And from which great country is Gringo?!
forum franco-hispanique / foro hispano-frances
It is not for my fun, just because i don't want to tell you where i am from, are you a com or something like that?
If you don't want me to know where you're from then you shouldnt have asked me to guess in the first place.
Gringo macabre, your list demonstrates your bias against the United States, but it doesn't refute what I said, "All it takes is a glance around the world to know that the United States values freedom far more than its enemies" -- more than the Taliban's Afghanistan, Saddam's Iraq, and North Korea. Or -- to continue with some of the conflicts that you brought up -- more than Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam and Pol Pot in Cambodia, and more than Che Guevara, lackey of the longest ruling dictator in the world, Fidel Castro (after nearly half a century still afraid to let his people be free).
Also, though the word 'gringo' is usually not offensive when used in a friendly way, it's obvious that you're using it in a hostile way. I suspect that you're not from the United States but using that name to be offensive. 'Gringo' doesn't have to mean somebody from the United States, of course (it's from the word 'griego' ['Greek'], and it has been used for people of several nationalities), but most people will assume that you mean someone from the United States. The mistakes in your writing show that English isn't your native language (unless you're very badly educated).
From the little that you've written, I can't tell for sure where you're from. You could be from a country that's "tan lejos de Dios, y tan cerca de los Estados Unidos" ["so far from God, and so near the United States"]. That line is often attributed to Porfirio Díaz, llorón [crybaby] and dictator of Mexico, himself one of the causes of his country's problems. Or you could be from another Spanish-speaking country or even a non-Spanish-speaking country. I don't care.
To return to the part of this thread that has a slight connection with language, a couple of us objected to the claim that "English is the language of domination! 1 language = 1 way of thinking = latin civilizations deleted." I'm not interested in how much you hate the United States. When you come up with something that demonstrates that English is equivalent to "1 way of thinking", let me know.
Also, though the word 'gringo' is usually not offensive when used in a friendly way, it's obvious that you're using it in a hostile way. I suspect that you're not from the United States but using that name to be offensive. 'Gringo' doesn't have to mean somebody from the United States, of course (it's from the word 'griego' ['Greek'], and it has been used for people of several nationalities), but most people will assume that you mean someone from the United States. The mistakes in your writing show that English isn't your native language (unless you're very badly educated).
From the little that you've written, I can't tell for sure where you're from. You could be from a country that's "tan lejos de Dios, y tan cerca de los Estados Unidos" ["so far from God, and so near the United States"]. That line is often attributed to Porfirio Díaz, llorón [crybaby] and dictator of Mexico, himself one of the causes of his country's problems. Or you could be from another Spanish-speaking country or even a non-Spanish-speaking country. I don't care.
To return to the part of this thread that has a slight connection with language, a couple of us objected to the claim that "English is the language of domination! 1 language = 1 way of thinking = latin civilizations deleted." I'm not interested in how much you hate the United States. When you come up with something that demonstrates that English is equivalent to "1 way of thinking", let me know.
Gjones2,
Well if you think i am a bad educated person when i speak about the fact some of your presidents were killed, which shows what kind of people are those who represents your governments, the 1st election of Bush which has been a real jike, the rights of black people in USA there is not so many time, the fact the politicians need to use the bible to send to death some young people, the fact some of your politicians used the uclear bomb in Japan and do not want the others to get nuclear stuff (your government is not the only one, France by example think the same), tge fact some of the US states still use the DEATH PENALTY, the fact there is not right to be syndicated in USA, the fact some 1/3 population is fat bacause there is not any serious sanitary information to tell to people hao to eat correctly.......................
I forgot the fact averyone can get a weapon, what a great freedom!
I does not mean i hate the americans, i just don't like the american government, and i can't believe you believe in what you say.
Yes sure, i must be bad educated and you must be brainwashed.
Another thing, i used Gringo just because i liked it, there is not any provocation or any symbolic signification.
Well if you think i am a bad educated person when i speak about the fact some of your presidents were killed, which shows what kind of people are those who represents your governments, the 1st election of Bush which has been a real jike, the rights of black people in USA there is not so many time, the fact the politicians need to use the bible to send to death some young people, the fact some of your politicians used the uclear bomb in Japan and do not want the others to get nuclear stuff (your government is not the only one, France by example think the same), tge fact some of the US states still use the DEATH PENALTY, the fact there is not right to be syndicated in USA, the fact some 1/3 population is fat bacause there is not any serious sanitary information to tell to people hao to eat correctly.......................
I forgot the fact averyone can get a weapon, what a great freedom!
I does not mean i hate the americans, i just don't like the american government, and i can't believe you believe in what you say.
Yes sure, i must be bad educated and you must be brainwashed.
Another thing, i used Gringo just because i liked it, there is not any provocation or any symbolic signification.
From the little that you've written, I can't tell for sure where you're from. You could be from a country that's "tan lejos de Dios, y tan cerca de los Estados Unidos" ["so far from God, and so near the United States"]. That line is often attributed to Porfirio Díaz, llorón [crybaby] and dictator of Mexico>>>>
Hey hey<Gjones> don't say accusations without any prove.
If I'm going to attack the USA or say crap about it you can be sure I'm going to sign the post with my name. As a mexican I dont like to attack for the back.
Hey hey<Gjones> don't say accusations without any prove.
