Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

Summer Evening Open Thread

by Fran Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:33:37 AM EST

Were I live, it is an absolutely delightful summerday - like out of a picture book, as my grandfather would have said.

How was your Sunday and any other news you want to share.


Display:
EUROPEAN NEWS
by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:35:24 AM EST
BBC: Madrid marchers reject Eta talks

At least 200,000 people marched through Madrid on Saturday, demanding the government call off planned peace talks with the Basque separatist group Eta.

The march was called by Spain's right-wing opposition and associations of victims of attacks by armed groups.

Participants carried banners reading: "Negotiations, not in my name".

Eta declared a permanent ceasefire on 22 March, and in May Spain's Socialist prime minister announced his intention to open direct talks with the group.

Some victims' associations say the government is dishonouring the memory of those killed by Eta over four decades - though others have distanced themselves from the demonstration organisers.


by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:42:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Let me point out that the victim association is split now. Basically, each region of spain has broken with the central board that rules the victim association.

Also point out that other smaller victim associations and regional boards have been very vocal and critic of the present board for his links to the rigth-wing party PP.

SO, if the demonstration was about how many victims do share the message, I would see a majority but not a very clear majority (at the spanish level). At the catalan level , the support by ETA victims to the national victim association is almost non-existent.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 03:53:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"Let's sacrifice another thousand troops in Iraq so the twenty five hundred who have died so far will not have done so in vain"?

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:28:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But aren't peace talks about the future, and not clinging to the past. As South Africa demonstrates, you only get peace and reconciliation when you accept that you cannot live in the past anymore.

N Ireland's continuing low-level tragedy is that it cannot accept that the past is gone and only the future can be changed. The demands of long term peace and short term justice cannot always be reconciled and it requires bravery to seek the harder path for the long term. Cowards hide behind victims for short term gain.

By embracing these demands to reject discussions they effectively reject the hope of a peaceful future for an unattainable victory in the name of the past.

they are fools.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:29:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It would be really easy for Britons to understand it if they cared: it's like confusing Britain and England, and over the last couple of weeks there has been a controversy over a "flag ban" over concerns that flying the English flag might "offend" the other nationalities within Britain.

It's really not caring to know rather than inability to understand.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:38:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Sorry, reply to the wrong comment... Gnomes delete parent, please?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:39:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I went to delete the parent...but it takes out yours and Alex's...so will leave it...

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia
by whataboutbob on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:59:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ok I re-posted my comment in the right place, you can delete this sub-thread bob!
by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:02:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, I reposted everything now.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:04:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I must admit I still don't get the British isles nationalities. I understand Bretons, Alsaciens, Corsicans, Basques, Catalans as distinct cultural entities, but not as "nations". They are part of the nation of France, just like Wales is part of the United Kingdom.

But then I understand "New Caledonia" as a nation, so I guess I could easily make the jump and declare Welsh their own nation. At what point should I make the jump? (I must admit I don't know why I consider New Caledonia to be its own nation, but distance probably helps subconsciously). When there is a local parliament? But then if that parliament has to follow national laws, then doesn't that equate to Regional Councils? And then what about the US? Is Utah a nation?

[/argh]

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:43:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What I do understand is that this gives the Brits more chances of winning a football or rugby world cup.
by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:44:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Actually, if England had subsumed Wales and had Ryan Giggs in various competitions in the last 15 years...
by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:05:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Arrgh! we're trying to kill this subthread: repost your comment in the right place!

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:09:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Bob, you can delete this thread, my comment will be reposted.
by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:11:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No offence meant, but this just means you have no idea of British history ;-)

BTW, you replied to a post of mine which was in reply to the wrong post... maybe you could cross-post to the right place?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:46:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Scotsman: Israel's Olmert eyes Europe support on Hamas, Iran

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert begins on Sunday his first visit to Britain and France, where he will likely seek a strong European stand against the Hamas-led Palestinian government and Iran's nuclear programme.

In talks with Prime Minister Tony Blair and French President Jacques Chirac, Olmert will also lobby for his West Bank redeployment plan, which has won U.S. praise but faces political hurdles at home and the misgivings of moderate Arabs.

As top European Union powers, Britain and France have played supporting roles in navigating a beleaguered "road map" to Israeli-Palestinian peace. Along with Germany, they have also led Western bids to curb Iran's atomic ambitions through talks.

Yet many Israelis see the Europeans as less reliable Middle East powerbrokers than their U.S. ally, a view bolstered by reports of anti-Semitism among Europe's growing Muslim minority.

"It (European Union) is the weak link, but Olmert has the advantage of coming with a plan under which he is willing to give up territory," an Israeli official said, referring to a proposal to remove dozens of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank while annexing others in the absence of peace talks.


by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:47:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"It (European Union) is the weak link, but Olmert has the advantage of coming with a plan under which he is willing to give up territory,"

WTF does that mean? If the EU is a "weak link", why bother courting its support? But isn't that what Olmert's doing, with his "plan"? Is "reliable broker" US not enough? And if there's a shift in power perception because GWB looks more and more like a busted flush, why must Israel go on disparaging the EU?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:13:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Perhaps I am being too charitable, but the phrase could have been intended to mean "weak link in terms of a solid support chain for his plan," and not "weak link in the war on terror" or "weak link in the chain that strangles the middle east" or whatever.
by Zwackus on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:17:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Independent: Britain accused of U-turn on public scrutiny of EU

Britain will face furious accusations of "betrayal" from its European neighbours today as the Foreign Secretary, Margaret Beckett, tries to water down moves the UK once championed to open EU law-making to public scrutiny.

At a meeting of EU foreign ministers Ms Beckett will argue that plans to allow television cameras into almost all discussions on legislation go too far, too fast. She will also suggest that such proposals will force negotiation into informal and private discussions in the corridors away from the glare of the cameras.

The new minister's stance has provoked anger because achieving greater openness was a theme of the UK's six-month presidency of the EU which ended in December. When Tony Blair agreed to the European constitution he backed the principle of transparency which was written into the text. Then, when the constitution was rejected in referendums in France and Holland, the UK argued that greater openness was one of the measures that would help restore confidence in the EU.
One EU diplomat said there was "surprise" that reservations were coming from "the country which was promoting the topic during its presidency".

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:53:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
...that even self-respected newspapers make the mistake:

Then, when the constitution was rejected in referendums in France and Holland, the UK argued that greater openness was one of the measures that would help restore confidence in the EU.

There is a long way to go... Not Holland. The Netherlands.

by Nomad on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 04:20:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
This would be a common mistake in the UK where the terms Holland/Netherlands are used interchangably. Most of us refer to the Dutch national team as Holland.  I have read that there is an important difference as far as the Dutch are concerned, but it remains largely unknown to us.

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:20:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It would be really easy for Britons to understand it if they cared: it's like confusing Britain and England, and over the last couple of weeks there has been a controversy over a "flag ban" over concerns that flying the English flag might "offend" the other nationalities within Britain.

It's really not caring to know rather than inability to understand.


A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:39:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
...that anything with "Dutch" in the English language is actually meant to make Dutch look bad. I thought it was mostly coincidental... until yesterday.

Linguistical spite. It's even more subtle than France bashing.

by Nomad on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:52:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, I always try to use "Netherlands" ever since I lived there. It's evil hard trying to write a World Cup report on a game and remember to use Netherlands whilst the commentators bang on about "Holland"... ;-)
by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:02:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I must admit I still don't get the British isles nationalities. I understand Bretons, Alsaciens, Corsicans, Basques, Catalans as distinct cultural entities, but not as "nations". They are part of the nation of France, just like Wales is part of the United Kingdom.

But then I understand "New Caledonia" as a nation, so I guess I could easily make the jump and declare Welsh their own nation. At what point should I make the jump? (I must admit I don't know why I consider New Caledonia to be its own nation, but distance probably helps subconsciously). When there is a local parliament? But then if that parliament has to follow national laws, then doesn't that equate to Regional Councils? And then what about the US? Is Utah a nation?

[/argh]

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:01:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What I do understand is that this gives the Brits more chances of winning a football or rugby world cup.
by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:02:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Really? If there was one UK rugby team, one UK football team, they might stand a better chance yet...
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:54:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No offence meant, but this just shows how little you know of British history.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:04:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But why should he ?

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:10:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Why should he what? Be offended, know the history, or get the nationalities?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:15:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Why should he know the history and understand the nationalities ?

He's in Toulouse: Britain's internal vanities are of no useful concern whatsoever, except for amusement purposes.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:23:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There is something euphemistically known as The Troubles where people got blown up to bits for "Britain's internal vanities".

I said "no offence" by which I mean that I understood he had no reason to think there's more to it than vanity, on which I disagree with you, even though I am not British. I am as bold as I am ignorant, as you know.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:26:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There is something euphemistically known as The Troubles where people got blown up to bits for "Britain's internal vanities".

N Ireland is not in Britain.

