|
09 Apr 07 - 06:46 AM (#2020351) Subject: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: skarpi Hallo all, I hope this a joke and even its a joke its not a laughing matter I got this in our paper this morning : http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2007/04/09/opinion/17995.shtml sorry dont know how to do this blue ........ All the best Skarpi Iceland. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 06:48 AM (#2020352) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: GUEST,Canadienne there you go skarpi |
|
09 Apr 07 - 06:56 AM (#2020357) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Jean(eanjay) It's clearly somebody's idea of humour - it's just that all of us don't have that sense of humour. I notice Tony Blair has got a mention! |
|
09 Apr 07 - 06:58 AM (#2020358) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Jean(eanjay) Skarpi, I think this should have gone into BS - in more ways than one!!! |
|
09 Apr 07 - 07:01 AM (#2020360) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Janie Hi skarpi, It is sarcasm, not a joke, and is a slap at the US foreign policy in the East, and not a put down of Iceland. He is basically saying that our policies in the East are as absurd as is the idea of bombing Iceland. Saving your $$$ for a trip to the Getaway this year, I hope? Janie |
|
09 Apr 07 - 07:06 AM (#2020362) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Jean(eanjay) Janie, now that you've explained it and I've re-read it, it is actually quite effective at what it was intended to do. I'm from the UK and so I can appreciate the Tony Blair bit - he's just as absurd as anything you've got. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 07:07 AM (#2020363) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: skarpi Janie , I am afraid this is going to taken the wrong way here in Iceland :>( you just left us defendless , you did not clean up the air force base , they left a mess all around the place and it will cost many hundred millions to clean up , and then this comes up ??? About Getaway I am getting there ........ with the money All the best Skarpi Iceland. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 07:08 AM (#2020365) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: skarpi http://www-cdr.stanford.edu/intuition/Slough.html this once happent ........... so ... all the best Skarpi Iceland. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 07:11 AM (#2020367) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Jean(eanjay) Skarpi, I've copied and pasted it instead of putting in a link. Slough by John Betjeman (1906 - 1984) John Betjeman published his poem about Slough in 1937 in the collected works Continual Dew. Slough was becoming increasingly industrial and some housing conditions were very cramped. In willing the destruction of Slough, Betjeman urges the bombs to pick out the vulgar profiteers but to spare the bald young clerks. He really was very fond of his fellow human beings. Slough is much improved nowadays and he might be pleasantly surprised by a stroll there. Slough Come friendly bombs and fall on Slough! It isn't fit for humans now, There isn't grass to graze a cow. Swarm over, Death! Come, bombs and blow to smithereens Those air -conditioned, bright canteens, Tinned fruit, tinned meat, tinned milk, tinned beans, Tinned minds, tinned breath. Mess up the mess they call a town- A house for ninety-seven down And once a week a half a crown For twenty years. And get that man with double chin Who'll always cheat and always win, Who washes his repulsive skin In women's tears: And smash his desk of polished oak And smash his hands so used to stroke And stop his boring dirty joke And make him yell. But spare the bald young clerks who add The profits of the stinking cad; It's not their fault that they are mad, They've tasted Hell. It's not their fault they do not know The birdsong from the radio, It's not their fault they often go To Maidenhead And talk of sport and makes of cars In various bogus-Tudor bars And daren't look up and see the stars But belch instead. In labour-saving homes, with care Their wives frizz out peroxide hair And dry it in synthetic air And paint their nails. Come, friendly bombs and fall on Slough To get it ready for the plough. The cabbages are coming now; The earth exhales. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 07:16 AM (#2020368) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Jean(eanjay) Slough is much improved nowadays So there's hope Skarpi. you just left us defendless , you did not clean up the air force base , they left a mess all around the place and it will cost many hundred millions to clean up , and then this comes up ??? |
|
09 Apr 07 - 07:22 AM (#2020371) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: GUEST,Canadienne skarpi - many people were very angry about that poem of Betjemans - especially as it was written durinhg the worst excesses of the civilian bombing campaign of the Spanish Civil War. If you read it carefully however you will see that it expresses Betjeman's anger at what he perceives as being wrong with the country he loved and was never meant to be anything other than savage satire. I think that, as someone who is opposed to the wanton and unlawful destruction of human life in the Middle East, you can see that no one is seriously suggesting the destruction of your beautiful country but they too are angry at American policy. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 07:25 AM (#2020372) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Little Hawk A lovely piece of political satire. Bravo! If Iceland proves too difficult a proposition for Shock and Awe 2007, there is always Blind River in Northern Ontario, Canada. Even easier to "take out" than Iceland...and hardly anyone would even care. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 07:30 AM (#2020375) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: skarpi Hi again : Eanjay thank you for take this down to BS :>) I have to say this He is talking down to a nation that can not defende it self and also in the Nato agreement says if one nation is attacked then they are all attacked , and remember both USA and UK are in Nato and he´s talking about bombing a Nato Nation . So for me this not a joke . I am not an anti american person I am 1/4 Us my self but I am afraid that some of my fellow Icelanders will do or say something about this. Eanjay, there was agreement between Us and Iceland about defending our airspace , we offered to pay for it so the jets could stay longer until we got it sorted out, but the Us coverment wanted the jets so badly to Iraq that they said no .There was also agreement that if they would left they would clean up every mess they left , but they did not.But the Icelandic coverment are working this out now and we have cleaned up almost . All the best Skarpi Iceland. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 07:32 AM (#2020376) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Jean(eanjay) Thanks for that Skarpi - I can understand how you feel. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 07:54 AM (#2020380) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Little Hawk What the article is, Skarpi, is an attempt to show how totally ridiculous and irresponsible the Bush administration is being in the world. Icelanders will misunderstand the intention of the writer if they get upset about it. The writer was writing for his home audience (Americans) and probably did not even think anyone from Iceland would see the artice...or if they did, would not take it seriously. The joke is not on Iceland, the joke is on the Bush administration...but it's not just a joke. It's a serious criticism of the Bush administration. If the article had chosen Ontario, Canada (where I live) instead of Iceland for the boming target, I would not be upset. I would appreciate that the article was drawing attention to the insane policies of the Bush administration. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 07:58 AM (#2020384) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Little Hawk (sigh) Another typo. Should have been "bombing target". |
|
09 Apr 07 - 08:00 AM (#2020386) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Janie I understand what you are saying, Skarpi. With the many wonders of global communication also come some significant pitfalls, and I don't know that it will ever be possible to control for that. One of those pitfalls is contextual communication. The American audience to whcih this article is directed will understand that Iceland is in no way the subject of this article. They will read this article as being entirely about the US policies in the East. I think it important that we be aware that others do not have the context to understand, just like I would not have the context to understand commentary written in Iceland about Iceland. However, I don't think people in one country can or should have to talk among themselves with an eye always on what other places without the context might make of it. What has happened here, is you have overheard a conversation between two people you don't know. You should not be expected to know the context, but the people you overhear should not be expected to take that into account. Remember, the Princeton Review is not a widely read international publication. Janie |
|
09 Apr 07 - 08:09 AM (#2020389) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Jean(eanjay) Skarpi, how was it put in your paper - for example, was there a copy of the report or was there some write-up before or after it, or a reference to the website? There is a facility on the website to respond to the article. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 08:26 AM (#2020391) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: GUEST,Janie Didn't see your post, LH, before I made mine. As is usual, you said it much better than me. Janie |
|
09 Apr 07 - 11:11 AM (#2020477) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Bee-dubya-ell See, Skarpi, it's sort of like this: We Americans just love bombing! Even our National Anthem celebrates "the bombs bursting in air". And when do we sing about those bombs bursting? Why, before baseball games, of course. And, as we all know, baseball is the US's national pastime. But, over the years, baseball and those damned bombs bursting in air have become so closely associated in many people's minds that a sizeable portion of the US population thinks it's bombing that's the national pastime. That would be fine if Americans were satisfied with simply watching their bombs explode like giant fire crackers, but the problem is that many Americans aren't satisfied with seeing their bombs exploding on bombing ranges in the desert. They want to see them actually knock down some buildings. But, as most of the rest of the world realizes, our bombing addiction has gotten us into trouble over the last forty years or so. Our bombs set babies on fire in Viet Nam. One of our bombs knocked down the Chinese embassy in what used to be Yugoslavia. And scarcely a week goes by without another "Oops! We did it again!" story from Iraq or Afghanistan about some wedding party that got bombed for getting a bit too boisterous with their AKs. That Princetonian article is an attempt to use satire to help us Americans recognize our bombing addiction for what it is. However, the author may not have realized that an addicted mind is an illogical mind. Something which a rational person would easily recognize as a joke may be interpreted by the deluded mind of an addict as a really swell idea. So, while I recognize the satire in the article, there are millions of Americans who won't, and who are probably chomping at the bit to get that Icelandic bombing campaign underway. Therefore, I think it would be wise to retract that article and substitute another that gets right down to the heart of the matter. The simplest way to cure Americans of their bombing addiction is to change the National Anthem! Quit singing about "rockets' red glare" and "bombs bursting in air"! To the best of my knowledge, nobody's ever been blown to pieces by "amber waves of grain". |
