 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
BeBro
|
 |
of the Krauts
Mar 2000
time: 06:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Angelo Scotto
Again, he insulted Italy, not only Berlusconi, he could limit himself to attack Berlusconi such Roman and Di Pietro did but not, that idiot had to insult also Italy and probably he was very proud of it. |
How exactly he insulted Italy? Can you post a link to his speech?
quote:
If you don't know what you're talking about just shut up, you'll make a better figure... |
Maybe I´m a Nazi too, who knows? 
And I hate to break it to you, but simply posting things proves nothing. It would be nice if you´d try to argue too.
Oh, and please do not opress me by telling me to shut up - denying my right to free speech sounds Nazi-like 
quote:
I wrote it already three times, read it again a couple of times, maybe you'll catch it... |
Where exactly did you explain why Schulz is a Nazi? And how? What exactly is the Nazi-like comment he made? Or do you think what the said about your ministers (low IQ) is Nazi-like? So people cannot say others are stupid without being Nazis?
Also, how come that the majority in the EP thinks Schulz is not a Nazi? Are they all idiots or Nazis too?
quote:
And explain me, now i've to ask you if i can or not use the  ? |
You can use whatever you want. Not that it would make your "arguments" better....
quote:
Trap? politics is all about those games don't you know? What on the hell has it do to with a "conspiracy theory"? prove what? Schulz himself admitted that he provoked Berlusconi, what i've to prove? |
Remember, the EP is a democratic institution. People can use polemics in a debate, that is standard tactics in any democratic country. So is criticism. Why is this a trap? If Schulz said wrong things, Berlusconi had the chance to refute Schulz´attacks by proving they´re wrong or simply denying their truth - yet he decided to go into personal attacks. Unprofessional. And wrong, as long you cannot prove that Schulz is really a Nazi.
quote:
Again, you don't know what you're talking about, go and read the Schulz speech... |
Perhaps you can enlighten us? What exactly did he say that makes him a Nazi? Why do I find nowhere something about it, not only in German news sources, but also in English or US media. Why does noone mention that Schulz made "Nazi" comments?
Acording to this CNN story http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europ...ress/index.html , the echo to Berlusconi´s comment is almost completely negative. Why is there no outcry about Schulz, when his comments were so evil?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Thorgal
|
|
Tarifa, Cádiz.
Jan 2002
time: 05:29
|
|
Martin Schultz only referred to the Italian leader's use of an immunity law to sidestep bribery charges in an Italian court.
It is logical that a personage as suspicious as Berlusconi would be bothered for such comment.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Giovanni Wine
|
 |
Torino, Italian Wine Capital
May 2002
time: 06:29
|
|
Berlusconi is a strange guy.
He is extremely intelligent, and that's how he managed to build his economic empire (the part of said empire he built legally), but as a politician he is a zero, and he has absolutely NO diplomatic skills (this is not the first time he responds to someone in such a manner).
However he is better than many of the current Italian politicians.
The only 2 politicians in Italy I consider as "good" are: Prodi, who is already the Euro-president, and Fini, who, because of his past as a fascist, will never be able to become the Prime Minister.
Unfortunatly Berlusconi is not able to contain himself, and he responded the worst way possible. Let's hope he will do better from now on (the fact he can not do any worse help a bit in that sense though  )
Saluti
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
As you are from Italia, Giovanni.
There is one Question which really interests me:
Do you think Berlusconi and his party will win the next Elections?
After all we hear a lot of how Berlusconi abuses the Italian Government for his own goals, and so my personal opinion would be that he won´t win.
But as I don´t know, how the opinion of the People on the Streets in Italia is and you also post, that the Alternatives to Berlusconi would also be no real Candidates for the office of Prime Minister, the answer to the question still remains a mystery to me.
After all I wouldn´t even have assumed, that Berlusconi would get elected at all.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Giovanni Wine
|
|
Torino, Italian Wine Capital
May 2002
time: 06:29
|
|
Well, personally I think that Berlusconi managed to win last elections mainly because Italy was just coming out of an extremely bad government from the left, the same left that sacked Prodi (the only real good left candidate), and that managed to change 3 governments in 3 years.
