006, 12:06 PM
Something about this theme sounds familiar...

dont confuse him ;)

Octavian
2/9/2006, 12:07 PM
too late...

OklahomaTuba
2/9/2006, 12:09 PM
too late...
About what? I guess I don't see what rights have been taken away? The right to board a commericial aircraft without getting searched for knives and guns, or the right not to be able to talk to Osama without the Gubment listening in?

Harry Beanbag
2/9/2006, 12:10 PM
“The press will give the Muslim world the message: We are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression,” he told the newspaper. “We can and we are ready to self-regulate that right.”


This quote is the saddest, most ridiculously ***** statement I think I've ever read.

Octavian
2/9/2006, 12:12 PM
About what? I guess I don't see what rights have been taken away? The right to board a commericial aircraft without getting searched for knives and guns, or the right not to be able to talk to Osama without the Gubment listening in?

he was referencing the willingness of people in this country to trade liberty for security vs. the willingness of people in Europe to trade liberty for security...

Harry Beanbag
2/9/2006, 12:18 PM
he was referencing the willingness of people in this country to trade liberty for security vs. the willingness of people in Europe to trade liberty for security...


Isn't free speech one of the main tenets of liberty? They seem overly willing to trade that for a weak transparent promise of security from the enemy.

OklahomaTuba
2/9/2006, 12:20 PM
he was referencing the willingness of people in this country to trade liberty for security vs. the willingness of people in Europe to trade liberty for security...

I don't have a problem with trading liberty for security when we are at war, as we are right now. That is common sense and worked well for this country since the revolution.

However, trading it as basically a goodwill gesture to not **** off Muslims, when a Muslim newspaper does the same damn thing over a friggin cartoon is absolutly stupid.

1stTimeCaller
2/9/2006, 12:22 PM
You don't think with all of the riots over there they feel like they are at war too?

Herr Scholz
2/9/2006, 12:24 PM
Why do you hate Benjamin Franklin, Tuba? ;)

OklahomaTuba
2/9/2006, 12:28 PM
Why do you hate Benjamin Franklin, Tuba? ;)
I actually love the guy. One of the best bios in history.

I firmly believe he would agree with me if confronted with the same issues in today's world as well, given his stance on England and what to do about the trade blockades/espionage during the war.

Herr Scholz
2/9/2006, 12:33 PM
I firmly believe he would agree with me if confronted with the same issues in today's world as well, given his stance on England and what to do about the trade blockades/espionage during the war.
Perhaps. Still, I don't like the 4th amendment eroding, especially when there are simple measures already set up to monitor these international phone calls. I also don't like Big Brother knowing what books I read, what websites I visit (obviously ;) ) or who I talk to. Am I a criminal? Hardly ever but privacy should still be important.

Herr Scholz
2/9/2006, 02:07 PM
Was I too civil? Hate to kill a good political thread early.

OklahomaTuba
2/9/2006, 02:19 PM
Nah.

I don't like my rights "eroding" either. And I don't believe they are. At least no more than they did anytime else in this nations history that we have been at war.

I think a precedent has been clearly set that during times of war and national emergencies that certain actions have to be taken to protect the people.

If anything, the latest de-classified info on the foiled attack on LA shows us that this is the best way of doing things without infringing on peoples rights to much.

And as for internet activity, I have no problem with the government knowing if someone is looking up kiddie pron. They should be doing that kind of stuff and keeping those sick bastards away from exploiting children.

NormanPride
2/9/2006, 02:39 PM
The problem I see is, if we define now as being at war, when have we not been at war over the last 100 years? How about the next 100? I won't live that long, guys. I want my rights while I'm still alive. ;)

Octavian
2/9/2006, 03:51 PM
I don't have a problem with trading liberty for security when we are at war, as we are right now.