England = England

England  + Wales = Britain

Britain + Scotland + Scottish islands = Great Britain

Great Britain + N Ireland  + lots of offshore islands like Isle of Man & Channel Islands = United Kingdom

As for what the Ulster troubles were about, it's complicated to the point that if you were to go around Ulster and ask 100 people what the issues really were, you'd probably  get 101 contradictory answers. However, most people in Britain were of the opinion that it had little to do with us, even if that was a little self-serving and evasive.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:46:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks for clarifying the terminology. I will from now on never use "Britain" to mean "Great Britain" or "UK".

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:49:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Same here, I had no idea! the horror, the horror :)
by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:52:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It's already unnerving enough that Brittany and Britain both translate as Bretaña in Spanish.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:54:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Does Great Britain then becomes Gran Bretaña...? I see a traumatic youth in development...
by Nomad on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:06:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, and an hijo de la Gran Bretaña is a son of a bitch.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:07:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
hehe and por supuesto means poor bastard
by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:09:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Are there any children still born in Spain named Bretaña...? Linguistical spite in Spanish too, eh?
by Nomad on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:14:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh, I finally understood your questions. No, Brittany is a girl's name that has no translation.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:34:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
By the way, if Great Britain and Ireland are "The British Isles", and Great Britain is "Great Britain", surely Ireland must be "Little Britain"?

Sort of like Mallorca and Menorca (Mallor = Larger, Menor = Smaller).

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:01:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ha, why don't you find an Irishman and suggest that. How about Colman ? I'm sure he'd only ban you from the site for a few months.

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:04:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
On the issue of things "not having to do with whomever", I'll just quote Terence: Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto, which just means that, humans being curious creatures, we like to stick out noses where they don't belong.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:53:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I seem to recall during the Ulster troubles people were blown also up to bits in the English heartland?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:02:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, but that's what I meant by complicated. There were all sorts of enemies being dealt with and guns were being pointed in all directions.

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:05:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I was addressing the "evasive" part of your comment.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:09:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Don't want to spoil the fun, but have you got a reference for that "England + Wales = Britain" ? I've never heard of it, and Wikipedia seems to disagree with you. "Britain" is just used for short, in place of "Great Britain".

Historically "Great Britain" is so named by contrast with the smaller Britain, Brittany, called Armor(ica) until Britons migrated there as the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, etc, advanced into what is now England (C6 and on).

OTOH, you're quite right that the full national title is "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland".

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:08:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ah, that explains Bretaña = Brittany.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:11:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I have no reference except to say that it is a common assumption.

The Cross of St George currently flying from practically every car in England isn't really the English flag at all. It is instead the symbol of English subjugation of Wales under Edward II as it was his banner and was flown from all of the castles built to enforce occupation as a symbol of his rule.  It has been the flag of Britain, as in the construct England and Wales, ever since.

As Wales has a flag, it has become a de facto flag of England, 'cept of course it isn't.

So when scotland was finally defeated Britain became Great Britain.

And I wouldn't trust wikipedia one byte. It's just the rubbish last input.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:45:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
 Helen,

 Have you got a copy of Whitaker's Almanac handy? --any edition should serve.  Look in there for the reference to the formal "legal" name for Britain.  I bet you'll find it in the headers to its summary info on various nations of the world.  Most general almanacs list the nations of the world and state the formal names--as well as specifying their components!

 Britain = England /*, Wales, Scotland, & the highjacked bits of Eire-- [England: /*excluding of course a recalcitrant bit surrounded by England and going by the name of "Yorkshire"].

 ;^)

"In such an environment it is not surprising that the ills of technology should seem curable only through the application of more technology..." John W Aldridge

by proximity1 on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:16:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, the CIA World Factbook says
conventional long form: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; note - Great Britain includes England, Scotland, and Wales
conventional short form: United Kingdom
abbreviation: UK


A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:19:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

 Since when does the C.I.A. get anything right?

    ;^)

"In such an environment it is not surprising that the ills of technology should seem curable only through the application of more technology..." John W Aldridge

by proximity1 on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:22:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No, sorry I don't have Whittaker's. However a browse of the web was illuminating.

Many references to common usages, many of which had Britain as another name for the entity 'Great Britain'. However, the word unofficially seemed to crop up at inconvenient times in all these definitions. Which led me to being quite confused.

Maybe there isn't a hard and fast definition as I expected, just accepted usages of which none have ever been officially defined.

In which case I would accept that mine is an uncommon set of definitions and will stand corrected. But I don't think I'm officially wrong either.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:36:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What does the Oxford English Dictionnary say? It has the advantage that it gives you the earliest [known to Oxford] use of each meaning.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:37:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Osford English Dictionnary:
Britain 1. a. The proper name of the whole island containing England, Wales, and Scotland, with their dependencies; more fully called Great Britain; now also used for the British state or empire as a whole. After the OE. period, *Britain  was used only as a historical term, until about the time of Henry VIII and Edward VI, when it came again into practical politics in connexion with the efforts made to unite England and Scotland; in 1604 James I was proclaimed `King of Great Britain'; and this name was adopted for the United Kingdom, at the Union in 1707. After that event,  South Britain  and  North Britain  are frequent in Acts of Parl. for England and Scotland respectively: the latter is still in occasional (chiefly postal) use. (So  West Britain , humorously or polemically for `Ireland'.)  Greater Britain  is a modern rhetorical phrase for `Great Britain and the colonies', `the British Empire', brought into vogue in 1868.


A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:43:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I wish I had access to the OED (perhaps someone does). But, in the meanwhile, here's a useful page at answers.com that pulls together explanations from a number of sources.

I know the official use of "Great Britain" (= England + Wales + Scotland) dates back to 1603, when James VI of Scotland also became James I of England (and Wales). The actual union of the kingdoms (of England(Wales) and Scotland) came a century later, with the Act of Union of 1707.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 10:15:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I do have access, but it's hideously clumsy to use as it involves logging on remotely to my old university account and using a text-only browser [the university library has an institutional subscription to the OED].

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 10:17:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Okay, here are the quotations under Britain in the OED: (The things in {}-braces are non-latin letters I did not feel like finding html encodings for)
(No separate OED entry for Great Britain exists)

a855 O.E. Chron. Introd., Gaius Iulius se Casere ærest Romana Breten-lond δesohte.
c890 K. ÆLFRED Bæda I. i, Breoton is ealond.
1297 R. GLOUC. 22 And aftur Brut ys owne nome he clepede hit Breteyne. 82 Bretayne.
a1375 Joseph Arim. (Vernon MS.) 232 {Th}e Auenturus of Brutayne.
c1428 Arthur 265 Maximian kyng of Bretaingne Conquered al France and Almayne.
c1500 Lyfe Jos. Armathy (W. de W.) lf. 4 Ioseph of Aramathia..came in to grete Brytayne.
c1505 DUNBAR `Schir for {Ygh}our Grace' 11 Fairest and best In Bartane.
c1515 Prophecy of Bertlington, The French wife shal beare the Sonne Shal weild al Bretane to the sea.
1542 HEN. VIII Declar. Scots Bivb, Brutus of whom the realme than callyd Brytayn toke fyrst that name.
1547 J. HARRISON Exhort. Scottes Hvj, Ye names of both subiectes & realmes ceassing, & to be changed into ye name of Britain & Britons, as it was at first, & yet stil ought to be.
1548 N. BODRUGAN Epitome Avb, England the only supreme seat of thempire of greate Briteigne.
1604 Procl. Jas. I, 24 Oct., King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland.
1630 WADSWORTH Sp. Pilgr. vii. 69 His Majesty of great Britaine. 1665 MANLEY Grotius' Low-C. Warrs 779 King James..obliterating the names of Scots and English, would have both to be united and grow up into one Kingdome..to be called Britain.
1667 DRYDEN Ann. Mirab. Ded., To the Metropolis of Great Britain, the most renowned and late flourishing city of London.
1707 Act of Union xi. §1 That the two Kingdoms of England and Scotland shall..be united into one Kingdom by the Name of Great Britain.
1710 Act 9 Anne vi. §4 To export and transport from Great Britain into Ireland.
1718 Act 5 Geo. I, xi. §16 The importation of Tar and Pitch from North-Britain into any part of South-Britain.
1729 Act 2 Geo. II, xxxv. §12 In several Parts of North Britain commonly called Scotland. Ibid. Brought..to that part of Great Britain called England.
1740 THOMSON `Rule Britannia', When Britain first, at Heaven's command, Arose from out the azure main.
c1800 DIBDIN `I sailed from the Downs', So adieu to the white cliffs of Britain.
1832 Act 2 & 3 Will. IV, lxxv. §1 In that part of the United Kingdom called Great Britain, and..that part of the United Kingdom called Ireland.
1868 C. W. DILKE (title) Greater Britain: Travels 1866-67.

by someone (s0me1smail(a)gmail(d)com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 10:59:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks, someone!

