2002-04-28 That really proves how ignorant and stupid WSJ editors really are. LePen himself is anti-EU and has called the Euro an occupation currency. Maybe it is time to scutinize the WSJ commentaries closely and watch for obvious errors and slander and sue them for each incident. I'm sure there are pro-EU organizations in Europe who would love take on the challenge.
BTW, can you print their comment here, or send it to me privately? I would be interested to read what they said. If it was vicious, it is meant to destabilise the EU. Remember they are jealous and angered at any attempt by any nation to rise up against US interests. To challenge US policy and US control is anathema to them. The stronger the EU becomes, more and more virulent rhetoric will come from the mouths of the editors of the WSJ and the rulers of the TABD. John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Han Maenen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, 2002-04-28 03:55 Subject: [USMA:19733] Off topic but about WSJ attitudes > (From: Nat Hager, > Subject: [USMA:19622] RE: European Union regulations) > > Off topic, but did all of you also read in the WSJ article that it supports > the use of spam and cookies that spy out what you are doing on the Internet? > WSJ opposes proposed EU regulations against spam. > As far as I am concerned, decent companies do not spam, do not send junk > faxes and do not engage in outbound telemarketing. The position the WSJ > takes in this regard is deplorable, as it is on many other issues, metric > included. The success of Le Pen in France caused WSJ Europe to print a very > vicious commentary against the EU. > And the WSJ's comment on road safety, in this case about 'bull bars' and > accidents with pedestrians is disgusting. It looks as if more deaths on the > roads are not a big deal to them. > > Han > Historian of Dutch Metrication, Nijmegen, The Netherlands > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: U.S. Metric Association > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 12:47 PM > Subject: [USMA:19664] Re: About the mailing list > > > In a message dated 2002-04-25 22:07:57 Eastern Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > Is the bit that says '[USMA:19624]' essential? It prevents me doing a > meaningful 'sort by subject'. > > > That, plus similar things on other lists, helps us detect and delete the > spam more easily. > > cm >
