No source -- c'mon folks, always put the link into the source box.
LONDON - The French were voted the worlds most unfriendly nation by a landslide in a British poll published on Saturday. They were also voted the most boring and most ungenerous.
A decisive 46 percent of the 6,000 people surveyed by travellers website Where Are You Now (WAYN) said the French were the most unfriendly nation people on the planet, British newspapers reported. The Germans have no to reason to celebrate the damning verdict. They came second on all three counts.
WAYNs French founder, Jerome Touze, told the papers he had been stunned by the thumping condemnation of his compatriots and sought to blame it on Gallic love-struck sulking. I had no idea that the French would emerge as such an unfriendly country, he said. I think our romantic moodiness is misunderstood and I will be sure to pass on the message to my family and friends back in France to be a bit more cheerful to tourists in the future.
Italy was voted the worlds most cultured nation with the best cuisine, while the United States was named the most unstylish with the worst food.
The British did not feature in the top 10 of any of the categories. The British fit in nowhere -- good or bad. It appears that we are so completely average that the voters did not include us in any category, the tabloid Daily Express commented. And to our shame, four percent of respondents -- all British of course -- said they would only talk to other Britons when they are abroad.
This unwillingness to talk to the locals appears to go hand in hand with respondents perceptions of foreigners. While most said Spain was the foreign country where they would most like to live, they said the Spaniards were nearly as unfriendly and ungenerous as the French.
To add insult to injury, British newspaper The Daily Telegraph put the boot in on Saturday by saying in an editorial that the French stank. The French may like to think that Chanel No 5 is their scent but we all know that garlic and stale Gitanes are much more representative.
Posted by: bk ||
05/20/2006 12:13 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
British people having a negative view of the french?
Shocking! Refreshing thing is, many (I think this is less common now than in the past) french have an equivalent stereotypical negative view of the british, so there's no love lost here.
For exemple, if my grasp of english is sufficient, "condoms" are actually "french condoms" (named after a french town), while they are "capotes anglaises" (english jacket) in France.
Intra-european bias are a logical legacy of the past, I guess, and I can live with the anglo-saxon (first britons, then americans) prejudice found on the english language internet about the froggies, because...
1) it's in some way a development of recent history (french military ineptude post WWII mostly, before WWII France was considered a military super power funnily enough, and nobody thought its soldiers couldn't fight, cf. WWI; also, IUC, during the 60's french paratroopers were seen as movie stars by their british counterpart due to the very successful antisubversive war in Algeria, and Franc eexportated its anti-revolutionnary war doctrine to the USA, to Latin America,...).
2) I'm somehow ok with it : 2006 France sucks ass, and I hope it will die soon enough, no, really, I despise it.
3) I don't care, we've got an equal amount of prejudice directed toward you : for us, it is the american soldier who can't fight, for example (oh, and english men are either loutish drunkards or closet homosexual... this one may be true, lol).
Speaking of theses prejudice, I'm always surprized how much they mirror "classical antisemitism" (which is pretty dead for the average french guy I'd say?) : americans are warmongerers, but they can't fight, they're materialistical and think only about money, yet they're sickly religious and irrationnal, they design covert, conspiratorial Grand Schemes, yet they lack complexity, they've got no culture, they are physically crooked (obesity, in your case, this one may be true too, so I'm not alone, hé hé hé, though I'm not fat, I'm big-boned), etc, etc, ad nauseam.
#3
We can't be all that unstylish. Last time I was on the continent (Germany), they all dressed pretty much like Americans.....and were eating at Mickey D's.
#5
I cant believe the frickin British think our food sucks. Not enough deep fried cod fillets to suit them? We cook meat other ways than boiling it? Sounds like the Brits don't think much of anybody but themselves.
#6
we don't eat enough internal organs apparently, or Spotted Dick. I'm OK with that
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/20/2006 23:04 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I lived in Germany for a total of ten years between 1971 and 1990, and travelled throughout Western Europe during that time. When I first arrived, the Germans were more friendly and open than the last time I was there. We made several trips to Italy, Austria, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and the small countries - Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, and San Marino. The most friendly people were the Dutch, followed by the folks in San Marino, Luxembourg, Italy, Switzerland, and Belgium. The LEAST friendly and helpful were the French. REAL Italian food is best, especially in San Marino. British food sucks - especially their excuse for a hamburger. The 18 months we lived in England, we ate at Pakistani, Greek, Italian, and Chinese (Hong Kong?) restaurants. We developed a taste for German food, but prefer Hessian to Bavarian, etc. French food, to me, is overrated. The Dutch put on a good spread, and have the best cheese on the continent. The best food I ate in all my tours in Germany was either at a Balkan restaurant in Wiesbaden, or at a small hotel in Ste. Croix, Switzerland. I'd have to rate it a tie... The easiest place to get around in was Frankfurt, the worst was Paris - only slightly ahead of Rome, Italy.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
05/20/2006 23:18 Comments ||
Top||
Letter to the Editor: The Times May 19, 2006 -- Chavez legacy
Sir, Your coverage of President Chavez visit to London (reports and Thunderer, May 16) misrepresents the record of the Presidents administration in Venezuela.