The left was/is very divided, and that's the main reason they lost.
Berlusconi and his allies seemed more reliable and more united, that's the main reason they were elected IMHO.
But now the things are changing, some of Berlusconi's allies (Bossi for example) are starting to divide the coalition (just like the left did before), and the new government didn't really do much as for now.
I think that if we were to elect someone now, than probably the left would win, as long as they manage to unite between themselves, and they candidate someone serious (like Fassino).
Right now I doubt Berlusconi's party would get much votes.
What I fear the most is the possibility of Berlusconi becoming President of the Repubblic (the position Ciampi is holding right now), becase after holding such a position you become a senator for life, and therefore you have a life-immunity
But as I said, right now the pubblic opinion is strongly against Berlusconi, even many people I know that supported him last elections are now criticising him badly.
Saluti
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Angelo Scotto
|
|
Milan, Italy
Oct 1999
time: 05:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by thorgalaeg
Martin Schultz only referred to the Italian leader's use of an immunity law to sidestep bribery charges in an Italian court.
|
False, Schulz said a lot of other things, you can read it by yourself.
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
How exactly he insulted Italy? Can you post a link to his speech?
|
Well, i read it from the Europarliament site, (http://www3.europarl.eu.int/omk/omn...2i.pdf&TYPE=CRE) there's the PDF with the complete transcription of the whole session, i see that you finally found the Schulz speech, but i suggest you to read the whole thing, so you can finally compare Di Pietro and Roman intervents with Schulz one.
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
Maybe I´m a Nazi too, who knows?
|
Now, this is simply absurd, you've to make a choice, you say that Schulz was only attacking Berlusconi (this is not true, but let's say for hypothesis that you're right) and so, you say, it's a nonsense that i feel personally attacked, but then Berlusconi answered attacking Schulz, and now you act as if Berlusconi was attacking all German people.
Decide: attacking a man in a parliament means attacking only that man or also the people he represents? the answer can't be "it depends if the attacked is italian or german" as you seems to think 
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
And I hate to break it to you, but simply posting things proves nothing. It would be nice if you´d try to argue too.
|
Yes, of course a guy who started a thread with the title " Berlusconi now completely mad - should Germany invade? "
followed by the body "Seems this Berlusconi guy has forgotten who saved Italy´s leader in 1943 But this time it wouldn´t be a friendly takeover" is in the correct position to teach others how to argue 
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
Oh, and please do not opress me by telling me to shut up - denying my right to free speech sounds Nazi-like
|
I just gave you a suggestion, and since now it's clear that you hadn't read the Schulz speech when you posted your thread i was right: i simply suggested you to read the whole thing before talking about it (in fact i didn't say "Shut up!" but "if you .... blah blah", there's a difference, can you see it?)
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
Where exactly did you explain why Schulz is a Nazi? And how? What exactly is the Nazi-like comment he made? Or do you think what the said about your ministers (low IQ) is Nazi-like? So people cannot say others are stupid without being Nazis?
Also, how come that the majority in the EP thinks Schulz is not a Nazi? Are they all idiots or Nazis too?
|
Strange requests from one who said two posts ago to have understood the irony...
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
You can use whatever you want. Not that it would make your "arguments" better....
|
Thank you for your kind permission...
(BTW, again, that small icon on the top left of the thread is supposed to express my dislike about Schulz speech...
Do you really think that just adding or not an icon could make someone arguments better? Wow, interesting theory... )
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
Remember, the EP is a democratic institution. People can use polemics in a debate, that is standard tactics in any democratic country. So is criticism. Why is this a trap?
|
Where i said that it was an illegal way of conducting a debate? traps are a well known tactic in politics, you prepare a speech to provoke a political adversary trying to push him over the limit, usually the adversary is enough expert to avoid going down to the same level, but Berlusconi (like i already wrote  ) fell in it like a child.
