Text 28841, 89 rader
Skriven 2006-05-05 18:18:10 av Björn Forsström (2:203/614.61)
  Kommentar till text 28812 av FRANK SCHEIDT (1:123/140)
Ärende: Canadian "Skills"
=========================
 FS> Spain left mainly because of that Madrid train explosion.

I know. They didn't want to be blown away of somthing they have no
part in.

  BF>>> I know of at least 2 cases where the passengers were innocent.

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

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

 FS> Politics being what it is, *no* politician dares apologize for an error.
 FS> If he *does* the opposition party will jump on his admission and beat up
 FS> on him.  That's the way politics goes. Say -- strictly for the sake of
 FS> discussion -- that the US *admitted* some error in invading Iraq, and note
 FS> this is merely
 FS> for the sake of discussion:  What do you think would happen?  Do
 FS> you think the foreign critics would accept that and move on?  I don't.  I
 FS> think they'd just use that as another excuse to batter the US ...

Being that loud as you are, wanting to have control over everything, you
just have to accept that there are others that also would like to have control,
at least in their own country and eveyone with a loud mouth, look at what
you have had to put up with, will get beaten back and the US have since the
Vietnam war being called to be the World Police and as long as you keep
that up you will be beaten on.

 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.

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

 FS> It didn't take "long" to convince me.  It took an article in *our*
 FS> "news"media to do it.

I mentioned it _at least_ 6 months before it was in your news and during
that time I was almost called a liar.

 FS> You may recall that I mentioned *our* papers will
 FS> *leap* at any chance to criticize the US.  You don't believe that, of
 FS> course,

I do, because that's as it is here.

 FS> just as you routinely reject almost anything I say, but it's the
 FS> truth nonetheless.  Having said that there finally appeared in our paper
 FS> an article about the plane.

You routinly rejected all I said so from whom do you think I learned it.

  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.

 BF>> After I brought it to your attention.

 FS> True ... I looked for it since then ... it seems it was *weeks* later,
 FS> though, that it showed up ...

At least 24...

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

 BF>> We both know it so why keep bringing it up?

 FS> *I* don't keep bringing it up.  I merely *respons* to others' questions --
 FS> such as yours ...

See below.

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


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

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

 FS> No argument there, though mine are *defensive* ...

So are most but no let's argue about that and finally, move on.

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