Far from Chavez opponents being repressed, as you suggest, they control the vast majority of the media, including 95% of the countrys 180 newspapers, and five out of five private TV stations, which pump out anti-Chavez propaganda around the clock.
You claim Chavez has contributed to a steep recession when in reality, since the defeat of the strike by oil industry managers early in 2003, Venezuela has enjoyed the most rapid economic growth in the region. GDP grew 9.3% last year and is projected to be 7% for 2006.
You claim poverty has increased when in reality it has decreased, with massive increases in spending on education and health care, in particular. UNESCO certifies that under Chavez illiteracy has been eliminated in Venezuela for the first time.
Seventeen million Venezuelans have been given access to free healthcare for the first time in their lives. A quarter of a million people are having their sight restored, shantytown dwellers are being given title to their homes and millions are being given the opportunity to continue their education in adulthood.
That is why, despite an overwhelmingly hostile media, Chavez stands at more than 70% in opinion polls and his supporters have won ten elections over the past seven years, all judged free and fair by international observers.
That is also why more than a million people took to the streets to defeat the attempt by the opposition to remove him through an anti-democratic military coup widely thought to have been orchestrated from Washington.
Hugo Chavez is one of the most popular leaders in his own country, and in the world today, because the combination of democracy and social justice, which he represents, is something to which the majority of people on this planet aspire.
#2
LOL what a moron. I am pretty sure the newpaper checked it's facts, unlike Red Ken who is full of some much agitprop it is a laugh.
Posted by: SPoD ||
05/20/2006 6:17 Comments ||
Top||
#3
70% sure beats , what 35% , I'm not sure how low its fallen lately, but it aint very high.
Posted by: bk ||
05/20/2006 10:03 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Yep, George should invite in some Cubans to run some Misions (soup kitchens) to run up his poll scores. Pay for this help with 90,000 bbl/day from the SPS. And discount gas for the poor. Yep, that would help GW's poll numbers and maybe get him a 25 year term like Hugos.
Recently ABC News spilled the beans. If you connect the dots, it is easy to understand why the mainstream media is in an uproar over NSA monitoring International calls to suspected terrorists who might be planning on attacking America. IT IS THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA THAT IS MAKING THOSE INTERNATIONAL CALLS!
A few days ago, ABC News ran a story citing another one of those unidentified Federal Government sources warning them that their calls are being monitored.
A senior federal law enforcement official tells ABC News the government is tracking the phone numbers we call in an effort to root out confidential sources.
"It's time for you to get some new cell phones, quick," the source told us in an in-person conversation.
This "senior law enforcement official" is likely one of the Federal Attorney Generals that were installed during the Clinton Administration. Amazing how many government "leaks" have come from the various government organizations to attack Bush and Republicans, but none seem to ever implicate Democrats.
The ABC News story also provides some interesting insight into the concerns at ABC. Some of the story focuses on the possibility that there may be an investigation into the CIA "leakers" who have been passing classified information to the media. It is understandable why those particular TRAITORS and their ABC allies wouldn't want to be caught.
As I recently noted, in an expose that reveals why the Media does not consider itself terrorists, USA Today ran a FRAUDULENT story about domestic phone monitoring.
The story is likely out of frustration that the American public did not get angry about the NSA monitoring International calls to suspected terrorists. As some stories over the last couple years have alluded to, Bill Clinton "installed" a number of loyal Democrats to attack the Bush Administration. Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff John Podesta even admitted this in an interview with CNN...
#1
The 'wiretaps and records' relevant to the leaks are probably being collected under lawful warrant. Wait to see MSM try to mix the NSA surveillance actions with the federal prosecutor actions. Its in the same propaganda form as they mix 'illegal' immigration with 'legal' immigration trying their old slight of hand.
How does the United States deal with a corrupt world in which we are blamed even for the good we do, while others are praised when they do wrong or remain indifferent to suffering?
We are accused of unilateral and preemptory bullying of the madman Mr. Ahmadinejad, whose reactors that will be used to wipe out the one-bomb state of Israel were supplied by Swiss, German, and Russian profit-minded businessmen. No one thinks to chastise those who sold Iran the capability of destroying Israel.