If this view becomes dominant, we should burn the Bill the Rights....this war is endless b/c we've declared war on a tactic. It will never end so we'll always be "at war."

mdklatt
2/9/2006, 03:56 PM
If this view becomes dominant, we should burn the Bill the Rights....this war is endless b/c we've declared war on a tactic. It will never end so we'll always be "at war."

IBTL

Tear Down This Wall
2/9/2006, 03:58 PM
The 4th Amendment isn't eroding away for anyone. The guv'ments just listening in on Al-Qaeda 'n' Friends as they call to and from our humble country. If you're not in contact with Al-Qaeda, don't sweat it.

This is typical European b.s. in the article: We can and we are ready to self-regulate that right. Limp-wristed push-overs.

Okla-homey
2/9/2006, 03:59 PM
Amazing.

The EU is so damn afraid of these jackasses, they will just give their rights away as a "good will gesture".

Talk about weak in the knees.

Adolf is smiling in hell right now no doubt.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060209/wl_nm/religion_cartoons_eu_dc

Here are the cartoons, notice this is in a MUSLIM newspaper BTW.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/20060208SandmonkeyScan01.jpg

Great Tuba. Just great. Now, because of you posting those pics some militant fundamentalist shiite-head is going to try to blow up SF.com.

If that happens, I'm billing you for sponsorship re-imbursement.

Sheesh.

1stTimeCaller
2/9/2006, 03:59 PM
The 4th Amendment isn't eroding away for anyone. The guv'ments just listening in on Al-Qaeda 'n' Friends as they call to and from our humble country. If you're not in contact with Al-Qaeda, don't sweat it.

This is typical b.s. in the article: We can and we are ready to self-regulate our 4th Amendment. Limp-wristed push-overs.

fixed;)

mdklatt
2/9/2006, 04:01 PM
I think a precedent has been clearly set that during times of war and national emergencies that certain actions have to be taken to protect the people.



Why are we waiting so long to round up Japanese people this time?


In all seriousness, the morning f***wit on AM 1520 was calling for Muslims in the US to be put in internment camps today. It was only a matter of time. :rolleyes:

Herr Scholz
2/9/2006, 04:40 PM
There are many rights that could be repealed in the name of national security. Internment camps is an extreme example but the point holds. If you don't fight to keep your personal liberties, one morning you'll wake up and they won't be there anymore. Our government's already discarded Geneva Convention rules with prisoners and holding people without a trial. Who's to say Habeas Corpus won't be done away with here if things get bad?

If Congress passes laws, the Executive Branch should be made to follow them. Otherwise, what's the point? What's the point of re-passing the Patriot Act if this administration is just going to assert authority to do what they want anyway?

C&CDean
2/9/2006, 05:04 PM
Whether your point is valid or not Herr, GWB ain't the first - nor the last - prez to exercise wartime powers.

NormanPride
2/9/2006, 05:08 PM
Whether your point is valid or not Herr, GWB ain't the first - nor the last - prez to exercise wartime powers.

I don't think this is as much about GWB as it is about ALL government. Whoever the figurehead at the top is is fairly irrelevant.

Jerk
2/9/2006, 05:40 PM
Wow, look at these libs talk about rights.

They've already neutered the 2nd, and trashed the 10th. And the 9th will mean nothing if these guys are in charge "because they know what's best for you"

Vote for liberals so we can have more first graders charged with sexual harrasment and we can protect the rights of terrorists to have private phone conversations.

Jerk
2/9/2006, 05:43 PM
Serious...did anyone see the news story about the first grader from Massachussetes who got hit with a sexual harrassment charge for patting a girl on the back? The radio guy was like "how can this happen" and I was screaming "because they're in Massachussettes, you dumbas$"

Herr Scholz
2/9/2006, 05:50 PM
They've already neutered the 2nd
Are you high?


...and trashed the 10th.
State's rights? States have plenty of rights. Oklahoma pay for its own highways lately?