You ask why it is a trap? Well, for example, because the speech ignored Berlusconi's talk, he talked about guidelines for Europe, he talked about middle east, he talked about ways to bring europe out of current economic stagnation, he talked about Constitutional treaty of the EU, and about a lot of other things really important for the European Union that will come, but Schulz (who probably prepared his trap several days before) simply ignored the speech and didn't say a single word about it, busy as he was bringing his attack.
Again (since it seems i've to repeat things two or three times to make you read them) i'm not saying it's illegal or something, if you don't like the term trap change it with another you like more, but the meaning remains the same.
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
If Schulz said wrong things, Berlusconi had the chance to refute Schulz´attacks by proving they´re wrong or simply denying their truth - yet he decided to go into personal attacks. Unprofessional. And wrong, as long you cannot prove that Schulz is really a Nazi.
|
Guess what? i already said i agree, in fact, like i already wrote (yeah, let's write another time )
quote:
...anyway this doesn't mean that Berlusconi was allowed to go down at the same level of that guy. |
Because, like i already said, in EP words weights more than concepts, Berlusconi used words unallowed in European Parliament, while Schulz expressed the concept that Italy is worse than a neo-nazi government (comparing it with Haider and asking himself if Italy is still a member of european union)
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
Besides, the tone was really insulting only when referring to Bossi (he was the one whose IQ was made fun of).
|
And then how is that he used the term ministries instead of Bossi?
i don't know, why he didn't say:
"You are not responsible for the IQ of Bossi, but for what he say" (BeBro translation)
I definitely support a similar statement (Bossi is an idiot, but fortunately he's just ministry of reforms and not ministry of immigration as wrongly said Schulz, this means that he has the same power of an hypothetical ministry of good weather...) but he used another statement... one may wonder why...
quote:
That is not an attack against Italians or Italian minister in general. That is not racist or Nazi-like at all.
[...]
Lastly, I see nowhere any hint of an insult towards the Italians.
|
BeBro, translate it all if you dare, especially the parts in which Schulz ridiculize italian delegation and italian historical people comparing Berlusconi, Fini, Frattini to Del Piero or Garibaldi and Cavour to Maldini, yes, it showed extreme respect for italians...
Or what about that part in which he said that italian government was worse than Haider
Or the point in which he ask himself if Italy is a member of the union since it doesn't comply with European Union's Charter of Fundamental Rights (which Italy wrote exactly as Germany, a thing that probably Schulz doesn't know).
Quote it fully, and translate it correctly, compare it with others speechs using the link i
gave you and if you still can't see the contempt about Italy (not just Berlusconi, i don't mind) then it's your problem, not mine.
quote:
Originally posted by Giovanni Wine
What I fear the most is the possibility of Berlusconi becoming President of the Repubblic (the position Ciampi is holding right now), becase after holding such a position you become a senator for life, and therefore you have a life-immunity
|
I completely agree with your analysis Giovanni, just a correction about immunity, the point is that in Italy there's NO immunity for members of parliament, it was removed during "Mani Pulite" in '93 and was never re-enacted, so even if Berlusconi became senator for life he don't get life-immunity (see Andreotti), the current immunity law ("lodo Maccanico") re-enacted it only for president of Republic, prime minister and presidents of chambers. (and another correction, immunity for parliament members (which Italy currently doesn't have) doesn't mean that, since you're a senator for life, justice can't touch you, it just mean that judges must be authorized by a parliament vote to act, so, even if Berlusconi became senator for life, eventually he'll lost the elections and judges will be able to obtain the ok from the parliament, and BTW, a thing that obviously Schulz didn't know is that this is the same immunity law acting for each member of EU...)
You know what makes me angry? the fact that with this story of Berlusconi people out there thinks that Italy is a strange kind of Orwellian country with Berlusconi as the Big Brother and our democratic institutions there just as an empty signs of the past, this, for everyone who live in Italy, is obviously a fake, but out there there's someone that believes it!
Our Republic survived "first republic", survived Red Brigate, survived mafia, survived "Mani Pulite"'s shock and even survived Scalfaro ().