Here in the United States we worry whether we are tough enough with the Gulf sheikdoms in promoting human rights and democratic reform. Meanwhile China simply offers them cash for oil, no questions asked. Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez pose as anti-Western zealots to Western naifs. The one has never held an election; the other tries his best to end the democracy that brought him to power. Meanwhile our fretting elites, back from Europe or South America, write ever more books on why George Bush and the Americans are not liked.
Hamas screams that we are mean for our logical suggestion that free American taxpayers will not subsidize such killers and terrorists. Those in the Middle East whine about Islamophobia, but keep silent that there is not allowed a Sunni mosque in Iran or a Christian church in Saudi Arabia. An entire book could be written about the imams and theocrats in Iran, Egypt, the West Bank, Pakistan, and the Gulf States who in safety issue fatwas and death pronouncements against Americans in Iraq and any who deal with the infidel, and yet send their spoiled children to private schools in Britain and the United States, paid for by their own blackmail money from corrupt governments.
You get the overall roundup: the Europeans have simply absorbed as their own the key elements of ossified French foreign policy utopian rhetoric and anti-Americanism can pretty much give you a global pass to sell anything you wish to anyone at anytime.
China is more savvy. It discards every disastrous economic policy Mao ever enacted, but keeps two cornerstones of Maoist dogma: imply force to bully, and keep the veneer of revolutionary egalitarianism to mask cutthroat capitalism and diplomacy, from copyright theft and intellectual piracy to smiling at rogue clients like North Korea and disputing the territorial claims of almost every neighbor in sight.
Oil cuts a lot of idealism in the Middle East. The cynicism is summed up simply as Those who sell lecture, and those who buy listen. American efforts in Iraq the largest aid program since the Marshall Plan, where American blood and treasure go to birth democracy are libeled as no blood for oil. Yet a profiteering Saudi Arabia or Kuwait does more to impoverish poor oil-importing African and Asian nations than any regime on earth. But this sick, corrupt world keeps mum.
And why not ask Saudi Arabia about its now lionized and well-off al-Ghamdi clan? Aside from the various Ghamdi terrorists and bin-Laden hangers-on, remember young Ahmad, the 20-year-old medical student who packed his suicide vest with ball bearings and headed for Mosul, where he blew up 18 Americans? Or how about dear Ahmad and Hamza, the Ghamdis who helped crash Flight 175 into the South Tower on September 11? And please do not forget either the Saudi icon Said Ghamdi, who, had he not met Todd Beamer and Co. on Flight 93, would have incinerated the White House or the Capitol. Much more at the link. A very interesting piece.
Proposal: Encourage the growth of US made alternate fuels in the US by a graduated reduction in the federal fuel tax. (currently: 18.4 cents/gal)
Logic:
The current fuel tax is a usage fee put into the transportation and roads fund. This fund is usually raided by entitlements and the money never put back in. Therefore, lowering the tax for alternate fuels is not impacting the transportation fund at all. It just makes a smaller pot for out of control entitlements to rob. This proposal would provide incentive to increase home produced energy and force some of the more out of control entitlements to experience a little restraint.
Examples:
So if bio-diesel or 100% ethanol or gas synthesized from say coal or shale were in a pump the cost would be at least 18.4cents less than oil products would have to pay.
If you had F-85 it would get a discount of 2.76 cents/gal in federal gas tax.
Benefits:
It cost the government nothing, encourages creation of alternate fuel at the expense of imports and imposes a tiny bit of fiscal restraint on raiding of a trust fund.
Extend this to oil that's drilled for in the United States.
Currently the House just introduced a set of financial incentives to decreace the amount of new drilling in the US.
And yes, this ties into "alternate fuels" too. How are you going to get any large institutional investors to invest in any sort of grand alternate energy scheme when you're providing disincentives to local drilling and scapegoating anyone who does?
Posted by: Phil ||
05/20/2006 11:46 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Problem with US drilled oil is I didn't see how to tell the difference by inspection at the pump. It's easier to address that by other incentives.
Unfortunately our House and Senate appear to be populated by refugees from the "short bus".
#4
MHW - I deal with this every friggin day. The enviros got approval for the gastax funds to help pay for environmental mitigation. Guess what? Our "banked" acreage purchase cost doubled - due to big moneybags.
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/20/2006 22:33 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Frank G.
Yes there are egregious cases of enviros blackmailing highway agencies into provided gold plated mitigation or requiring 4 acres created for every 1 acre taken.
Notwithstanding this, do you really feel both the fed and state gas tax should be repealed?
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Encourage the growth of US made alternate fuels in the US by a graduated reduction in the federal fuel tax. (currently: 18.4 cents/gal) 