And the 9th will mean nothing if these guys are in charge "because they know what's best for you"
That amendment says there shouldn't be rights listed in the Constitution that "disparage other rights retained by the people". That is, don't put in an amendment banning gay marriage.

mdklatt
2/9/2006, 05:50 PM
And the 9th will mean nothing if these guys are in charge "because they know what's best for you"



The Party of Big Government, Republican Edition already has that covered.

mdklatt
2/9/2006, 05:53 PM
Oklahoma pay for its own highways lately?


This is a trick question. Oklahoma seemingly spends no money on road maintenance, although it must cost something to put up the orange barrels and have those construction vehicles sitting idle in the median all day long.

soonerscuba
2/9/2006, 05:57 PM
You know, at the end of the day, Kansas has never shown me that they are actually capable of running their own government. That pretty much sums up how I feel about state's rights.

TUSooner
2/9/2006, 06:47 PM
Anybody who has paid a little attention to my posts knows that I am no fan whatsoever of Islam - either the radical or “normal” type (assuming there is a difference).
But I don't see the big deal about this proposed "self-regulating." Self-regulation happens ALL THE FRIKKIN TIME to prevent potentially offensive cartoons about Jesus, the Holocaust, etc. The stormtroopers are not marching into to take over the Danish press, so keep your pants on and put a lid on your hypocritical indignity.

Read the story: What did the EU promise anybody? A little sensitivity? C'mon! That's hardly a surrender of free speech rights.
Some of y'all are just mad because the EU didn't get all bowed up and threaten to slaughter all the Muslims in Europe if they don't suck it up.

I do not in any way think violent Muslim protests are justified; nope, they are stupid and basically confirm my own belief that Islam fosters hate, intolerance, ignorance, and violence. And I think the cartoons I've seen are spot on.

I just think this knee jerk "EU surrender monkey" cant is, under the circumstances, short-sighted, narrow minded, overwrought, and - as usual - the product of way too much opinion and way too little thought.

Octavian
2/9/2006, 07:03 PM
You know, at the end of the day, Kansas has never shown me that they are actually capable of running their own government. That pretty much sums up how I feel about state's rights.

Its a brilliant way to maintain backwardz *** discriminatory policy cloaked in states' rights.

Segregation. Marriage restrictions. Education issues...

Thank goodness for judicial oversight.

mdklatt
2/9/2006, 07:25 PM
Its a brilliant way to maintain backwardz *** discriminatory policy cloaked in states' rights.

Segregation. Marriage restrictions. Education issues...

Thank goodness for judicial oversight.

I'm going to have to call BS on this one--sort of. The *********s in the state capitol are--in general--in a better position to govern their state than the *********s in DC. They're easier to get rid of, too.

KABOOKIE
2/9/2006, 10:46 PM
I don't care. I just wanna punch me one of them raghead dudes holding them signs. :D

OklahomaTuba
2/9/2006, 11:47 PM
Its a brilliant way to maintain backwardz *** discriminatory policy cloaked in states' rights.

Segregation. Marriage restrictions. Education issues...

Thank goodness for judicial oversight.

Typical liberal thinking at its best.

If a federal program isn't telling people how to live, its just wrong. :rolleyes:

OklahomaTuba
2/9/2006, 11:52 PM
But I don't see the big deal about this proposed "self-regulating." Self-regulation happens ALL THE FRIKKIN TIME to prevent potentially offensive cartoons about Jesus, the Holocaust, etc. The stormtroopers are not marching into to take over the Danish press, so keep your pants on and put a lid on your hypocritical indignity.

So a government self-regulates the press all the time??

Wouldn't that the mean government is controlling the press then???



I just think this knee jerk "EU surrender monkey" cant is, under the circumstances, short-sighted, narrow minded, overwrought, and - as usual - the product of way too much opinion and way too little thought.

Oh, of course, very stupid of me.

We all know that Europe has NEVER EVER engaged in appeasment to avoid conflict. :rolleyes:

SoonerBorn68
2/10/2006, 12:13 AM
Why are we waiting so long to round up Japanese people this time?