I think that it can survive Berlusconi too...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sloth
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Proteus_MST
Do you think Berlusconi and his party will win the next Elections?
|
If the center/left manages to stay unite not a chance in the world. A big if, though.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Angelo Scotto
|
|
Milan, Italy
Oct 1999
time: 05:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro
Since you claim Schulz speech is Anti-Italian in general, and he´s a racist etc. it is your task to provide evidence for your claims.
|
BeBro, i did; i pointed you to the EU discussion (not just the Schulz speech), i told you which passages of it i found insulting and why (and you strangely didn't translate them to show me that i was wrong); i explained you that, even in the hypothesis that you were right, it's illogic, at least IMO, to say that if a german member of EU attacks an italian one he's just attacking the man, while if the italian attacks the german, he's insulting the whole country.
But you still seem to miss the point, and i really don't know what else to do: like i already wrote, if you still can't see the point, it's a problem of yours, not mine...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:29
|
|
The German attacked Berlusconi first, indeed. He mocked Bossi's IQ, asked Berlusconi about his agenda for a Europewide civil justice, and 'thanked' former EP president Nicole Fontaine for having helped Berlusconi with to keep his impunity in the past.
Only the insults towards Finni were directly insulting. The Jabs towards Berlusconi implied he was a crook, but the words used weren't insulting.
The only "insult" you can see about Italy is when Schulz says the Italian justice system needs reform to fit a hoped European standard.
For future reference, here is the full text of Schulz's intervention:
quote:
Schulz (PSE) . – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Ich wende mich zunächst an den Kollegen Poettering. Der Kollege Poettering hat in geradezu euphorischer Form die Kompetenz auf der Ratsbank, die aus Italien hier angereist ist, gelobt: Berlusconi, Fini, Frattini, Buttiglione, ich hatte Angst, er kommt noch mit Maldini und Del Piero und Garibaldi und Cavour, aber einen hat er vergessen, nämlich den Herrn Bossi. Das ist auch ein Mitglied dieser Regierung, und die kleinste Äußerung, die dieser Mann macht, ist schlimmer als alles, worüber dieses Parlament gegen Österreich und die Mitgliedschaft der FPÖ in der österreichischen Regierung Beschlüsse gefasst hat. Über den müssen wir dann ja auch einmal reden.
(Beifall)
Sie sind nicht verantwortlich, Herr Ratspräsident, für den Intelligenzquotienten Ihrer Minister, aber verantwortlich für das, was die sagen, sind Sie schon. Die Äußerungen von Bossi, Ihrem Minister für die Einwanderungspolitik, die Sie in Ihrer Rede erwähnt haben, sind in keinster Weise vereinbar mit der Grundrechte-Charta der Europäischen Union. Sie sind als Ratspräsident aufgefordert, diese Werte zu verteidigen. Dann verteidigen Sie diese Werte gegen Ihren eigenen Minister!
Ich will ein Wort aufgreifen, das der Kollege Di Pietro hier erwähnt hat. Der Virus des Interessenkonflikts, hat er gesagt, dürfe nicht auf die europäische Ebene gehoben werden. Ja, da hat er Recht, und jetzt ist man hier in diesem Haus seit Tagen immer in der schwierigen Situation, wenn man über die italienische Ratspräsidentschaft redet, dann heißt es immer: Ja, nun seid vorsichtig, dass ihr den Berlusconi nicht kritisiert wegen dem, was er in Italien tut, denn das hat ja hier im Europäischen Parlament nichts verloren. Wieso? Ist Italien nicht Mitglied der Europäischen Union?
(Beifall)
Natürlich hat das hier etwas verloren, und ich sage Ihnen warum: Was Sie als Premierminister Italiens machen, dafür sind die Kolleginnen und Kollegen des italienischen Parlaments gewählt, um mit Ihnen darüber zu diskutieren, aber was Sie als Präsident des Rates tun, dafür sind wir hier zuständig. Da sage ich Ihnen: Sie haben über den Raum der Sicherheit, der Freiheit und des Rechts geredet, über den Tampere-Prozess. Da haben Sie einen Begriff verwendet: EUROPOL, aber drei Begriffe haben Sie nicht verwendet, und daran will ich Sie erinnern und Sie fragen, ob Sie bitte zu diesen drei Dingen etwas sagen können. Was gedenken Sie zu tun zur Beschleunigung der Einrichtung einer Europäischen Staatsanwaltschaft?
(Beifall)
Was gedenken Sie zu tun zur Beschleunigung des Inkrafttretens des europäischen Haftbefehls? Was gedenken Sie zu tun bei der gegenseitigen Anerkennung von Dokumenten in grenzüberschreitenden Strafverfahren? Da hätten Sie übrigens in Ihrem eigenen Land ein bisschen Reformbedarf, was die Dokumentenechtheit angeht. Wenn Sie im eigenen Land eine Reform durchführen, könnte nämlich der europäische Haftbefehl viel schneller in Kraft treten.
Ich freue mich trotzdem, dass Sie heute hier sitzen und ich mit Ihnen diskutieren kann. Das verdanken wir nicht zuletzt Nicole Fontaine, denn wenn Nicole Fontaine es nicht so gut geschafft hätte, die Immunitätsverfahren Berlusconi und Dell'Utri, ihres Assistenten, der heute ausnahmsweise einmal anwesend ist, so lange zu verzögern, dann hätten Sie die Immunität, die Sie brauchen, nicht mehr besessen. Auch das ist eine Wahrheit, die an diesem Tag hier gesagt werden darf! |
Now, if you can tell me where he insulted Italy, I'm curious.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
I have made a little translation of the Text Spiffor posted so those who have no knowledge of the german language aren´t forced to use Babelfish
quote:
Schulz (PSE) . Mister President, Ladies and Gentlemen! First I want to adress the colleague Poettering. Colleague Poettering praised the authority in the Court, which traveled here from Italy, in almost euphoric form:
Berlusconi, Fini, Frattini, Buttiglione, I feared, he would even mention Maldini and Del Piero and Garibaldi and Cavour, but there is someone he forgot, and this one is Mr. Bossi.
This one is also a member of this government, and the smallest remark, which this man makes, is worse than everything, about which this parliament issued resolutions against Austria and the membership of the FPÖ in the Austrian government. So we also have to talk about this Person (i.e. Bossi)
(Applause)
You, Mr. President aren´t responsible for the IQ of your ministers, but you are responsible for the things they say. The remarks of Bossi, your Minister for the immigration policy, which you mentioned in your speech, are in no way compatible with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European union. You, as President of the Court are urged to defend these values. Therefore defend them, also against your own ministers.
I want to take up a word, which the colleague Di Pietro mentioned here. The virus of the clash of interest, he said, should not be lifted to the European level. Yes, there he is right, and now here in this house you have for days always been in the difficult situation, if one talks about the Italian council presidency, he will always be urged:
Be careful not to critizise Berlusconi because of what he does in Italy, because that is nothing which should be adressed in the European parliament. Why? Isn't Italy a member of the European union?
(Applause)
Of course it should be adressed here and I want to tell you why:
Your Colleagues of the italian Parliament are elected to discuss with you, what you do as Primeminiester of Italia, but we are the ones responsible to discuss with you the things you do as President of the European Court.
There is one thing I´ll tell you:
You talked about room for Security, for Freedom and Justice, about the Tampere-Process. There you used a term: EURO POL, but there were three terms you didn´t use and I want to remind you of them and ask you whether you can please say something about these three terms.
What do you intend to do for the acceleration of the mechanism of a European public prosecutor's office?
(Applause)
What do you intend to do for the acceleration of the realization of the European warrant of arrest?
What do you intend to do with the mutual acknowledgment of documents in transnational criminal procedures?
There you would have, by the way, a little need for reforms in your own country, concerning the authencity of documents.
As, if you accomplish a reform in your own country, the European warrant of arrest could enter into force much faster.
But nevertheless I am pleased that you sit here today and that I am able to discuss with you.