Having taken a look at Chaucer (late C14) I may add that he (or his characters in the Canterbury Tales, who use different idioms according to rank, regional origin, and personal foibles) uses the following:

Britaigne, Britayne, Briteyne, to mean either Britain or Brittany (which he also calls Armorik(e): "In Armorik, that called is Britayne" Franklin's Tale, l.1);

Bret, Briton, to mean Welshman;

Britoun, Briton, to mean Breton.

No use of (for example) "Grete Britayne" to mean "Great Britain".

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:06:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well I can't say that I am too familiar with all the historical events that made things the way they are in the UK, but I am familiar with the way things went in France, where Breton/Corsican/Alsatian/Basque "nationalism" is now marginal at best, after decades of being crushed by the all-crushing French Nation. Regionalism is still strong in these places, but then even Toulousains and Marseillais are proud of their identity and of their "region" ...

ps: I've observed this issue of "cultural sub-nationalism" a lot since I went to Sri Lanka, and since then I try not to take it seriously. I landed in SL convinced that there were the Sinhalese, and there were the Tamils ... but the very first good friend I made there had a Tamil father and a Sinhalese mother ... confusion enough to make me feel like burning my books about the history of both cultures.

I am however aware of sensitivity on this type of issue so I do say British instead of English. However in France people commonly say "les Anglais" (the English) to refer to Great Britain as a whole.

And actually I know what's behind this sensitivity too: in all the years I've spent abroad, people I'd meet would often say "ah you're French, so you're from Paris huh?". This would sometimes make me pout.

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:34:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, IMHO
  1. The Prince of Wales (or his heir) would do good to become the first Prince of Wales in history to learn the Welsh language.
  2. "England and Wales" should be broken up as an administrative unit, into England and Wales.
  3. There should be separate English and British parliaments.


A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:38:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
4. The United Kingdom should field only one team in sports tournaments (and the six nations tournament would then become the four nations tournament)

[/i'm actually snarking, I like the fact that there is a Scott & Welsh team in rugby ... but we should also be allowed to have Southwest & Rest-of-France French teams, being different rugby cultures entirely]

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:43:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It probably didn't even register in your radar, but there was an attempt to get a Catalan field hockey team recognized internationally. They were even allowed to play in the international 'B' division for a season and routed every one of their opponents. Then Aznar's government heavily lobbied at the international body governing hockey and got their bid rejected.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:46:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It's interesting that in middle class sports like rugby and cricket, aggregation is acceptable. But in working class sports such as football it isn't.

Ireland have one rugby team, but two football teams.

The Englaish cricket team is actually officially the MCC (Marylebone cricket club) to get around the fact that Welsh and Scots (and nowadays just about anybody else) can play for them.

West Indies is one cricket team and god knows how many football teams.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:54:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You're right in a sense, but the reason is that rugby and cricket are not played or supported by vast numbers of people. There are not many Rugby Union players in Ireland (Colman will tell us there aren't any), and a deliberate effort was made to bring the North and the Republic together to increase the chances of fielding a competitive international side. Something similar applies to cricket -- the Scots and Welsh don't play it much and iirc the only first-class county side outside England is Glamorgan...

It's easier to build and support football sides. Look at how many pro clubs London has.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:24:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Initially there were two unions both founded in 1874. The Irish Football Union had jurisdiction over Clubs in Leinster, Munster and parts of Ulster; the Northern Football Union of Ireland controlled the Belfast area. The IRFU was formed in 1879 as an amalgamation of the two different organisations and branches were formed in Leinster, Munster and Ulster. The Connacht Branch was formed in 1886.(Wikipedia)

The IRFU predates partition... it was the soccer crowd that split:

Upon the partition of Ireland in 1921 the FAIFS (now the FAI) was set up to regulate the game in the Irish Free State (now the Republic of Ireland). Those behind the FAIFS believed that soccer should be regulated by a federation based in the Free State capital Dublin. The IFA's supporters argued that the federation should be based where the game was mainly played - Ulster and its principal city Belfast. Both federations claimed to represent the whole of the island and both competed as Ireland and both picked players from the two rival leagues - which also split at this time.
(Wikipedia)

Which endorses Helen's view I guess: the upper and middle class sport stayed as one because it would have been dominated by rich Protestant or Anglo-Irish and the working class sport split over politics.

While I didn't go to a "rugby school", my father played  at some level in London in the sixties...

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:38:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
By the way, I always wanted to ask someone (not you specifically but anyone in the know): how do the political divisions map onto the North Irish football team?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:51:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No idea. I'm guessing that Northern Protestants/Unionists don't have much time for the Republic team, but I'm not sure of the attitude of the Nationalists.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:08:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks for the historical detail -- I didn't know it went back that far -- but this still seems to me to beg the question. Why should a working-class sport be subject to disunion? Is there something proper to the working-class essence that makes it so, or is it intervention from above (ie upper classes), or is it (as I suggest) that football has the numbers (players, supporters) to make division possible and therefore envisageable?
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:52:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Would you said below seems quite valid (just look at the West Indies ... each island has so few cricket players - precisely because it's a middle class sport - that they have to gang up).

But then again maybe working class sports are so much a way for the working class to be heard that they don't want to share the glory of being heard with distant others?

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:58:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I would have expected the upper and middle classes to be much closer personally than the working classes: they would have gone to the same - or at least overlapping - schools, the parties, the universities. They would have done business with each other. Working class Protestant Belfast and Catholic Dublin would hardly ever have met. That wouldn't be true of the richer classes.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 10:05:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Let's see, gruff English pack, slick Welsh backs and some Scottish bruisers sprinkled in.

Be careful what you wish for Alex, you might not like the outcomes.

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:04:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The Prince of Wales does speak Welsh. He was taught to be fluent as a pre-condition by his mother for accepting the title. He was probably the first ever to be required to do so.

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:49:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
He does? First news I have of that. Makes me like the guy some more.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:55:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Also makes me like the Queen a little more for the requirement.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:01:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There should be separate English and British parliaments.

There were plans to devolve power to a collection of Regional Assemblies around the country, which would be more or less equivalent to a local parliament, and would deal with local issues in much the same way that the Welsh and Scottish assemblies do already.

There was a stirring lack of interest from most of the regions about this. So although there's a Campaign for an English Parliamen, as Wikipedia says 'politically it remains a minor issue.'

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:20:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, but most people do confuse Britain and England and most of the time few of us care.

Of course, when the English do it the Scots and Welsh care a lot. Which is  understandable, but it's unreasonable to expect non-natives to understand domestic squabbles.

I was entirely unaware until this week there was even an issue about The Netherlands/Holland and I bet that fewer than 0.1% of people here know even that much. It's not a case of not caring, it's a simple case of not knowing.

As for Dutch being a term of abuse, that may well be, but it's lost in mists of time. I certainly wasn't aware of that connotation and I doubt that few are.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:08:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Those "few of us" who care would be the Scots, Welsh and Irish, as 5/6 of the population of the UK lives in England. I would think that the Scots and Welsh that care a lot when an Englishman says "England" for "Britain" probably do care a lot when a foregner calls them english to their face, but are pobably too polite to gat angry and just chalk it up to igorance.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:14:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'd like to think that the Scots and Welsh are more generous than that. (NB The Irish never get called english, they aren't even British).

Yes, they'll call the english on it, practically every time and with good reason. But, as I said, it is largely a domestic squabble and shouldn't concern non-natives.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:21:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Two hours later and this topic is all over the place...

You know, my off-hand comments gear up interesting discussion faster than my scrupulously scalped diaries.

Lesson to self: Nothing is mere. Nothing is mere. Repeat ten times, have kiwi.

by Nomad on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:00:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well I normally wouldn't be participating so much at this time of day, but I had the stupid idea of trying to cook chick peas to make hummus, this morning. I started at 9am, thinking "it's going to take a while" but not actually realizing that it would. I'm just eating now, and it's definitely not hummus (more like half-cooked chick peas that go crunch crunch under the teeth)

(I mean to say by this that I normally work on a full stomach - I know that digestion hinders cognition but I like feeling reassured stomach-wise, call it an animal instinct ... so for me confident half-cognition is more important that insecure full-cognition.)

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:05:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You're supposed to soak chick peas for at least a day before you cook 'em.

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:08:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The funny part is that I actually know this. I've repeatedly failed at cooking chick peas.

It's because I am a rebel when it comes to cooking. When someone tells me "you have to respect the cooking time" or "you have to put salt in the water" or whatever, I always feel like doing the opposite. When I have a curry dinner with friends in Paris, and two of us are doing the cooking, the other person follows a strict recipe and comes out with a perfect dish, while I just mix all sorts of spices in random fashion and always end up with a stew.

But my chick peas this morning, and my stews in general, taste good. It's just that they never end up being the dish that I announce beforehand.

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:14:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think the worst mix I ever did (but which still tasted good) was lentils with potatoes and celery all mixed in one big stew. Then again I have eaten raw pasta with nutella when I was a (smoked-out) student ...
by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:18:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
afew if you're reading this thread, let me tell you that the taboulé I suggested to bring at the ET meet-up on saturday will probably be purchased. I tried making taboulé once and it ended up being a couscous-seed stew with large chunks of tomatoes and what not.
by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:20:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I am reading, and can happily make taboulé if you like.