|
09 Apr 07 - 11:43 AM (#2020494) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: GUEST,meself I don't know if something is getting lost in the translation - but, Skarpi, no offence, but you're completely missing the point of the article. It is SATIRE. Betjeman's poem also is satire; Slough was NOT bombed, and no one was proposing bombing it. It's like Jonathon Swift calling for Irish children to be cannibalized by the English, as a way of criticizing the kind of treatment Ireland was receiving from Britain. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 11:55 AM (#2020499) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: skarpi I hope you will remember me in Mudcat , after you have kill me ........... you think this is funny ............uppsss there goes skarpi just like the Chinese embassy in what used to be Yugoslavia ups sorry . This article is now on the table of our coverment so we dont see this as some joke they may do something may do nothing .It was on the news of every radiostation in Iceland and all the newspapers . Although this article is a slap into Mr. bush face its on our cost you dont make jokes about killing innocence people, and makes joke about: we can go to the pub while the british fill up the planes again for us ?? My friend said today after he saw the article I hope this man never comes to Iceland............... . Well I am not gonna say anymore about this , its not worth it . That poor man . All the best Skarpi Iceland. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 12:42 PM (#2020529) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Bee Living next door to the US, I'm able to easily recognise American satire for what it is, and the contextual aspect has been well explained above. But Skarpi and Iceland have some right to be disturbed, because the author obviously does not know very much about Iceland, has not bothered to research a little and therefore discover that Iceland has had its problems with the US government, and uses Iceland as a conveniently absurd country for Americans to bomb (ironic, considering the air base problem Skarpi cites). This can be seen as dismissive of Iceland as a real place where real people live. More than the satiric suggestion about bombing, the article insults because it is so typically ignorant about the world outside the US. The comparison with Betjeman fails because Betjeman was writing satire about a place he knew well, not a place he knew virtually nothing about. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 12:46 PM (#2020531) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Jean(eanjay) It's clearly been written without much thought. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 01:22 PM (#2020552) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: GUEST,Janie I understand what both Skarpi and Bee are saying. If the author was talking too Icelander's or, in any real sense, about Icelander's, I would agree wholeheartedly. In actuality, Iceland is in no way the subject of the article--he could have used Disney World instead. Satire and sarcasm are legitimate means of expression, and they are ALWAYS contextual, and are directed at an audience that can be expected to understand that context. My hometown newspaper is now available on the web and anybody in the world CAN read it. It is there for the world to see, but not directed at the world. I would hate to think that the people who r\write for that paper could not longer talk to me within the contextual richness of my community becaause some one in another land might pull the article up on the web and misunderstand. Janie |
|
09 Apr 07 - 01:47 PM (#2020573) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: GUEST,meself Shall we open up the "cartoons of Mohammed" controversy again? I wonder what the prevailing feeling was about that in Iceland? (Seriously - I have no idea). |
|
09 Apr 07 - 02:15 PM (#2020587) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Bee Janie, no one is saying (at least, I don't think they are) that people can't write whatever they want to, but the fact is that wildly thrown rocks are going to strike somewhere, and whether you meant to klonk an innocent bystander or not, the bystander is within his rights to feel outraged. And, Janie, I'm not sure Iceland-as-humourous-bomb-target is a good example of 'the contextual richness of your community', since in this case, the writer seems to know nothing about it, and likely neither does the community he's speaking to. In this case, not just 'someone in another country', but an entire country, government included, is somewhat upset, as I'm sure the article could be read as rubbing salt into wounds with regard to the Icelandic airbase. Personally, I see it as another example of how uninformed many US journalists appear to be, as I'm sure the writer did not mean to upset anyone in Iceland. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 03:02 PM (#2020622) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Donuel France did it Brits did it Roman Legions in leather pants did it Lets do it Lets go to war Spain did it Dutch did it A US Prez without a brain did it Lets do it Lets go to war |
|
09 Apr 07 - 03:12 PM (#2020631) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Peace Just don't bomb in New Haven. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 04:42 PM (#2020708) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Bee-dubya-ell Personally, I see it as another example of how uninformed many US journalists appear to be.... The writer is not a journalist. He's a professor of economics and public affairs. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 04:56 PM (#2020723) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Little Hawk LOL!!! By God, are people this upset in Iceland about the article? Well, maybe that's good, because it will help Icelanders realize (if they didn't already) that the USA is a very dangerous country and that will help in a small way to build even more international opposition to Bush and his damned wars. I hope. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 04:57 PM (#2020724) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: GUEST,Janie Bee, You are right-it can be read that way. And I also don't think anyone was saying people can't write what they want to write. But I also did not read the piece as saying the idea of bombing Iceland is humorous. I didn't find the article humorous. I found it sarcastic. And I also am not trying to say that Skarpi or Iceland do not have the right to be offended. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 05:26 PM (#2020755) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: GUEST,Janie didn't mean to hit the submit button yet. My toes get stepped on for one of two reasons. 1. Someone moved their foot over my toe (by accident or on purpose.) or: 2. I moved my toe under someone's foot. It hurts either way. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 05:33 PM (#2020761) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Donuel Mohammed walks into a bar in Iceland... |
|
09 Apr 07 - 11:26 PM (#2021043) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: leeneia I read the article. It's way too long - obviously written by somebody who's used to a captive audience. (It was written by a professor.) I find the ad for McDonald's in the center of it to be curiously telling. To me, it was proof that you don't have to be a sophomore to be sophomoric. I have been to Iceland twice, and I don't find anything funny about the idea of bombing it. It is a beautiful, beautiful place. Skarpi, I am real sorry to hear about the pollution left behind by the air base. |
|
09 Apr 07 - 11:59 PM (#2021070) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Bee-dubya-ell Perhaps the author should have suggested the US bomb Liechtenstein instead. |
|
10 Apr 07 - 12:08 AM (#2021075) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: TRUBRIT 1. My mum was from Slough and I lived close to their on and off for many years.....I didn't care fot it. 2. There is a new book I heard reviewed on NPR along the Modest Proposal lines -- it speaks to a world where aging baby boomers voluntarily commit suicide at their own pace and on their own time (dammit - we like to be in control) in return for (decreasing) tax breaks the longer the suicide is put off. 3. Bush would bomb Iceland BECAUSE IT IS THERE ....if he noticed it was there...... 4. I think Skarpi's appalled reactions are entirely appropriate to the horribleness of the suggestion, whether satirical or not. |
|
10 Apr 07 - 12:08 AM (#2021076) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: GUEST,meself Or perhaps he should have slagged Mohammed - then we'd all be on his side ... |
|
10 Apr 07 - 12:16 AM (#2021081) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: GUEST,meself (the aforementioned author, that is). |
|
10 Apr 07 - 02:59 AM (#2021133) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Gurney There are a couple of reasons why this might be an attractive option. Icelanders were likely among the first illegal immigrants in the Americas, although it wasn't the Americas then. Iceland's parliament works quite well (I'm told,) and has done for about a thousand years. Makes everyone else look a bit bad. There are only about 300,000 of them. Easy Peasy. It is the 'greenest' country in the world. 95% of the generated power does not use fossil fuels. Again, makes us look bad. Scarpi, this post is irony, my take on it. |
|
10 Apr 07 - 03:22 AM (#2021138) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: JohnInKansas Is skarpi saying that the government in Iceland is taking this seriously in order to warn us that they may launch a pre-emptive strike against the US? With all our active troops mostly in Arab countries, and our few remaining National Guard forces busily engaged in patrolling our southern border, or so ill equipped that they can no longer properly spit-shine their boots, it might be quite easy for even a small nation like Iceland to inflict massive and horrible damage here. Just think of the chaos and disorientation that would result if a precision strike force of a dozen or so troopers managed to invade and shut down iTunes headquarters and even a quarter of their servers. It would cut the very heart and soul out of half our population. Capturing just one major football or basketball coach could reduce our entire economy to a smoldering, stinking heap; and if they got a major player in the deal our communications and media people would have nothing left to talk about, so they'd probably just turn off their stations. A road block at the K-Tel distrubution warehouse (any one of them) would definitely terminate public media communications, since without "paid commercial announcements" there'd be no programming to broadcast. I personally intend to take skarpi's innuendo quite seriously. It's 02:00 in the morning here now, but as soon as the shops open, I'm heading out to stock up at least on beer and weiners for the seige. If I've got funds left after the essentials I might even lay in a couple of sets of mando strings just in case. And skarpi - if you make this far in, we can probably bunk a couple or three in the camper out in the back yard. Ordinarily I'd offer the spare bedroom, but we are expecting house guests toward the end of the week. John |
|
10 Apr 07 - 03:34 AM (#2021147) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Big Al Whittle Its not really satire - its irony - so beloved of American academics and pronounced so differently over there. Difficult to define - but basically - saying one thing but meaning another. Us Brits, we are basically warm blooded and celtic in origin, so it doesn't play so big in English literature - although Browning's poem To His Last Duchess is always cited as a great example of irony. My old college professor used to take the piss out out of the American academics love of irony by quoting an exam question he once came across:- Nake six different kinds of irony in the first three chapters of Pride and Predjudice. |
|
10 Apr 07 - 03:46 AM (#2021154) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Jean(eanjay) I looked up all of the following for my own interest really because to be quite honest I wasn't sure of the difference. I thought I might as well post them. Irony - expression of meaning by use of words normally conveying opposite meaning. Satire - use of ridicule or irony etc. to expose folly or vice etc. Sarcasm - bitter or wounding remark(s) esp. ironically worded. |
|
10 Apr 07 - 04:33 AM (#2021173) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Big Al Whittle that icy patrician thing - that's irony! |
|
10 Apr 07 - 06:44 AM (#2021203) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Wolfgang Liechtenstein has already be suggested in Mudcat as the next target and they plan to arrest and charge Little Hawk with planning genocide next time he crosses the Liechtenstein border. I'm not sure the judge will buy the "not-serious" defense. Wolfgang |
|
10 Apr 07 - 07:17 AM (#2021217) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: skarpi Tree times we have been taken , first by Danmark , then by the British and , 1941 by USA . Never talk down to Nation , that what happen in this article, and yes we are some of us offended, are the coverment gonna do something ? I dont know , but at least one minester has seen this and he was not happy ........ Gurney: There are a couple of reasons why this might be an attractive option. Icelanders were the first immigrants in the Americas, although it wasn't the Americas then. Iceland's parliament works quite well (I'm told,) and has done for about a thousand years. Makes everyone else look a bit bad. true There are only about 300,000 of them. Easy Peasy. wrong -you thinks so 300,000 one year ago now we are 320,000 and growing fast . It is the 'greenest' country in the world. 95% of the generated power does not use fossil fuels. Again, makes us look bad. true Gurney thanks, this poor article man said , bring Iceland into the furure? he dont have to , we are already there , thank you for show it .I took some words out and put in others :>) I am not angry , but I am offended , there s a diffrent there, althouh its a slap into Mr. Bush , but again I can not see the humor in this . all the best Skarpi Iceland. |
|
10 Apr 07 - 08:52 AM (#2021264) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: GUEST,meself Okay, Skarpi, my question: What was the general feeling in Iceland concerning the controversy over the cartoons of Mohammed? I take it there was solidarity with those Muslims who did not appreciate the humour ... ? |
|
10 Apr 07 - 09:18 AM (#2021282) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: Big Al Whittle Skarpi, there was no offence intended. Iceland is just a place this guy had heard about in the geography book. It is an abstract concept to him. As indeed the life of experiences of 95% of us will remain throughout his sheltered existence. When you've attended that sort of educational institution you talk down to everybody - he can do no other. Its like asking Geof the Duck not to quack. |
|
10 Apr 07 - 09:23 AM (#2021287) Subject: RE: We USA should 'Bomb ' Iceland ?? From: skarpi well most of people here did not see any humor , but also some said that its a free world ?? still , they who did this cartoons were looking down to the Arabs . I dont see any point making a war in the east against the arabs ? if people want to hurt them why dont they quit their buisness there and leave ? Its all about the oil ? and you dont need it from there . you have alot of high thermo land in the Us to use to heat up your houses. We know how to do it we can help you . Then you can go " green " as we are. Okei there is a lot of responce from the Icelanders on the Princeton web side now , and mr. Reinhardt said this to a news paper today: I am sorry on the other hand that some of the Icelandic people think that I have looked down to them , I am gonna try to right an article in Icelandic paper to explain this he said. „Mér þykir hins vegar leitt, ef einhverjir Íslendingar telji að ég líti niður á þá og ég ætla að reyna að skrifa grein í íslenskt dagblað og reyna að útskýra málið," segir Reinhardt. We should respect a human person , and I dont care if hes or she is a Muslim, Catholic,Luthern or Budda and I dont care what color they are to me we are all the same . This I got from US Embassy in Reykjavík - Dear Mr. Haraldsson, Thank you for your message and your interest in U.S.-Icelandic relations. We share your interest in enhancing the already strong ties between our two countries. The views expressed in Professor Reinhardt's column are most certainly not those of the U.S. Government. As you know, Iceland and the U.S. share very close ties in security affairs, from our common membership in NATO to cooperation in numerous other areas. Prof. Reinhardt has since issued a statement indicating that the column was an attempt at political satire. A report on his apology may be found on the back page of Morgunblaðið today. Again, thank you for your message. Warm regards, Brad Evans Now I said " that Poor man " doesent mean that I don´t reaspect as a human . I am glad you all could laugh through this , it gives a live a meaning I am still not laughing ......... sorry . Tell me a joke that will not hurt anyone then I will laugh . All the best Skarpi Iceland. |