This we owe not least to Nicole Fontaine, because if Nicole Fontaine had not been so successful in delaying the immunity procedures of Berlusconi and Dell'Utri, her assistant, who is as an exception present today, then you would no longer possess the Immunity you need. Also this is a truth which is allowed to be said today.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BeBro
|
|
of the Krauts
Mar 2000
time: 06:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Angelo Scotto
BeBro, i did; i pointed you to the EU discussion (not just the Schulz speech), i told you which passages of it i found insulting and why (and you strangely didn't translate them to show me that i was wrong); i explained you that, even in the hypothesis that you were right, it's illogic, at least IMO, to say that if a german member of EU attacks an italian one he's just attacking the man, while if the italian attacks the german, he's insulting the whole country.
But you still seem to miss the point, and i really don't know what else to do: like i already wrote, if you still can't see the point, it's a problem of yours, not mine... |
Yeah, you explained a lot, and you repeated a lot, but that doesn´t make it true.
The reason why I do not translate passages with insults from Schulz against Italy is quite simple - those passages do not exist. Let´s have a look on your initial claims in this thread....
You said in your first post here:
quote:
he simply insulted italians saying they've a low QI |
Truth is, Schulz didn´t said this. What he said was what I translated earlier as "You (Berlusconi) are not responsible for the IQs of your ministers (reffering to Bossi, who was attacked earlier, see below), but for what they say"
You said later:
quote:
Or what about that part in which he said that italian government was worse than Haider |
Truth is, he didn´t said this about your government. He said it about Bossi. And he didn´t mention Haider at all, he just compared Bossi´s views about immigration policy with those of Haiders party, the Austrian FPÖ, and said Bossi´s are worse.
You claimed further:
quote:
Again, he insulted Italy, not only Berlusconi, he could limit himself to attack Berlusconi such Roman and Di Pietro did but not, that idiot had to insult also Italy and probably he was very proud of it. |
Truth is, he didn´t insult Italy at all. He has criticized some Italian policies regarding Eu law, but it was by no means insulting as you paint it here, and as a member of the European Parlament he has every right to criticise such things. When Germany has problems keeping up with EU rules, it has to accept criticism as well, eg. about his financial problems. Mutual criticism is absolutely normal within a parlament, that´s what the EP is for.
Finally you said:
quote:
The point is exactly that, Berlusconi had to explain (no apologize) Schroeder that his answer was directed to that racist idiot called Schulz |
Spiffor has posted the speech of Schulz, there is simply no point which can count as insult towards Italy as a country. Nowhere in his speech is a point that can count as racist comment.
And Schulz´ speech is the only speech that matters in this context, the rest of the discussion is irrelevant for Berlusconis comments about Schulz.
Edit: and now Proteus has translated it....X-post
Last edited by BeBro on 08-07-2003 at 04:06
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Giovanni Wine
|
|
Torino, Italian Wine Capital
May 2002
time: 06:29
|
|
quote:
I have made a little translation of the Text Spiffor posted so those who have no knowledge of the german language aren´t forced to use Babelfish
quote:
Schulz (PSE) . Mister President, Ladies and Gentlemen! First I want to adress the colleague Poettering. Colleague Poettering praised the authority in the Court, which traveled here from Italy, in almost euphoric form:
Berlusconi, Fini, Frattini, Buttiglione, I feared, he would even mention Maldini and Del Piero and Garibaldi and Cavour, but there is someone he forgot, and this one is Mr. Bossi.
This one is also a member of this government, and the smallest remark, which this man makes, is worse than everything, about which this parliament issued resolutions against Austria and the membership of the FPÖ in the Austrian government. So we also have to talk about this Person (i.e. Bossi)
(Applause)
You, Mr. President aren´t responsible for the IQ of your ministers, but you are responsible for the things they say. The remarks of Bossi, your Minister for the immigration policy, which you mentioned in your speech, are in no way compatible with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European union. You, as President of the Court are urged to defend these values. Therefore defend them, also against your own ministers.
I want to take up a word, which the colleague Di Pietro mentioned here. The virus of the clash of interest, he said, should not be lifted to the European level. Yes, there he is right, and now here in this house you have for days always been in the difficult situation, if one talks about the Italian council presidency, he will always be urged:
Be careful not to critizise Berlusconi because of what he does in Italy, because that is nothing which should be adressed in the European parliament. Why? Isn't Italy a member of the European union?
(Applause)
Of course it should be adressed here and I want to tell you why:
Your Colleagues of the italian Parliament are elected to discuss with you, what you do as Primeminiester of Italia, but we are the ones responsible to discuss with you the things you do as President of the European Court.
There is one thing I´ll tell you:
You talked about room for Security, for Freedom and Justice, about the Tampere-Process. There you used a term: EURO POL, but there were three terms you didn´t use and I want to remind you of them and ask you whether you can please say something about these three terms.
What do you intend to do for the acceleration of the mechanism of a European public prosecutor's office?
(Applause)
What do you intend to do for the acceleration of the realization of the European warrant of arrest?
What do you intend to do with the mutual acknowledgment of documents in transnational criminal procedures?
There you would have, by the way, a little need for reforms in your own country, concerning the authencity of documents.
As, if you accomplish a reform in your own country, the European warrant of arrest could enter into force much faster.
But nevertheless I am pleased that you sit here today and that I am able to discuss with you.
This we owe not least to Nicole Fontaine, because if Nicole Fontaine had not been so successful in delaying the immunity procedures of Berlusconi and Dell'Utri, her assistant, who is as an exception present today, then you would no longer possess the Immunity you need. Also this is a truth which is allowed to be said today. |
|
Thanks Proteus... finally i can read this famous speech...
As far as I can tell, I must say I agree with BeBro here, I don't see any insult against Italy here... well he said Bossi... can we count that as an insult?
AFAIK he justs did a little mistake in the beginning, because luckly Bossi is not our minister of immigration policies... but only our minister of the reforms (which basically is nothing).
On the rest i must say Schulz did some clever comments and raised some interesting questions, maybe Berlusconi should have tried to answer them rather than insulting Schulz back.
Saluti
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Angelo Scotto
|
|
Milan, Italy
Oct 1999
time: 05:29
|
|
Proteus:
Yes, i see that your translation is really different from the literal one i did.
For example, interestingly you translated "kommt" with "mentioned", its literal meaning should be instead "come", and so the literal meaning of Schulz words is:
quote:
... the authority in the Court, which traveled here from Italy ... :
Berlusconi, Fini, Frattini, Buttiglione, I feared, he would even come here with Maldini and Del Piero, Garibaldi and Cavour.
|
As you can see, the literal meaning of Schulz phrase it's more like depicting the italian delegation as a sort of circus moving to the EU.
You said that kommt was to interpret as "mentioned" and, since you're a native German speaker, i believe to you, but you also can see that the choice of words was at least questionable and if taken literally, showed a full load of racism (you really don't have a word for "mentioned" which primary meaning is not come?)
quote:
Originally posted by Giovanni Wine
As far as I can tell, I must say I agree with BeBro here, I don't see any insult against Italy here... well he said Bossi... can we count that as an insult?
|
no, obviously not. 
But the point is that he didn't say Bossi:
quote:
You, Mr. President aren´t responsible for the IQ of your ministers
[...]
Therefore defend them, also against your own ministers.
|
The point is, again, literal: if "Minister" in Germany is translated with "Bossi" i see no offence...
quote:
Originally posted by Giovanni Wine
he justs did a little mistake in the beginning, because luckly Bossi is not our minister of immigration policies... but only our minister of the reforms (which basically is nothing).
|
It's not a little mistake for me: we all know the idiotic phrase of Bossi about immigration, and we all know the hard polemic between our real "immigration minister" (Pisanu) and Bossi about that phrase.
Now this guy go to the EU and says that Bossi (the one who made that statement about immigration) IS our immigration minister! Obviously this paints an Italy far far far worse than Haider (As Schulz said after) but this is also untrue because our real "immigration minister" strongly disagreed with Bossi who, as you noticed, counts nearly zero in the government.
