U.S. Lobbied EU Over Microsoft Fine
ukhackster writes "European commissioner Neelie Kroes has claimed that she was lobbied by the US government over the Microsoft antitrust case. ZDNet UK is reporting that Kroes 'did not appreciate' being asked to be 'nicer' to Microsoft. Given that Microsoft was fined 280m euros, perhaps this tactic backfired." From the article: "The commissioner criticised the approach. 'This is of course an intervention which is not possible,' Kroes told Dutch newspaper Financieele Dagblad this week. When asked if she was annoyed by the Embassy's approach, she said 'In my work, I cannot have a preference. I have, however, a personal opinion, but that is for Saturday night.'"
I don't understand what the issue is -- if Siemens or Airbus or Glaxo gets into some regulatory issue in the US, you think their countries' embassies don't try to pull a few strings?
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
We had the founding fathers, then maybe 50 or 100 years to bask in their glow
It says a lot about your understanding of US history that you think it was like that.
We haven't had people who think that way in the last 150 or so years here. We had the founding fathers. . .
.tea merchant. This just might have had some influence on his political point of view.
John Hancock was America's largest . .
KFG
It has a lot to do with how much said company contributes each year to taxes.
Usually it has more to do with how much the company contributes to election campaigns, not taxes.
Those taxes fund government programs such as welfare, foodstamps, education, defense, etc.
So what? If a billionaire pays a million dollars in taxes each year should we ask the EU not to convict them for armed robbery when we convicted them of the same offense two years ago?
Sure, it may not be what you want but the govt is actually looking out for its bottom line, not the company it's lobbying for.
Nope. They are looking out for their slush funds and bribes. Both the companies who asked the EU look into this issue and who are the victims whose money is being unlawfully redirected are American companies whose taxes also fund the US government. How does MS paying taxes on their portable document and antivirus tools businesses benefit the US any more than Adobe and Symantec doing the same?
Rubbish. Not even the Golden Horde or the Nazis were simply murderous. They'd wipe out armies, and occasionally cities that resisted, but otherwise just wanted to enslave their opponents. More successful empire builders like the Romans made efforts to assimilate their former enemies.
Has it been that long since world war II? Certainly it's been a while. But Europe has a much longer lineage of threating the world than the US does...
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
Although you dont outright claim it - it is obvious - you are claiming Europe enjoys peace because the US is doing "all" the dirty work?! Americans so often fall back on that old joke about you "saving" Europe during WWII. You Yanks only showed up AFTER the British had done the hard work anyway. And today I rightly claim that Europe does more than its fair share of peace keeping missions in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. You probably wouldnt know where anyway so I will refrain from listing them. We dont invade nations without UN approval, sure makes for better relations afterwards. Now, for the REAL reason Europe has enjoyed peace and growth is because we sought to end the in-fighting in the family by creating the European Union. And, yes, this time peace is permanent for European Union citizens.
Creating "peace" and democracy in Iraq sure has been effective, I must say. The draft, coming soon to a city near you!
Ok, maybe we should. But next time you have a terrorist attack, don't think it was because the terrorists hate your freedom or because their religion tells them to do it. It will be because of that very same asshole attitude of yours.
"As an American, I just hope that the next empire is as kind to the US as the US has been toward the last empire."
Ah...for a moment there, I thought you were going to end with "towards Iraq".
"I'd love to live in Europe right now and enjoy empire living standards without having to do any of the dirty work."
Dirty hands, you mean. Yes, obviously, it's thanks to the imperialistic tendencies and unilateral arrogant attitudes on worldlevel, that Europe enjoys good living standards. If you hadn't supported rebels - though now described as terrorists - and dicators alike, where would we be?
Didn't the US do some good as well? Certainly, just like any other country. Alas, also just like all empires before it, it also behaves like it owns the world. the problem with that is:
a)They aren't very good at it (at least the Romans made an effort to bring culture and civilisation, aside from destruction, AND they were also politically adept, AND they endured for a thousand years)
b)The time of empires has passed, and it seems the US didn't get the memo. This imperialistic, military and arrogant behaviour belongs to another era, and the USA is like a dinosaur acting like it still can control the world the way a budding empire did hundreds of years ago. And not only that, it thinks it has the god-given right to do so, moral superiour as they think they are, or 'a shining example for all'. You know: freedom, democracy, all that - well, unless a country goes against USA interests, of course.
Anti-americanism exists all right, even in europe. But what you fail to realise is, that it's been born and it has grown as a result from your own hypocritic actions. It might be funny in a south-park episode, but it isn't in real life, if USA citizens are unaware of the reason why people dislike the USA so much. And for fucks' sake, it isn't because we're "jealous of your freedom" or because america is the pinacle that the West has to offer, or any such self-deluging flattery that you people invent to try to keep your own narcistic illusion in place.
The downside is, most of the populace are viewing the matter in generalised terms, and in black and white. And anti-americanism gets a too broad a stroke to my taste. I'm anti-american myself, though I only interpret that in a limited way: I do not dislike the USA population as a whole (as is becomming more and more the current mentality), because, as individuals, I know you have some swell persons living there. (The late) Carl Sagan comes to mind, and a lot of others. But, your current government deserves all the flack it gets, and THEY present the USA on the world-stage (and, in all honesty, at least half of the populace voted for Buja - well, the second time, anyway - and thus, half earns the miscontempt it gets)
Anti-americanism, based on the actions of your government, and those that kept that same government in place, is justified and well deserved, me thinks.
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
You people really should be happy we haven't killed you yet.
Which is precisely why some people like Osama and his friends have decided that it's in their best interest to kill you first, before you change your mind.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Ok, but does that make it right? "but he did it too!" is the favourite excuse of every 5 year old in the playground. The more relevant question is, what advantage does this tactic ultimately give, and how often can you use it before it becomes "abuse" ?
Terrorists do not attack and kill 3000 people simply because they don't like the people's attitude. They attack because they hate the people and want them destroyed.
No, al Queda wants us out of the middle east in general, and Saudi Arabia in particular. You don't see them attacking Canadians or Germans so much, do you?
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"