Am about to put up a diary re the meet.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:31:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Did you soak the chick-peas over night?
by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:13:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Alas, no. I thought I could beat the cooking books this time too (see my comment above), and failed again.

But it tasted alright, it just wasn't hummous. Anyhow I knew this would fail, as I don't have a robot mixer (but I started looking at online prices for one as soon as I started eating my peas)

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:16:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
A decent hand-held one is probably better than the free-standing ones unless you already know you want to use it a lot.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:20:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yeah I was wondering about that, I noticed there were handheld types. Do these actually work alright? Do they produce fine stews?
by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:21:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
They work quite well and they're much less hassle to clean up - make sure you get one that allows you remove the blade section for washing. You can use the hand-held in pots, cutting down the washing up even more!

I have a big KitchenAid free-standing liquidiser that I seldom use for things like hummus - if you're working with small quantities the handheld is better - you don't waste so much on the sides and nooks and crannies of the mixer.

Now, for crushing ice or making smoothies - or to pick a random example, for making iced coffee -  the free-standing one is the only way to go.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:28:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Guardian: Secular Turks and Islamists fight for supremacy in the courts and streets

As Ankara begins entry negotiations, attempts are being made to sabotage its chances

When it comes to negotiating the treacherous faultlines of Turkey's fast road to modernity, chewing gum and garlic can make a dangerous cocktail. As Veysel Dalci, a leader of the governing party of pragmatic Islamists in Ordu on the Black Sea, stepped up to place a wreath at a monument to Ataturk - Father of the Turks - on Sovereignty Day, he was seen chewing gum.

The Turkish prosecution service went into action and Mr Dalci was charged with the crime of insulting Mustafa Kemal, better known as Ataturk, a national hero. Mr Dalci, who was held for 48 hours before being bailed, is awaiting trial and could face three years in prison.

A victim of the power struggle between defenders of the secularist state and the ruling AKP party of religious conservatives, Mr Dalci initially blamed his Sovereignty Day ordeal on an excess of grilled garlic the night before. He needed the gum to clear his breath. But then he denied chewing gum at all.

An AKP deputy leader, Dengir Mir Mehmet Firat, said: "How can you arrest someone for this? Let's assume he was chewing. It's not a crime, though it might be bad behaviour."

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:56:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
where you can be arrested, and rightly so, for having "bad taste."

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 03:33:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But I thought chewing garlic was compulsory in France.

[/snark]

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:31:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That and chewing dried frog leg sticks. [/supersnark]
by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:34:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And little bags of snail crackling.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:35:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Financial Times: Prodi pressed on labour costs plan

Italian industrialists criticised the centre-left government of Romano Prodi, prime minister, at the weekend for proposing that a radical plan to cut labour costs should not cover all businesses.

"The cut should be for everybody," Luca Cordero di Montezemolo, leader of Confindustria, Italy's employers' association, told the Financial Times.

"Selection is something that is done by the market. We should not be afraid of the market. If some companies don't use the cut in labour costs in the proper way, they will close," he said.

Mr Prodi's proposal to cut labour costs by 5 percentage points, or €10bn ($13bn, £7bn), in his first year in office was the centrepiece of the economic programme that he put to voters before his general election victory.

Mr Prodi said the plan would improve the competitiveness of Italian companies, many of which are struggling on world markets because of high taxes, low productivity growth and insufficient spending on research and development.

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 01:05:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
...why industrialists spit feathers, while "the business world" welcomed the idea? I can think of reasons why the business world would not sputter... What differs the industrialist from the business world?
by Nomad on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 04:24:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
My best guess: "industry" is labour-intensive (manufacturing) and "the Business world" just shuffles paper back and forth?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:04:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Business has nothing to do with industry, really.  Industry is about building things and employing people and whatnot, while business is about financial parasitism through means of fictitious capital and political leverage.
by Zwackus on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:21:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"Selection is something that is done by the market.

There you have it, the fundamental misunderstanding of the principle of natural selection permeated by marketista economists and businessmen. "The market" is not some mythical agent with an existence of its own, it is a theatre of business defined by the circumstances. Which do selection. Government policy to favor small business or renewable energies is just as much a defining circumstance as the rule of major companies in a 'deregulated' setup.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:22:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Does anyone know exactly what's being proposed here?

The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt št gmail dotcom) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 10:11:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Financial Times: Hungary's PM plans 'first aid' for economy prior to surgery

Ferenc Gyurcsany, Hungary's prime minister, has vowed to slash the country's budget deficit by raising taxes and fighting waste in the public sector.

Corporate tax will be raised from 16 per cent to 20 per cent. Income tax, value added tax and social security contributions for employers and employees will also rise.

The austerity package is a 2½-year plan to tackle a budget deficit forecast to reach 9.5 per cent of gross domestic product this year, overshooting the 4.7 per cent target.

Mr Gyurcsany, who launched the plan on Saturday, told the Financial Times that tax increases were a short-term measure that would be followed by more important efforts to rein in public spending that had spun out of control, partly as a result of election spending promises.

"The steps for this year are what I would call first aid," he said. "We are not just cutting expenses but we are trying to reconstruct the system itself."

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 01:15:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The Gyurcsány government also plans 'reforms' in the health sector, in education, and public transport. So I am not happy.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:16:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Hi DoDo,

Can you tell me what the current status of the health reforms is? It might be useful for some research I am doing. So as not to tax you too much, I'll just ask? Are there concrete proposals yet? I'd heard that a multi-insurance setup was proposed, but is it looking likely? Have any other policies been outlined?

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:39:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No, no concrete proposals yet, and I suspect they won't be concretised for some time. But multi-insurance setup is the direction, and it is a mad idea.

I may do a write-up for you during the week.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:50:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks for this!
by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:10:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
IHT:  Russia plays energy card vs. Western investment

Russian, American, European and Japanese officials are negotiating over whether Russia should be allowed greater freedom to invest in utilities, pipelines, natural gas facilities and other infrastructure in the United States and Europe.

In a draft declaration intended to be offered for endorsement at a Group of 8 summit meeting this summer in St. Petersburg, broadened Russian access is endorsed for approval as long as it is in accordance with market principles.

Paired with that principle in the summit meeting draft is something the West wants: greater access by foreign investors in Russia's energy industry, which has made Russia into one of the biggest oil and natural gas producers in the world.

The maneuvering in advance of the summit meeting comes at a time of rising prices, concern about future energy supplies and anxieties in the West over Russia's use of its energy industry to expand its political influence in its region and around the world.

In January, Russia cut off of natural gas shipments to Ukraine during a price dispute, shutting down deliveries in Europe. That move was seen as an effort to punish Ukraine, long dominated by Russia, for its political independence.

More recently, Vice President Dick Cheney and other senior U.S. officials have rebuked Russia for its increased state takeover of the energy sector, its crackdown of political dissent and what Americans say is an effort to muscle out Western investments in oil and gas pipelines in the Caspian Sea.

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 01:28:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There are ... "anxieties in the West over Russia's use of its energy industry to expand its political influence in its region and around the world."

What astonishing behavior!

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 04:25:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Because there are no other superpowers that try to act like that in the world, so why should russia be allowed to get away with it.

{Two sarcastic posts in succession - be positive}

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:35:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Guardian: Britain's ports poised to fall into foreign hands

· US bank close to sealing agreed bid for AB Ports
· Sale to consortium will cause political row

The vast majority of British ports - including Southampton, Immingham and Port Talbot - are poised to fall into foreign hands with an agreed bid from a consortium led by Goldman Sachs, the American bankers, close to completion.

The £2.4bn deal could be announced as early as this week as Goldman Sachs has completed due diligence on the 21 docks owned and operated by Associated British Ports.

The move is bound to trigger further political soul-searching about the UK's vital infrastructure being controlled from abroad, particularly after last week's agreement to sell the airports group BAA to the Spanish and P&O's takeover by Dubai Ports World (DPW). Goldman had tried to acquire BAA but lost out to Spain's Ferrovial. Neither Goldman Sachs nor AB Ports was willing to comment last night on the state of the talks but industry sources confirmed that a deal was close to being signed.

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 01:37:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't understand globalisation and capitalism, why would any country want its ports to belong to another country?
by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:02:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It's called "profit," and it knows no boundaries.
by gradinski chai on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:22:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Competition. Boost. Markets. Bolster. Reform. Grow. Less red tape. Dynamism. Freedom.

Get with the message, Frenchie.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:29:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"Nice ports you have there. It would be a shame if anything - you know - happened to them..."
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:33:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
MosNews.Com: U.S. Military Leave Ukraine After Mass Anti-NATO Protests


About 200 U.S. reservists, whose arrival in Crimea in southern Ukraine sparked anti-NATO protests, will leave by Monday, but planned military exercises may still take place, Ukraine's navy quoted by AFP has said.