One can just hope that his error was accidental...
quote:
Originally posted by Giovanni Wine
On the rest i must say Schulz did some clever comments and raised some interesting questions, maybe Berlusconi should have tried to answer them rather than insulting Schulz back
|
I already agreed on this point, Berlusconi made a mistake with his answer, i just said that Schulz was not at all that "poor innocent" guy incredibly attacked by Berlusconi, and that he deserved the answer.
In fact, even if Proteus interpretation is right (and actually i think it is), and this means that Schulz is not insulting as in the literal translation, you still have to explain me why, when an italian attacks a German MEP he is attacking the whole country and when a German attacks the italian prime minister and a minister of our republic (even if he's Bossi ) he's just attacking two men...
Anyway, for me the discussion was already over and now it's definitely over, for two reasons:
Because Proteus is a native German speaker and so his interpretation of the Schulz speech is obviously the correct one and because, at least here in Italy, this argument is really old and we prefer to talk about more important things such as, for example, the hot weather...
BeBro, if in German you really can't move over it i don't know what else to say,  , you may follow your advice and invade us or maybe you can follow the example of Schroeder and don't come in Italy for your holidays... (now that's scary ... ... )
BTW check the news, it seems that Nicole Fontaine too joined my "little crusade"...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BeBro
|
|
of the Krauts
Mar 2000
time: 06:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Angelo Scotto
BeBro, if in German you really can't move over it i don't know what else to say, , you may follow your advice and invade us or maybe you can follow the example of Schroeder and don't come in Italy for your holidays... (now that's scary ...... )
BTW check the news, it seems that Nicole Fontaine too joined my "little crusade"... |
I would have been long over it if you had told the truth about Schulz´ speech. If you are not a native German speaker then misunderstandings are of course not your fault, but then you perhaps should have followed the suggestion you gave to me earlier in this thread.
quote:
As you can see, the literal meaning of Schulz phrase it's more like depicting the italian delegation as a sort of circus moving to the EU. |
That is just wrong. Since you agreed to Proteus translation I don´t understand why you still are holding this - there is no literal meaning like you describe it behind that statement. And the passage "er kommt" is related to Poettering´s comments (so not at all towards Italy or the Italians in the EP, or Berlusconi, his delegation, or others from his government), who spoke about Berlusconi earlier, so your construction is completely illogical.
If you think you can now manipulate Schulz´ speech afterwards so that it fits to your claims (which were already proven wrong) then you are just a liar.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Angelo Scotto
Proteus:
Yes, i see that your translation is really different from the literal one i did.
For example, interestingly you translated "kommt" with "mentioned", its literal meaning should be instead "come", and so the literal meaning of Schulz words is:
As you can see, the literal meaning of Schulz phrase it's more like depicting the italian delegation as a sort of circus moving to the EU.
You said that kommt was to interpret as "mentioned" and, since you're a native German speaker, i believe to you, but you also can see that the choice of words was at least questionable and if taken literally, showed a full load of racism (you really don't have a word for "mentioned" which primary meaning is not come?)
|
Yes, there is always a danger of misinterpreting foreign Texts, if you try a literal translation or use Babelfish.
(I often translate Douments from German to English and back to german using Babelfish, just for fun. It ist always astonishing what you get. One time I tried it with a paper for neurobiological Experiments. In the Original, the Experimentator blindfolded Tests Persons so that one eye was covered and only the other eye could be used to see. After translating and retranslating via Babelfish it said, that the Experimentator removed one Eye from the Probationers ).
Of course I think the Translators within the European Parliament aree much better than this and so I doubt anyone within the Parliament got a Trnslation, which could be misinterpreted.
As for Schulz using "kommen" instead of other terms, such as "erwähnen":
The Phrase "wäre er mit dem und dem gekommen" is widely used within german speakers, and in the context of the whole sentence no native german speaker would misinterpret it with the meaning you thought it would have, after your literal translation. So no, I don´t think there is anything questionable with the choice of words and I really doubt that Schulz might have used these words just to get a double meaning into this sentence.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29.
Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-07-2003 01:25
Attachment: 
|
![0,1020,274893,00[1].jpg](/forums/attachment/49149/0,1020,274893,00_1_.jpg){kind=link}