If I'm going to attack the USA or say crap about it you can be sure I'm going to sign the post with my name. As a mexican I dont like to attack for the back.
Sigma,
It must be the american way of democracy, to acuse someone without any prove.
It must be the american way of democracy, to acuse someone without any prove.
Yes Gjones we can be whatever you want, lazy people, crap people, ignorants, poor, "the scum of the human race" if you want etc, etc, but at least we have something called "Honor" which I doubt you Anglo- Saxons have.
As must as Gjones is horribly rightist and nationalist, what does any of these historical events at all have to do with the general population of the US, not to say the general population of the "English-speaking world" (the term "Anglo-Saxons" here is completely inappropriate for what you mean), have to do with any of this as a whole, Aldebaran?
>As must as Gjones is horribly rightist and nationalist.... [Travis]
Gjones is not horribly rightist and nationalist, though he may appear to be so to those who have been steeped in anti-American propaganda. I've absorbed much of my philosophical perspective from non-American and non-rightist sources. I have no sympathy, though, for those who attack my country, exaggerating its misdeeds and ignoring the good that it has done.
Gjones is not horribly rightist and nationalist, though he may appear to be so to those who have been steeped in anti-American propaganda. I've absorbed much of my philosophical perspective from non-American and non-rightist sources. I have no sympathy, though, for those who attack my country, exaggerating its misdeeds and ignoring the good that it has done.
> As a mexican I dont like to attack for the back. [Sigma]
>It must be the american way of democracy, to acuse someone without any prove. [Frenchi]
Frenchi, I didn't accuse Sigma. It's you and Sigma who are accusing me without proof. Since when is Sigma the only Mexican on the net? And I didn't even say that the poster had to be from Mexico. I said, "From the little that you've written, I can't tell for sure where you're from." After considering the possibility that the writer was from Mexico, I added, "Or you could be from another Spanish-speaking country or even a non-Spanish-speaking country. I don't care." What part of those sentences are you unable to comprehend?
>It must be the american way of democracy, to acuse someone without any prove. [Frenchi]
Frenchi, I didn't accuse Sigma. It's you and Sigma who are accusing me without proof. Since when is Sigma the only Mexican on the net? And I didn't even say that the poster had to be from Mexico. I said, "From the little that you've written, I can't tell for sure where you're from." After considering the possibility that the writer was from Mexico, I added, "Or you could be from another Spanish-speaking country or even a non-Spanish-speaking country. I don't care." What part of those sentences are you unable to comprehend?
>some of your presidents were killed, which shows what kind of people are those who represents your governments. [Griper]
As I said before, these tiresome complaints don't prove the earlier claims that either the English language or the "Anglosaxon" culture forces people to think in one way. I have some time to waste, though, so I'll discuss some of them. In more than two hundred years of government Lincoln was killed by John Wilkes Booth, a pro-slavery secessionist. Garfield was killed by Charles Guiteau, a loony who was disappointed that he wasn't given an ambassadorship. McKinley was killed by Leon Czolgosz, an anarchist immigrant and disciple of Emma Goldman (who, though she didn't endorse the assassination, spoke sympathetically about it). Kennedy was killed by Lee Harvey Oswald, a Communist and defector to the Soviet Union.
What's notable is not these assassinations, though. It takes only a single person to commit an assassination (especially in the days when there was little protection given to the presidents). What's notable is that for its entire history the United States allowed the opposition to campaign freely, and had orderly successions from one administration to that of its political opponents. Do you know of any "Latin" countries where that has taken place for over two hundred years?
As I said before, these tiresome complaints don't prove the earlier claims that either the English language or the "Anglosaxon" culture forces people to think in one way. I have some time to waste, though, so I'll discuss some of them. In more than two hundred years of government Lincoln was killed by John Wilkes Booth, a pro-slavery secessionist. Garfield was killed by Charles Guiteau, a loony who was disappointed that he wasn't given an ambassadorship. McKinley was killed by Leon Czolgosz, an anarchist immigrant and disciple of Emma Goldman (who, though she didn't endorse the assassination, spoke sympathetically about it). Kennedy was killed by Lee Harvey Oswald, a Communist and defector to the Soviet Union.
What's notable is not these assassinations, though. It takes only a single person to commit an assassination (especially in the days when there was little protection given to the presidents). What's notable is that for its entire history the United States allowed the opposition to campaign freely, and had orderly successions from one administration to that of its political opponents. Do you know of any "Latin" countries where that has taken place for over two hundred years?
>the 1st election of Bush which has been a real jike. [Griper]
Fortunately elections are not usually that close. Very close elections are likely to lead to problems and to accusations of fraud by the losers. The disputes were settled in a Constitutional way, though. Also there was a second opportunity to reject him, and that time he was elected by a larger margin, a majority of both the popular and electoral votes (by 'electoral votes' I mean votes in the electoral college which is apportioned based on a combination of popular votes and representation for the individual states).
Fortunately elections are not usually that close. Very close elections are likely to lead to problems and to accusations of fraud by the losers. The disputes were settled in a Constitutional way, though. Also there was a second opportunity to reject him, and that time he was elected by a larger margin, a majority of both the popular and electoral votes (by 'electoral votes' I mean votes in the electoral college which is apportioned based on a combination of popular votes and representation for the individual states).