...

The contentious atmosphere in Ukraine has led to the postponement of another joint military exercise between Ukraine and Britain.

The Ukrainian defense ministry said Thursday "in the current situation" Kiev and London had decided "unfortunately" to postpone maneuvers which were scheduled to start June 12. No new date has been set.

by blackhawk on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:06:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Regnum: Ukrainian Foreign Office: Declaration on Ukrainian state sovereignty is a myth


Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine urged the national mass media "not to disseminate the myth of the neutral political status of Ukraine." As Deputy Head of the NATO Department at the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry Vladislav Yasniuk claimed at a special seminar for journalists on the issues of Atlantic integration, "the Constitution does not contain a word on the neutral status, that is why we are urging the media to refrain from propagating the myth," REGNUM correspondent in Kiev reported on June 9.

"We are facing the situation when information about NATO circulated by the media does not conform to the reality," Yasniuk warned. "One of the most popular ones is the myth on Ukraine's neutral political status. There is no neutral status, actually, that is a myth, because the statement on the neutral status is only mentioned once in the official documents, in the Declaration on the State Sovereignty of Ukraine of 1991. That is the only case when the neutral status is mentioned."

by blackhawk on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:08:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Is there a way to convince Ukraine not to join NATO?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:05:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
With 60+% population against joining NATO, it would not take much of convincing. As for political leadership, they got a political capital (15% percent of the vote in parliamentary elections, in which I don't count Timoshenko block, who are more of the opportunists) to spend, so the show will go on.
by blackhawk on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:16:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Kommersant: Russia's Tourists Don't Go to Crimea on NATO Fears

The demand for tours to Crimea sank 40 percent in Russia first week of June. Tourist operators blame the decline on mass rallies staged there against the Sea Breeze exercise of NATO in Feodosia. Nevertheless, the record-low drop has hardly surprised the tourist firms. In Crimea, which is the Black Sea resort once owned by Russia but currently belonging to Ukraine, both hotels and individuals tend to hike prices by 25 percent each year without improving either the service or the lodging.
TV news about protest rallies prompt a tourist to think the vacations could be threatened in Crimea and Sochi would be better, representatives of tourist firms explain. "The people don't attempt to go into the problem and regard the peninsula ultra-hazardous," specified Natalia Romanova, executive director at Orpheus Co.

The actual situation is even worse. Tourist operators speak about the 40-percent drop in public, but in private, they acknowledge the decline is much more serious, said SNP General Director Andrey Golovin. "Some firms put down the seven-fold reduction in number of those willing to spend vacations in Crimea in June or July."

Crimea's Resorts and Tourism Ministry claimed some 1.014 million Russians visited the peninsula past summer, only 1.4 percent up on year. At the same time, the share of Russians in the overall tourist flow to Crimea lowered from 42 percent to 35 percent past season.

by blackhawk on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:10:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Baccalaureate examinations: The degradation of the level of expression in the French language is a source of headaches for paper graders (not sure if this is the right term, I mean "teachers who read student copies and assign grades").

ps: you know how much I dislike mobile phones? I would ban them from use inside schools, I think SMSes are partially responsible for this expression & spelling degradation ... but then again, this is a conversation we've had here on ET before, and someone argued that there was no reason to believe that SMS style was any less good than correct grammar/spelling, and that langauges evolved anyways ...

Libération (in French, partially translated here to make commenting possible ) - Paper grayderz tested on there scillz of the language it is being they are

Brushing aside any apocalyptic discourse on the decline of France's heritage, they sometimes admit to feeling scared and powerless. Benoît, 34 years old, professor of Philosophy in Paris, explais: "The philosophy dissertation (examination) requires a level of language that is not necessarily shared by all. And, the less you master the language, the less access you have to its meaning." And philosophy, only taught in the final year in high school, and implicating the manipulation of concepts, reveals itself as out of reach for students that are weak in the literary field. "Sometimes, I simply do not understand what the student meant", says this teacher, "and I ask myself if I have to grade the content, meaning the philosophical argumentation, or stick to requiring a minimum level of expression"

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:45:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
From conversations with my mother, who teaches Spanish language and literature in High School, I came to the startling [to me] and scary [to me] conclusion years ago that conceptual thought, which we take for granted in "western" civilization is a cultural construct and could be effectively lost in a couple of generations.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:02:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You may say this, but I have, to a small degree, acquired my ability towards literary conceptual thought in later life. Pretty much after my 25th birthday when I stopped reading tabloids and started reading newspapers.

I wouldn't deny that I have struggled at times to get my ideas to coalesce. It's not that the ideas aren't there, but I lack any form of training in marshalling them into a coherent argument.Yes, it is frustrating.

It's why my diaries are so few and often trivial in nature and seem happiest with the short sharp shock of commenting. One idea, one argument, 2 - 3 paragraphs at most.

However, that said, I used to frequently cross argumentative swords with a friend who had a good degree in Philosophy and taught english & philosophy at 12th grade level. what used to frustrate me was the intellectual dishonesty she brought into her discussions, legalistic arguments that were intended to win competitively at the expense of expanding comprehension. She viewed these not as exchanges of views intended to widen discussion, but as mere challenges to be seen off.

She used to justify it with "of course I cheat, you're better at this than I am". So, just cos you can frame your thoughts well, doesn't mean those thoughts were worth the effort of framing.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:16:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You just gave the Socratic critique of the sophists.

When I say "conceptual thought" I don't mean "literary conceptual thought". I am, after all, a mathematical physicist.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:32:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You just gave the Socratic critique of the sophists

I am, after all, a mathematical physicist.

Methinks you doth protest too much. Somebody who even knows what a sophist is, let alone what a socratic response to them might be, has got a good grounding in the formulation of of literary argument.


keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:56:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, I did get a perfect score in the History of Philosophy paper when I took the university access examinations.

But I do protest too much because I was referring to conceptual though outside of the literary sense.

By the way, what the french call litteraire is arts in English, I think, or more generally humanities.

When I was in my last year in high school, two people came from the university to give us a presentation about the access examinations. It turns out they were husband and wife, him a mathematician and she from the humanities. At one point she said something to the effect that "of course" writing well was not that important for a math exam. You should have seen the man's face.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:00:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Goes back to my argument a couple of weeks ago that science is not viewed as an intellectual discipline. You can study arts and be respected even if you can't do basic arithmetic. However, whatever your achievements in science, you can never be an intellectual until you understand literature, history and art.

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:15:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In the UK you don't get taught much about any of those.

The idea of teaching philosophy to 18 year olds would make a lot of heads explode here. What possible relevance could philosophy have to the corporate job market? (And so on.)

And yes, a lot of what we take for granted intellectually is socially maintained and not intrinsic. And that makes it terrifylngly fragile.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:27:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No time ti translate this editorial...

El Pais: Vía Royal (12-06-2006)

Francia necesitaba salir de su sopor político. Ségolène Royal, aspirante a candidata de la izquierda socialista a la presidencia de la República, lo está consiguiendo poco a poco. Se ha apoderado de la agenda de la seguridad ciudadana proponiendo que los menores delincuentes puedan ir a internados o a centros bajo tutela militar. De paso, ha considerado un error la supresión del servicio militar y propuesto instaurar en su lugar un servicio cívico obligatorio para todos los chicos y chicas. Ha rechazado el "patriotismo económico" del primer ministro Dominique de Villepin. Su última embestida ha sido para atacar la semana de las 35 horas -bandera de la izquierda en los últimos años, que la derecha sólo ha retocado-, por considerar que no sólo no ha creado el empleo buscado, sino que su exceso de flexibilidad ha dañado a las clases bajas.

Ségolène Royal se adentra así en un camino político muy al estilo de la tercera vía de Tony Blair, a quien dice admirar y con quien comparte una cierta vena autoritaria. Sus propuestas en materia de seguridad -un terreno en el que la izquierda siempre se ha sentido incómoda- han recibido un amplio apoyo en la opinión pública, no menor entre los votantes socialistas que entre los de Le Pen o los seguidores del actual ministro del Interior, Nicolas Sarkozy, la personalidad a batir en la carrera al Elíseo y cuyo monopolio sobre el debate sobre la seguridad quiere romper Royal.

...



A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:31:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It's pretty much what I think, though we could do without the sempiternal reference to her supposed admiration for Blair.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:51:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
WORLD NEWS
by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:35:50 AM EST
Riverbend: Zarqawi...

So 'Zarqawi' is finally dead. It was an interesting piece of news that greeted us yesterday morning (or was it the day before? I've lost track of time...). I didn't bother with the pictures and film they showed of him because I, personally, have been saturated with images of broken, bleeding bodies.

