Interesting thread. Razorback is wrong. The proofs he demands are common knowledge, and the "American" results he uses as his proof should be accompanied by the same research he demands of others. A person who truly represents himself as the voice of moderation won't be calling others rednecks, as the term has been corrupted so much as to be useless today. Such obvious disdain for others opinions, and his own from the manner in which he presents it, reveals a person with a poor grasp of politics, international religious behavior, and the ability to implement a logical argument. He is what he accuses everyone else of being.
I'm a little curious where your documentation of the statement "those europeans also had "proof" that Americans were going to attack Canada," comes from. You accuse others of poor messaging skills, but operate in the same manner when it helps you make a point.
The Europeans NEED to regard Americans as somehow "less civilized", with the French leading the issue. Anyone who has actually studied the issue formally will acknowledge the fact that it's a tradition there. The media of Europe routinely portray Americans in the least favorable light, and have done so for decades. With much of the European media under government control, whether they admit or not, the governments of many Euro countries have a vested interest in keeping the population wary of America, lest that same population begin to agitate for American freedoms. There is also a residual distaste for the fact that most of Europe was enslaved by Germany, and that the Americans not only freed them, but rebuilt them, as well.
The muslim population of France didn't riot over pictures. Remember? They rioted over being excluded from the mainstream. This is a paradox, as they wish to continue their traditional lives, languages, religion, and life-style, while demanding access to all facets of French life, many of which they condemn. The problem with the Cult of Mohammad is that violence permeates it thoroughly. Their answer to any question about their religion, or any limit placed upon it, is violence. People are condemned for writing books about the religion, or drawing pictures of Mohammad, or questioning the wisdom of the leadership. While a relative few are moved to violence at any point, those who support them by way of witholding information, or providing financial or physical aid, are accepting responsibility for these creatures continued crimes and existence. That they don't doesn't make it true.
If an American wishes to debate gun control with the Europeans, he can truly change nothing. His verbal abilities, or bellicosity, are nothing compared to the verbal sewage he exposes himself to while doing so. The governments of Europe are complicit in the reduction of crime statistics within their countries. This is accomplished in a variety of ways. They ignore entire catagories of crime, or separate crimes committed by "terrorists" out of their totals. Some, like the Brits, don't count homicides until the final verdict is in. If the person is acquited, there was no homicide. The dead person is "forgotten". How do you debate with people capable of this? We're comparing apples to oranges.
There is a need, perhaps, to discuss this with the actual population of Europe, but the flippant demand to curb anyone's attempts to do so, unless he or she uses a particular format, is all too Euro-trash for it to be anything of value to this forum.
Did this person forget that, in Europe, they kill each other over the outcome of soccer games? What an idiot!:barf:
