Marc Phillips said:

After as many as 10,000 people (or, as Arny would say, 10,000's of people) have
died in France due to the heat, Chirac has announced that they plan to have the
problem licked by October.

The Ministre de Sante has put his head on the block as a result.
Apparently, when you don't control the weather adequately, you're
deemed to have failed at your job.



Yes, you read that right.

Probably just a bunch of street people anyway.

On 21 Aug 2003 19:12:40 GMT, (Marc Phillips) wrote:

After as many as 10,000 people (or, as Arny would say, 10,000's of people) have
died in France due to the heat, Chirac has announced that they plan to have the
problem licked by October.

Yes, you read that right.

Boon

hello,
i'm french and i don't understand "licked".
Anyway, what Chirac was talking about was enquiries to find out what
went wrong and means to be more efficient next time.

We don't ask the government to control the weather, but the high
number of dead was the result of not being able to take care of old
people suffering from the heat. We have a good system but it's
expensive and every government tries to save money. So small unities
in the country are closing, and there are less and less people
(doctors, nurses,..) and beds. Now we have reached the point where the
results are dramatic, even in a normal situation emergency services
are near the breaking point.
Second point: there are emergency plans using the army, the red cross,
etc... and despite the calls of some doctors nothing was made until
the real figures came out, and the real numbers were always denied by
the government (saying 1500 when 3000 was circulating, 3000 when it
was 5000, and so on....)

Now there is a big controversy which goes beyond the number of dead of
the heat, but is about the way to manage the whole health system.

I suppose there is a also big controversy about irak in the US, it's
not the heat which is killing your soldiers.
I've heard that americans are beginning to realize that government
information about the mass destruction weapons of saddam were forged.
I must say that we knew that months before, we saw on tv an interview
of the student whose article was used and transformed by the british
services, ......etc.....
If you didn't knew that, there's something wrong with the way you are
informed.

Conclusion: chirac does not represent the french, he was elected with
82% just to avoid a worse candidate, he only got 19% at the first
vote; Bush does not represent the americans, he would not have been
elected if the counting was not stopped too soon (but maybe you got no
information about the real results), so i think we could stop making
fun at each other by using our presidents.

Best regards.

FOURCADE Jean said:

hello,
i'm french and i don't understand "licked".

Two contradictory statements if I ever heard them.

dave, can I get a rim shot?

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 06:14:54 -0400, George M. Middius
wrote:



FOURCADE Jean said:

hello,
i'm french and i don't understand "licked".

Two contradictory statements if I ever heard them.

dave, can I get a rim shot?

Bada Bing!

George'll be here all week! Don't forget to tip your waiters and
waitresses! You've been a lovely audience!

Girth said:

About as abusrd as their refusal to admit that Hamas and Islamic Jihad are
terrorist organizations.

Jihad isn't an organization, it's a declaration of war or spiritual
struggle.

Oh no. Please retract this before duh-Mikey starts crowing at you.

"Girth" wrote in message
...
Michael "Duh!" Mckelvy wrote:

About as abusrd as their refusal to admit that Hamas and Islamic Jihad
are
terrorist organizations.

Jihad isn't an organization, it's a declaration of war or spiritual
struggle.

--
S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t

You are correct in the meaning of Jihad but McKelvy didn't say Jihad but
Islamic Jihad, which happens to be the name of one of the terrorist
organizations. Now admittedly there are a lot of Islamic terrorist
organizations so it is difficult to keep them all straight but in this case
McKelvy is correct in his characterization.

Phil

"Girth" wrote in message
...
"Phil" wrote:

About as abusrd as their refusal to admit that Hamas and Islamic
Jihad are terrorist organizations.

Jihad isn't an organization, it's a declaration of war or spiritual
struggle.

You are correct in the meaning of Jihad but McKelvy didn't say Jihad
but Islamic Jihad, which happens to be the name of one of the
terrorist organizations. Now admittedly there are a lot of Islamic
terrorist organizations so it is difficult to keep them all straight
but in this case McKelvy is correct in his characterization.

Dormer is well known for editing posts to change their meaning, and
then
replying to them.

That is a lie. I am not "well known" for the practice described above.
In fact a google search on "Dormer" and "editing posts" results in
just one match - guess who it's about :-


http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl...oogl e+Search

I haven't notice such, but it could be true. So, let's check the
original.
Going back to McKelvy original post it says, "About as abusrd as their
refusal to admit that Hamas and Islamic Jihad are terrorist
organizations."

Which is exactly what is quoted in Dormer's post. So, at least in this
case
Dormer didn't change the post by McKelvy, he just mischaracterize it. If
Dormer does mis-quote people this is not an example.

And you were right Phil, I was mistaken - Islamic Jihad *is* a group.
I thought they were known as "Palestinian Islamic Jihad" or "Islamic
Jihad Movement", but apparently these are interchangeable.


--
S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t

There are so many groups and they are known in many cases by shorten names.
Islamic Jihad could very well be either of the groups you mention as well as
"Islamic Jihad". As far as I can remember I've heard on the radio a group
called "Islamic Jihad" but again it could have been shorten from the other
names. There so many of these groups it is hard to keep them straight.

Phil

"Phil" wrote in message
news:HpO4b.324598$o%2.149944@sccrnsc02

So, at least in
this case Dormer didn't change the post by McKelvy, he just
mischaracterize it. If Dormer does mis-quote people this is not an
example.

Your point?

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Phil" wrote in message
news:HpO4b.324598$o%2.149944@sccrnsc02

So, at least in
this case Dormer didn't change the post by McKelvy, he just
mischaracterize it. If Dormer does mis-quote people this is not an
example.

Your point?

Your original statement was as followed,"Dormer is well known for editing
posts to change their meaning, and then replying to them." Since you were
responding to a post Dormer had made one would assume that your comment was
about that particular post, otherwise your comment seems to be a bit of a
non sequitur.

Phil

"FOURCADE Jean" wrote in message
...
On 21 Aug 2003 19:12:40 GMT, (Marc Phillips) wrote:

After as many as 10,000 people (or, as Arny would say, 10,000's of
people) have
died in France due to the heat, Chirac has announced that they plan to
have the
problem licked by October.

Yes, you read that right.

Boon

hello,
i'm french and i don't understand "licked".
Anyway, what Chirac was talking about was enquiries to find out what
went wrong and means to be more efficient next time.

We don't ask the government to control the weather, but the high
number of dead was the result of not being able to take care of old
people suffering from the heat. We have a good system but it's
expensive and every government tries to save money.

If you had a good system, so many wouldn't be deadand it wouldn't be so
expensive.

So small unities
in the country are closing, and there are less and less people
(doctors, nurses,..) and beds. Now we have reached the point where the
results are dramatic, even in a normal situation emergency services
are near the breaking point.
Second point: there are emergency plans using the army, the red cross,
etc... and despite the calls of some doctors nothing was made until
the real figures came out, and the real numbers were always denied by
the government (saying 1500 when 3000 was circulating, 3000 when it
was 5000, and so on....)

Now there is a big controversy which goes beyond the number of dead of
the heat, but is about the way to manage the whole health system.

Hint: Get the government less involved.

I suppose there is a also big controversy about irak in the US, it's
not the heat which is killing your soldiers.

We have private citizens sending air conditioners to the servicemen.

I've heard that americans are beginning to realize that government
information about the mass destruction weapons of saddam were forged.

You understan wrong.

I must say that we knew that months before, we saw on tv an interview
of the student whose article was used and transformed by the british
services, ......etc.....
If you didn't knew that, there's something wrong with the way you are
informed.

Conclusion: chirac does not represent the french, he was elected with
82% just to avoid a worse candidate, he only got 19% at the first
vote; Bush does not represent the americans, he would not have been
elected if the counting was not stopped too soon (but maybe you got no
information about the real results), so i think we could stop making
fun at each other by using our presidents.

Bush won every count of the votes. Get over it. Your government is an
example of why Socialism is stupid and will never be any good.
Best regards.