Text 28774, 85 rader
Skriven 2006-05-04 16:27:35 av Björn Forsström (2:203/614.61)
  Kommentar till text 28717 av FRANK SCHEIDT (1:123/140)
Ärende: Canadian "Skills"
=========================
 BF>> We were against it and GWB did this on his own, for the wrong reason, so
 BF>> it's your problem. Not anyone elses.

 FS> Since it's being done for the interest of the entire world, the entire
 FS> world should contribute

I can agree with that but only England bought the story about WMD:s and
it would haven been better if Russia was in it too but since you started it
on your own you can't come whining now. Spain have left (if I'm correct)
and Denmark is going to reduce their force.

  BF>> **
 FS>> That was (is?) a truly *minor* matter -- the transportation of terrorists
 FS>> to prison ... so let's move on ... [sigh] ...
 BF>> **
 BF>> I know of at least 2 cases where the passengers were innocent.

 FS> Possibly ... mistakes are made, after all ...

And none have ever said they are sorry for it either. And we have still
people on the terrorist list that haven't been proven guilty too.

  FS>> If you only knew ...

 BF>> I do.

 FS> You *don't*.  You're concentrating on that ancient WWI war debt thing.

Errr....no. You do.

 FS>  I
 FS> don't *expect* it ever to be paid.  I brought it up because some one
 FS> (you?) mentioned a *monetary* debt.  That debt clearly filled the bill (no
 FS> pun intended)= ...

No I didn't. My respons to that debt was to bring up N379P.

 BF>> Above, between  ** and ** you agreed, again.

 FS> What you are ignoring is this:  The mention in our papers WRT
 FS> that plane was a minor matter.  It was given little mention and was
 FS> something *anyone* could have easily missed.

But how long did it take to convince you about it? At least 6 months.

 FS> There are *far* more
 FS> important and interesting things in the news.

Here in Europe it was rather big.

 FS> *I* mentioned it to you
 FS> just to give you credit that it *did* exist.  *Anyone* here could have
 FS> missed the article.  It's just that *I*, personally, pay a lot of
 FS> attention to published news.

After I brought it to your attention.

 BF>> You have moved on wrt. N379P since that's negative for you but you
 BF>> haven't moved on from the war debt which seems to be your fanatical
 BF>> interest.

 FS> See above as to *why* I bring up that ancient debt ...

As I said, my respons to the debt was to mention N379P.

 BF>> You want me to move on from N379P but when I ask you to move on from the
 BF>> war debt *I* am the bad guy. Shouldn't this work in both directions?

 FS> Of *course* it should and I'm more than willing to stop talking about that
 FS> WWI debt.  After all that will *never* be paid.

We both know it so why keep bringing it up?

 FS>> I *never* try to force my ideas on others.  I merely express them -- and
 FS>> they're almost always damn good ideas!

 BF>> This is where our opinions differ (again).

 FS> I could easily argue thing rationally if you'd stop the incessant
 FS> insulting ...

Well, you're not the most innocent in that matter either.

---
 * Origin: . (2:203/614.61)