The reactions have been different. There's a general consensus amongst family and friends that he won't be missed, whoever he is. There is also doubt- who was he really? Did he even exist? Was he truly the huge terror the Americans made him out to be? When did he actually die? People swear he was dead back in 2003... The timing is extremely suspicious: just when people were getting really fed up with the useless Iraqi government, Zarqawi is killed and Maliki is hailed the victorious leader of the occupied world! (And no- Iraqis aren't celebrating in the streets- worries over electricity, water, death squads, tests, corpses and extremists in high places prevail right now.)

,,,,,

How do I feel? To hell with Zarqawi (or Zayrkawi as Bush calls him). He was an American creation- he came along with them- they don't need him anymore, apparently. His influence was greatly exaggerated but he was the justification for every single family they killed through military strikes and troops. It was WMD at first, then it was Saddam, then it was Zarqawi. Who will it be now? Who will be the new excuse for killing and detaining Iraqis? Or is it that an excuse is no longer needed- they have freedom to do what they want. The slaughter in Haditha months ago proved that. "They don't need him anymore," our elderly neighbor waved the news away like he was shooing flies, "They have fifty Zarqawis in government."

So now that Zarqawi is dead, and because according to Bush and our Iraqi puppets he was behind so much of Iraq's misery- things should get better, right? The car bombs should lessen, the ethnic cleansing will come to a halt, military strikes and sieges will die down... That's what we were promised, wasn't it? That sounds good to me. Now- who do they have to kill to stop the Ministry of Interior death squads, and trigger-happy foreign troops?

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:38:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Wasn't killing Zarqawi about knocking Haditha out of the news in the West ?

I always assume they know where most of these people are but view that as a card to be played at a useful time.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:40:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The thought did cross my mind. I can't believe it just yet. Coincidental events and life have a high correlation with each other.
by Nomad on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:57:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
ynet: PM's daughter protests Gaza killings

Dana Olmert takes part in left-wing demonstration outside army chief's house; protesters call Halutz 'murderer,' declare 'intifada shall prevail.' Meanwhile, human rights groups send letter to PM, defense minister, calling on them to stop war crimes in territories
Avi Cohen

Some 200 left-wing activists marched outside the house of IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz at the Tzahala neighborhood in Tel Aviv Saturday evening, to protest the killing of civilians in Gaza on Friday.

The demonstrators chanted slogans such as "Tzahala residents, there's a murderer in your neighborhood," and raised signs calling on the government to "put a stop to the murder of civilians" and stating, "Halutz is a killer, the intifada shall prevail." Activists also shouted, "neighbors, ask Halutz why he's killing children and how many."

 Dana Olmert, the daughter of Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, also took part in the demonstration.
 About 30 policemen arrived at the place to maintain order, but allowed the rally to proceed uninterrupted. Some of the neighborhood's residents, however, were less pleased with the disturbance and squirted water on the protesters from inside their houses.


by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:39:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Has anyone explained why the Israelis shelled that beach ? They always say it's in retailiation to rockets, but Hamas say they haven't fired any for months.

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:41:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The ultra-orthodox were offended by the DJ who played "let's have sex on the beach" on huge loudspeakers?
by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:45:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Because they can.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:47:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No official explanation, but I suggested someone in a tank got pissed off at seeing Arabs on what was not so long ago an Israeli beach (unfortunately possible), or, (unfortunately more likely) this was a deliberate effort to spike Mahmoud Abbas' attempt to hold a referendum on recognition of Israel.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:59:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
BBC: Guantanamo suicides a 'PR move'

A top US official has described the suicides of three detainees at the US base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as a "good PR move to draw attention".

Colleen Graffy told the BBC the deaths were part of a strategy and "a tactic to further the jihadi cause", but taking their own lives was unnecessary.
But lawyers say the men who hanged themselves had been driven by despair.

A military investigation into the deaths is under way, amid growing calls for the centre to be moved or closed.

Speaking to the BBC's Newshour programme, Ms Graffy, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, said the three men did not value their lives nor the lives of those around them.

Detainees had access to lawyers, received mail and had the ability to write to families, so had other means of making protests, she said, and it was hard to see why the men had not protested about their situation.


by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:41:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
According to the Public Diplomacy Web Site of the United States Information Agency Alumni Association:

According to the Planning Group for Integration of USIA into the Dept. of State (June 20, 1997), public diplomacy is defined as follows:

"Public Diplomacy seeks to promote the national interest of the United States through understanding, informing and influencing foreign audiences."

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy?

..."understanding, informing and influencing"?

Sometimes I think they make these gaffes on purpose. How else can one explain this?

by gradinski chai on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:35:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What pisses me off the most:

From the NYT:

Democrats in the United States said little, apparently concerned about appearing to be sympathizing with detainees who could turn out to have significant terrorist connections.


The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt št gmail dotcom) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:54:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Everything is black or white, grey is so out of fashion.
by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 04:22:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So, because you are lukewarm--neither hot nor cold--I am about to spit you out of my mouth. — Revelation 3:16 (New International Version)

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:09:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Fran, you missed the best quote:
But earlier, the camp commander, Rear Adm Harris said he did not believe the men had killed themselves out of despair.

"They are smart. They are creative, they are committed," he said.

"They have no regard for life, either ours or their own. I believe this was not an act of desperation, but an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us."

Have they no shame?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:08:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In order to save time in our world of global, instant, communication I assume statements from military figures are lies, obfuscations, or mis-information.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
by ATinNM on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 10:53:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
US steps back from Guantanamo suicide comments


LONDON (Reuters) - A senior U.S. official rowed back on Monday from remarks by colleagues that Guantanamo Bay prisoners' suicides were an act of war and a "good PR move," after the comments were condemned abroad.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Detainee Affairs Cully Stimson, speaking to BBC radio, distanced himself from the statements.

"I wouldn't characterize it as a good PR move. What I would say is that we are always concerned when someone takes his own life. Because as Americans, we value life, even the lives of violent terrorists who are captured waging war against our country," he said.

The camp commander, Rear Admiral Harry Harris, had described the three suicides as an act of war. Colleen Graffy, U.S. deputy assistant secretary of state for public diplomacy, told the BBC on Sunday the deaths were "a good PR move."

In an editorial headlined "Bad Language," the right-leaning Times, normally a defender of Britain's alliance with the United States, said such rhetoric "plays once again into the hands of America's enemies."

The left-leaning Guardian described Admiral Harris's remarks as "cold and odious." "The demented logic of Dr Strangelove hung like a ghost" over the U.S. response to the suicides, it said.

Britain has been Washington's closest ally in Afghanistan and Iraq, and British Prime Minister Tony Blair has been cautious in criticizing Guantanamo, which he describes as an "anomaly."

But senior British officials have increasingly openly called for the camp to be closed down.

"If it is perfectly legal and there is nothing going wrong there, why don't they have it in America?" Constitutional Affairs Minister Harriet Harman said.

"It is in a legal no man's land. Either it should be moved to America and then they can hold those people under the American justice system or it should be closed."

...

by blackhawk on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:36:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
IHT: In Darfur, attempting to disarm a phantom army

Their camouflage uniforms bear no insignia. Their machine guns lack the brassy patina of long use. Instead of boots, most wear sandals or flip-flops.

The armed men swarming this mysterious town, usually off limits to foreigners, look almost, but not quite, like soldiers. Their allegiance does not appear to be to any military commander, but to a tall, copper-skinned man in a white robe and turban named Musa Hilal.

Mr. Hilal, the sheik who the State Department and human rights organizations say is an architect and perhaps the key leader of the fearsome Arab militias that have unleashed a torrent of misery in Darfur, laughed softly at the question of who these armed men were.

"They are soldiers," he replied with an easy smile in a rare interview here. "Just regular soldiers."

But the commander of the African Union peacekeeping base two dozen miles away, Col. John Bosco Mulisa, said there was little doubt who these men really were.

"They are janjaweed," he said, using the local term for the Arab militias. "This town is their headquarters."

Whoever their commander is and whatever they are called, these men and the weapons they carry will determine whether, after three years of conflict that has left at least 200,000 dead, the fragile efforts to bring peace to this shattered region will succeed or fail.

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 01:26:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Le Figaro: Bush's America and the Glamor of War

Is calling the present conflict a 'War on Terror,' just a dangerous misappropriation of an advertising gimmick? According to this analysis from France's Le Figaro newspaper, Washington's careless word play has belittled its own authority, and has placed a 'puny, unrepentant miscreant like Zarqawi' on an equal footing with Bush himself.

Our concern, as Western listeners, came first of all from the fact that George Bush thought it right to personally announce this news. It makes us a bit queasy to see the President of the United States, head of the most powerful country in the world, calling a puny, unrepentant miscreant that turned to violent Islam his direct adversary, as though Zarqawi was in enemy on Bush's level.

Hitler's suicide in his bunker on April 30, 1945 was instantly known by the Allies' intelligence services at the time. That was an event fo which a public announcement from either U.S. President Harry Truman or British Prime Minister neither a great ideologue nor the leader of a great nation. He was merely a gang leader who took advantage of the disintegration of the Iraqi state to cause even more chaos in that country.