'Cause we nuked them and they learned. ;)



In all seriousness, the morning f***wit on AM 1520 was calling for Muslims in the US to be put in internment camps today. It was only a matter of time. :rolleyes:

I'm not in favor of internment camps, but my idea is simple & enforcable.

When a person rents a house/apartment/living quarters, make them show proof their visa is good. If not, c'ya...back from which you came. Citizens would only be required to show a DL or other photo ID.

These people are NOT (all illegals) citizens and should have to prove they have legal grounds to stay in our country. They have to live somewhere...and the people who rent/employ these people are enablers. Harsh monetary penalties should be handed out to them.

Just my .02.

OklahomaTuba
2/10/2006, 12:55 AM
I just think this knee jerk "EU surrender monkey" cant is, under the circumstances, short-sighted, narrow minded, overwrought, and - as usual - the product of way too much opinion and way too little thought.

Just thought I would share more short-sighted and narrow minded facts that are no doubt the product way to much of my opinion and way to little thought. :rolleyes:


According to Dagens Nyheter, the Swedish security services (Säpo), in collusion with Foreign Minister Leila Freivalds, have forced the website SD-Kuriren offline for publishing the Jyllands-Posten cartoons (SD-Kuriren is the house organ of the hard-right Swedish Democrats).

“We think that this was the best decision after we were contacted by the Foreign Ministry and Säpo,” Anna Larsson, vice president of hosting compant Levonline, told DN. Freivalds told DN that “it is terrible that a small group of extremists are exposing Swedes to danger [by reprinting the cartoons].”

Note: Freedom House’s 2005 survey ranks Sweden 9th in press freedom. http://www.spectator.se/stambord/?p=1100

Nice. Shutting down websites with this horrible filth on it.

Wonder if the muslims demanded that the muslim papers that published this stuff do the same?

Oh wait, there I go with the narrow-mindedness again.

RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
2/10/2006, 01:00 AM
he was referencing the willingness of people in this country to trade liberty for security vs. the willingness of people in Europe to trade liberty for security...:confused: and his comparison was strikingly absurd.Willingness here to have the govt. listen in on calls involving alqueda(sp?) vs. the Euro media saying they are giving in to attack by the Islamists.

Octavian
2/10/2006, 01:56 AM
I'm going to have to call BS on this one--sort of. The *********s in the state capitol are--in general--in a better position to govern their state than the *********s in DC.

I see what you're saying. People from their own locals definetely know their own people better than people thousands of miles away. That doesnt mean those local people in power construct justifiable laws for all the people in their areas. Elected officials often succumb to terrible mass opinion....

Americans who were born w/ dark epidermises before the mid-1960s can attest to that.

I guess I was thinking more along the lines of federal judicial power being able to check states' legislative power. Its a way of countering Aristotle's "tyranny of the majority" objection to democratic rule.

The brilliance of the Founders never ceases to amaze me.

Octavian
2/10/2006, 02:05 AM
:confused: and his comparison was strikingly absurd.Willingness here to have the govt. listen in on calls involving alqueda(sp?) vs. the Euro media saying they are giving in to attack by the Islamists.

He was saying that Europeans' readiness to lay down certain civil liberties in exchange for false security reminded him of Americans' readiness to do the same.

see: Tuba. ;)

RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
2/10/2006, 02:37 AM
He was saying that Europeans' readiness to lay down certain civil liberties in exchange for false security reminded him of Americans' readiness to do the same.

see: Tuba. ;):rolleyes: As I said before, he was wrong. Americans aren't looking for false security. We are actively engaged in seeking out the evil *s*h*les. Admittedly, we are neither willing nor able to afford doing EVERYTHING possible to protect ourselves, but that's another issue.

Octavian
2/10/2006, 03:03 AM
:rolleyes: As I said before, he was wrong.

Re-read the thread.