Commenting on the death of the Jordanian killer, President Bush said: The ideology of terror has lost one of its most visible and aggressive leaders. That is the second thing that bothers us. The ideology of terror is a confusing notion, based on the hollow War on Terror, invented by President Bush after the monstrous attacks against American soil on September 11, 2001 (3,000 civilians assassinated).

There is not, nor has there ever in history been, an ideology of terror. There have been ideologies, like communism and Nazism, the leaders of which used terror to impose or consolidate their power. The attacks of September 11 were committed by Mohammed Atta and his associates, in the name of the totalitarian ideology that is now spreading quickly in the world: Islamism. It is an ideology that not only organizes societies politically, but governs people's private lives, up to and including their most personal behavior.

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 01:50:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think the US is a dangerously militarized and militaristic society.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:11:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Isn't it time for the rest of the world to stop financing it?

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:39:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In the stages of grief, I was in the Bargaining phase "ok, I can accept that the US is going to the dogs, but let it be that the rest of 'the west' (and the world) is just in denial and they will realize what's going on and hang them out to dry". Now [after the reaction to last week's CIA flights report] I'm in the Depression phase.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:42:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
At the end of 2002 I had a conversation, at a party, with a middle aged French woman whose father was Syrian. She was very well acquainted with Palestine and Iraq. We both knew the U.S. was probably soon going to attack Iraq. She said something very simple which I have not forgotten: " The U.S.A. is a monster which was created by the rest of the world."
So, is it time for Dr. Frankenstein to cut the electricity or whatever he had to do?

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:35:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There was an International Herald Tribune article a few years back where the cost of the Iraq war and the amount of US debt bought by foreign countries each day were mentioned. I don't remember the article making the connection, but I did: the whole world is funding the Iraq war, and your taxes pay for the occupation regardless of where you live.

The problem is, the minute someone who matters pulls the plug on the US dollar, the economy of the whole world will suffer greatly. The question is whether things will reach a point where the international community will think stopping the US' foreign policy is worth the price of a global recession.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:03:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, if the world pulls the plug on the U.S. dollar, the only ones in the world who might benefit are the Iraquis, who would witness the U.S. being forced to leave their country for financial reasons.
 I'm sure they would better put up with all the death and destruction in their country if they realized how much their suffering is supporting the rest of our standards of living. We could even give the Iraquis a freedom medal.

Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by LEP on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 10:40:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
BBC - Whaling nations set for majority

Pro-whaling nations look set to command a majority of the votes when the International Whaling Commission (IWC) annual meeting begins on Friday. Several countries which appear likely to vote with the pro-whaling bloc have joined the body in recent weeks. UK marine affairs minister Ben Bradshaw said he is "very concerned".

A pro-whaling majority could lead to the scrapping of conservation and welfare programmes, though not a return to full-scale commercial whaling.

That would need three-quarters of the delegates to vote in favour, which is extremely unlikely.

But a simple majority would be enough to end IWC work on issues which Japan believes to be outside its remit, such as welfare and killing methods, whale-watching and anything concerning small cetaceans such as dolphins.



by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:58:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
At some point I'll need to find a way to explain convincingly that eating cows is not any different than eating dogs, and that eating whales is not any different than eating apes. Cultural trends fuzz out the proximity between these species, but where am I wrong in saying this above? (ie. we know that (some) Japanese consider whales to be fish, that (some) Koreans consider dogs to be protein, that (some) Frenchies consider rabbits to be a deliquacy, that (some) Americans will keep pet rabbits but eat more beef than anyone else in the world, and that (some) in all these nations think the pig starring in Babe will look better on a barbecue.)

Eating fish or lizards on the other hand, is a lot harder to amalgamate to eating mammals ... ie. it's easier to go "awwww ain't that cute" when seeing a calf breast-feeding but harder to say the same thing when seeing a lizard dump eggs in the sand somewhere and walk away. Eating birds ... I don't know, it kind of sucks too ... they go tweep tweep, are (mainly) monogamous, care for their little lones ... so that should make them prone to "awwww ain't that cute" syndrome too.

I just don't think I get the whole "I'll eat this mammal but not this one, which is man's friend (or man's cousin)" thing.

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:57:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The issue with whaling, whether Sirocco likes it or not, is a long history of various nations abusing the hunting of the small common whales to hunt the large rare ones who are close to extinction.

In my philosophical view, if you can farm blue whales you are welcome to eat them, but I think there is a decent argument for opposing them becoming extinct just because you like their flavour.

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:09:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
THIS AND THAT
by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:36:15 AM EST
Ananova: Mechanic is 99, not out

Britain's oldest mechanic is still working full-time - at the age of 99.

Former Second World War Sergeant Major Buster Martin maintains a fleet of 100 vans for a plumbing firm, reports the Sun.

He retired at 97 but he applied for his current job after three months because he found retirement 'boring'.


by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:40:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Guardian: Why washing your jeans can cost the Earth

Want to save the planet? Wear your jeans two days a week, wash them every fifth day, and let them dry by themselves. Or better still don't wash them at all. And don't even think of ironing them.

This is the conclusion of a report commissioned by France's environment agency on the ecological impact of a pair of denims. The study looked at an "average" pair of jeans - made of 600gm (1lb 5oz) of denim, lined with 38gm (just over an ounce) of polyester, with six rivets and a button, worn one day a week for four years, washed every third time in a highenergy machine at 40C and, in a singularly French twist, ironed before wear.

...

It concluded that a French jeans wearer would damage the environment the least by buying denims made of cotton from a country not too far from Europe with strict anti-pollution laws. Machine washing, tumble drying, and ironing caused 47% of the eco damage the jeans caused - 240kWh of energy a year, equal to using 4,000 lightbulbs, each of 60 watts, for an hour. Dry cleaning was "an environmental disaster".

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 01:11:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And don't even think of ironing them

Not that I wear jeans, but at last someone who speaks my language! And when I think that I get scoffed at when people see my unironed tee-shirts ...

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:04:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I could suggest that you savor the irony...

The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt št gmail dotcom) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 03:10:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I thought everybody washed their jeans every fifth or sixth day....ooops.
by gradinski chai on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:37:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I suspect this is not unique to jeans, and by singling them out a misleading message is sent out.

How about: wear fewer clothes more often, wash them less often and don't iron them?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:13:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, I wear my jeans for one week and wash them then, and it never appeared to me to iron jeans (huh?). Who does such silly things?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:51:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I always think of jeans as the type of clothes I wear when I don't want to think about ironing. Ironing jeans seems to be missing the whole point of them.
by lauramp on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:27:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Guardian:  Overrun Tuscan town may limit flow of tourists

Residents unhappy about overcrowding caused by 3 million visitors a year

The medieval hilltop town of San Gimignano, acclaimed as one of the jewels of Tuscany, is under such attack from tourism that local authorities are considering restricting the numbers of people allowed into the city at any one time.

Three million tourists descend on the town, famed for its art-filled churches and picturesque skyline of towers, every year, surging through a cramped historical centre that measures only 900 metres by 500 metres.

The influx has led to congested roads full of buses and cars and fears of environmental damage. It has also provoked complaints that traditional craftsmen are being edged out in favour of tacky souvenir shops.

In an attempt to reverse the trend, town elders are to offer incentives to tourists to stay away during the busy summer period by promoting winter as an ideal time to visit, and offering discounted museum and gallery tickets.

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 01:21:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Financial Times - IBM chief calls for end to colonial companies

Sam Palmisano, head of IBM, on Monday called on multinationals to evolve into a new type of corporation if they are to avoid an anti-globalisation backlash that leads to the election of governments hostile to the interests of big business.

In a rare public intervention, Big Blue's chairman and chief executive writes in today's Financial Times that traditional multinational companies need to abandon their almost colonial approach to operations outside their home country. He cites as examples of this old-style method the way GM, Ford and his own company built factories in Europe and Asia but kept all the research and development in the US.

nstead, he argues they need to move towards full global integration of their operations so as to stop the current unease about the forces of globalisation turning into an all-out assault on big business. The danger for multi-nationals that fail to change their thinking is that countries will elect political leaders who impose draconian labour regulations or try to constrain free trade.


by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:20:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
but kept all the research and development in the US

Of course, now that that high-quality R&D can be done more cheaply in India, it's time to "decolonialize".

Well, I guess we shouldn't be surprised that Palmisano's global awareness contains a large self-serving component.

The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman

by dvx (dvx.clt št gmail dotcom) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 03:25:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I guess this statement by IBM's man sums up the complexities of globalisation. It worries me how little we seem to understand the phenomenon we are pursuing.

On the one hand, R&D moving to India and China is good news for them, as it should boost their economy, bigger pay packets than assembly line or call centre work. It may also slow the brain drain from these countries.

But, where does this leave the comparative advantage theorists? Just what is going to be left behind in the more expensive "developed" world?

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 04:04:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Indeed. This non-economist has wondered for some time now whether comparative advantage theory really stands up empirically.