There is evidence in this thread that some Americans dont mind trading liberty for security. So, he was not wrong.

OklahomaTuba
2/10/2006, 09:17 AM
Re-read the thread.

There is evidence in this thread that some Americans dont mind trading liberty for security. So, he was not wrong.

Yes, but only during a time of war or national emergency, as we are in now.

Just like in every other damn war we have been in since George Washinton rode his horse.

And telling the media they shouldn't report on stupid news is really far and beyond telling people they will be listened to if they talk to the group we are in armed conflict with.

Obviously common sense has left this thread.

TUSooner
2/10/2006, 09:24 AM
According to Dagens Nyheter, the Swedish security services (Säpo), in collusion with Foreign Minister Leila Freivalds, have forced the website SD-Kuriren offline for publishing the Jyllands-Posten cartoons (SD-Kuriren is the house organ of the hard-right Swedish Democrats).

“We think that this was the best decision after we were contacted by the Foreign Ministry and Säpo,” Anna Larsson, vice president of hosting compant Levonline, told DN. Freivalds told DN that “it is terrible that a small group of extremists are exposing Swedes to danger [by reprinting the cartoons].”

ooooh. not good. :O OK, Tuba, you could possibly, maybe, perhaps be just a little less wrong than usual... this time. ;)

OklahomaTuba
2/10/2006, 09:29 AM
Maybe we could just role all the liberty vs security into one person, like the EU does. Why seperate the two, in times when offending a group calls for a censorship code?


Franco Frattini, the European Union commissioner for justice, freedom and security, revealed the idea for a code of conduct in an interview with The Daily Telegraph. Mr Frattini, a former Italian foreign minister, said the EU faced the "very real problem" of trying to reconcile "two fundamental freedoms, the freedom of expression and the freedom of religion".
Millions of European Muslims felt "humiliated" by the publication of cartoons of Mohammed, he added, calling on journalists and media chiefs to accept that "the exercising of a right is always the assumption of a responsibility". He appealed to European media to agree to "self-regulate".

Accepting such self-regulation would send an important political message to the Muslim world, Mr Frattini said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/09/ncart109.xml

And that important political message to the muslim world would be "we surrender, please don't hurt us."

TUSooner
2/10/2006, 09:33 AM
And that important political message to the muslim world would be "we surrender, please don't hurt us."

:rolleyes:

OklahomaTuba
2/10/2006, 09:43 AM
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

TexasLidig8r
2/10/2006, 09:48 AM
Obviously common sense has left this thread.

Where have you been Joe DiMaggio.. it IS the South Oval.. Even interlopers like me assume common sense at some time will go flying wheels off in most threads. :)

mdklatt
2/10/2006, 11:16 AM
Americans aren't looking for false security.

Sure we are. Most Americans think the new airport security rules are a good thing, even though they're mostly a boondoggle. They wouldn't have prevented 9/11 from happening, for example. We're still hung up on the idea of random searches when we should be profiling. The big fat white dude with his family on their way to Orlando probably doesn't need a body cavity search. The nervous looking guy with a one-way ticket and no baggage? Yeah, maybe you should ask him some questions.

mdklatt
2/10/2006, 11:22 AM
Yes, but only during a time of war or national emergency, as we are in now.



Would the Cold War have qualified? The threat of nuclear war was very real, and that would have been a lot worse than anything some disgruntled camel jockeys could do to us.

Harry Beanbag
2/10/2006, 11:34 AM
Sure we are. Most Americans think the new airport security rules are a good thing, even though they're mostly a boondoggle. They wouldn't have prevented 9/11 from happening, for example. We're still hung up on the idea of random searches when we should be profiling. The big fat white dude with his family on their way to Orlando probably doesn't need a body cavity search. The nervous looking guy with a one-way ticket and no baggage? Yeah, maybe you should ask him some questions.


There are few people on this board that would argue that we shouldn't be profiling. I think you know why we aren't doing that, and which part of society that reasoning comes from.