The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt št gmail dotcom) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 04:41:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I have said this before and I've said it again until an actual economist sets me straight: Ricardo's comparative advantage assumes that capital and labour are tied in place and only goods move [and shows that by allowing goods to move more freely you get more goods for everyone)]. Since the global financial markets were fully liberalized (and this happened within the last 20 years, if I am not mistaken), capital is what moves most freely, followed by goods, and labour is what moves the least [as Adam Smith already pointed out: labour is the least mobile of the factors of production]. The way I see it, the developed economies are being decapitalized as we speak, not only by outsourcing and investment in foreign markets [which I call capital flight when I am not feeling too charitable], but by the debt-for-consumption binge that is keeping us on this side of the brink of depression.

I long ago wrote a diary on comparative advantage (you could call it a first stab at "the irreversible thermodynamics of free trade", the Ph.D. dissertation I will never write ;-) which was well-received...

Here are our latest discussions of comparative advantage.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 04:58:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Mig,

It strikes me that I've read a lot about the mythic status of "Comparative Advantage" in connection with proof using simple game theory. Indeed, if you inspect the average college economics course you are almost guaranteed to find a very simple simulation set up to demonstrate how Comparative Advantage is real, despite its "counterintuitive nature."

(For myself I sometimes think that great play is made about the "counterintuitive nature" of Comparative Advantage in order to bolster it's mystique, but that is a discussion for another day.)

I seem to recall that you are in the simulation field to some degree at work. Would it possible to set up one of these "simple" demonstrations of Comparative Advantage, but add in movement of capital to that of goods?

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:00:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Metatone, we need to e-mail back and forth on this, or maybe even talk about it in person.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:50:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
ok.
by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:02:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Better to set-up a diary so the rest of us can watch and chime in? Or at least cc me!
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:17:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ok, let me rephrase.

Metatone, spell out the model you want to simulate in a diary, and I'll run the simulations.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 08:20:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The mythical "counter-intuitive" status of comparative advantage may have something to do with Paul Samuelson, whose introductory textbook I hate:
Stanislaw Ulam once challenged Nobel laureate Paul Samuelson to name one theory in all of the social sciences which is both true and nontrivial. Several years later, Samuelson responded with David Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage:
That it is logically true need not be argued before a mathematician; that it is not trivial is attested by the thousands of important and intelligent men who have never been able to grasp the doctrine for themselves or to believe it after it was explained to them. --Paul Samuelson


A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:53:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I suppose you could take the view that the developed economies are overdeveloped and they need to drop level of the emerging economies. We're paying the price for exploiting the rest of the world an engaging in years of protectionism and colonial exploitation. Not that I like that view, but I suspect it's an argument you could make inside the accepted wisdom of economics.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:24:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
This is the elephant in the living room. Instead of encourage debt-for-cunsumption as a way to push the depression until after the ext election cycle, someone should come out and ask the question if our per capita income is going to take a big hit, how do we manage the transition on our terms so the outcome is best for the most"?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:35:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'd imagine it would be a difficult argument to make in the west because "best for most" would be to diminish living standards here quite severely in orderr to improve them in the 3rd world.

We may be living off the broken backs of the 3rd world, but few will accept a serious downgrading of their income in order to help out. It's the way people are.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:48:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I am assuming the downgrading of our income is happening as we speak and is inevitable, so we might as well manage it. You know, proactive instead of reactive.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:32:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, if we take on board the thoughts of the economists and psychologists in the happiness measurement fields then even if we stay as rich as we are now, the mere fact that other nations becomes less poor has a similar psychological impact as us getting poorer.
by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 07:07:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That doesn't feel right: other nations are too far away for the status comparisons to work I think.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 11:57:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The global economy isn't a Set because it is impossible to give an exact definition such that one can determine if an entity is a element.  I submit, if carefully read, there is a great deal of ambiguity - to put it nicely - in economic discussion between what are Sets and what are Properties.

And if you don't have Sets you don't have mathematics as a necessarily Valid tool.


She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 11:23:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So you can use category theory, where you do have a way to talk about the difference between stuff, structure and property.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 11:25:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Explain precisely what you mean here? You're building a model, so obviously you have to draw a line somewhere.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 11:42:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]
FOOTBALL SUMMER
by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:36:41 AM EST
Independent: German Jews angry over Iranian Cup visit

For many in Nuremberg, it was deeply unfortunate when the World Cup draw placed Iran's first game in their city - a cruel coincidence that the team from the Islamic republic, whose leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has caused worldwide offence with his anti-Semitic pronouncements, should kick-off their campaign in one of the cradles of Nazism.

But their dismay was compounded yesterday by the presence at last night's match against Mexico of Mr Ahmadinejad's deputy, Mohammed Aliabadi, so much so that hundreds of people, drawn mainly from Nuremberg's small Jewish community, staged a demonstration in the city centre against the representative of the "21st century Hitler".

A mood of celebration among Mexican fans in giant sombreros milling around the stadium was in stark contrast to the scenes several miles away at Jakobsplatz, near where the infamous Nuremberg laws clamping down on German Jews were signed in 1935.

Hundreds of blue-and-white Israeli flags flapped as speakers condemning the Iranian leadership were met with roars of approval from the crowd. "Now the deputy is at this game, the World Cup has become political" said Michel Friedman, one of Germany's most influential Jews. "He is a man who has never challenged the words of his [President], a 21st century Hitler. It is our business to tell him that he is not welcome. The German government should have banned this man from Germany."

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 12:45:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Spiegel Online: A WAKING GIANT - US Soccer Comes of Age

Long unknown at home and ridiculed abroad, the United States isn't being written off in the soccer world anymore. But the Americans will need to pull together as team to get past their tough World Cup group.

A motorcade of police cars with flashing blue lights and a massive, unmarked FIFA bus has announced the arrival and often rapid departure of the US soccer team in Hamburg over the past week. But when the American players are on their own, it's a different story.

On Friday, star midfielder DaMarcus Beasley sat, blissfully anonymous, at a sidewalk café outside the Americans' well-guarded hotel in downtown Hamburg. A group night out by some of the team early in the week warranted only brief mention in the local paper.

The contrast is typical of the US soccer story. Individually, the players are unknowns, their limited impact on the top European leagues ensuring them the sort of privacy their opponents in their World Cup group matches can only dream of. But as a team, the US is slowly making the rest of the world sit up and take notice.

"We're not expecting to take anyone by surprise this time around," said Brian McBride, the team¹s go-to goal-scorer who will be playing in his third World Cup.

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 01:03:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
sooner or later there will be a really good US team that will go most or even all the way. But not this time.

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:51:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
They're coming of age right now as we speak snark :)

Mikhail from SF
by Tsarrio (dj_tsar@yahoo.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 01:07:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Kölner Stadtanzeiger: Refusal of Entry Virtually Impossible (in German)

Berlin - With the start of the World Cup, the controversy surrounding a possible visit by Iranian head of state Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has flared up again. CDU parliamentary whip Wolfgang Bosbach told the Berlin newspaper "Tagesspiegel" that it would be extremely difficult to refuse Ahmadinejad entry as a head of state should he choose to visit. Among other reasons, he noted that contracts with FIFA made it difficult to refuse entry to the controversial Iranian leader. In the contracts pertaining to the World Cup, Germany has extended certain government guarantees.


The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt št gmail dotcom) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 03:20:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
This just in from L'Equipe (I won't translate, no time):

Ribéry (the future Zidane II) will start France's game against Switzerland next to Zidane, and attackers will be Henry and Wiltord. This implies that Malouda will be missing this game due to an unknown injury.

Team composition will apparently be:
Barthez, Sagnol, Thuram, Gallas, Abidal, Vieira, Makelele - Wiltord, Zidane, Ribéry, Henry.

Which means that Vieira will retake his normal position, and that France may have a chance after all to beat the Swiss.

by Alex in Toulouse on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:31:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You did a great job at the YK convention!
by Hausfrau on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 01:08:37 AM EST
Happy Birthday, European Tribune...and community!! Whew...we have all put in a lot of energy to get to this point...here's to an exciting and growthful year 2! Cheers!!

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia
by whataboutbob on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 02:44:44 AM EST

Happy Happy! Don't forget to share!

by Nomad on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 04:48:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
A demand for the gnomes: can we have an open thread on 1 year of various site statistics?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:06:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I would be glad to, though I'd get it from the site meter...but I have family in town today, so it will either have to be someone else today...or another day...

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia
by whataboutbob on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 06:12:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, I've only been here a few months but it's a nice place to be.

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 05:37:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

happy birthday, indeed !
by name (name@spammez_moi_sivouplait.org) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 03:48:49 AM EST
 Heard on this morning's Accents d'Europe on Radio France International a story about a recently-launched web-browser

http://www.exalead.com/search > Exalead

with what are claimed to be interesting new & improved features over the other common brands.

"In such an environment it is not surprising that the ills of technology should seem curable only through the application of more technology..." John W Aldridge

by proximity1 on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 10:44:23 AM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

Top Diaries