Microsoft Could Delay Vista in Europe

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

September 7, 2006, 12:06 PM

Microsoft is pushing hard to get its next-generation Windows operating system ready for a public launch in January, but now it has a new hurdle: the European Commission has raised concerns about Vista. The Redmond company said a delay may occur if the EU demands changes to the product.

Microsoft has had a tumultuous relationship with the European Union after being found guilty of violating antitrust laws in March 2004. The Commission long accused the company of not complying with the ruling, while Microsoft has responded by publicly chiding regulators for ignoring key information.

The company was fined an additional 280.5 million euros in July for continuing non-compliance, and the Commission threatened to double that number if Microsoft did not get its act in gear. For its part, Microsoft has long asserted it is trying to comply with vague demands and says such fines are unnecessary.

But pressure from the Commission has not stopped with Windows XP. Back in March, the EU expressed concern regarding Vista's built-in Internet search functions and new document features. It warned that if it finds evidence of anti-competitive behavior, a new case against the Redmond company could be made.

Microsoft responded to the Commission and is awaiting a response, it said in a statement Thursday. "Once we receive the Commission's response, we will know whether the Commission is seeking additional product design changes that would result in delay in Europe."

"Generally Microsoft is targeting world-wide availability of Windows Vista for corporate customers in November and retail availability in January, with the exact delivery date to be determined by results from the final testing that is now underway," a company spokesperson said.

Meanwhile, the European Parliament is beginning to question the Commission's pursuit of Microsoft. A letter sent to Antitrust Commissioner Neelie Kroes by four MPs warned that Microsoft delaying or pulling products from the European market would only hurt the EU. However, Parliament has little jurisdiction over the antitrust Commission.

Add a Comment (73 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By terminalx

posted Sep 11, 2006 - 10:09 PM

linux is ALWAYS going to be a niche market until they make it for joe user it will never be popular...because your average user already gets frustrated with installing drivers by running a disk (and always losing it) tell joe user he has to compile the drivers and use a command line interface....yeah...exactly

Score: 0

By Araxen

posted Sep 11, 2006 - 1:30 PM

I for one would love if M$ pulled out of Europe. Apple and Linux would take a foot hold there and it would weaken M$ immensely.

Score: 0

By terminalx

edited Sep 9, 2006 - 2:38 PM

ok the EU appears to be compromised of people who clearly have an agenda for Microsoft...yes they have made mistakes a plenty but look what their efforts have done...Apple has all the same features and Linux to some degree and only because Microsoft is so big do they go after them...they are complaining about integrated search? Apple has had this for quite some time but did anyone raise an eyebrow? NO, of course not because they are not huge...if you dont want to use something that is microsoft branded you don't have to...its not like Microsoft keeps you from being able to install something else...you are free to try the myriad of instant message clients, media players, browsers, whatever and in vista it wont even be necessary to use IE to get updates as its built into the OS now (at least from what I can tell from rc1) so from what I can tell the EU wants it where third party vendors can bundle their software in Windows...why would any company that makes an OS allow this? If you really want all the third party bundled crap buy a dell, sony, toshiba, pick your flavor as they come with a mountain of junk for you to peruse...

Score: 0

By alphatrigon

posted Sep 9, 2006 - 9:10 PM

it is because MS epitomizes what the US is all about, success and capitalism. And because it mirrors it so, and is an american company the EU wishes to see it's downfall or wants to see how difficult it can make it for MS.

It is synonymous with how MS is called a monopoly, and yet when you look at the cases, instead of the complainers wanting MS to stop, they want MS to give them code, which makes no sense.

The biggest, most successfful entities will always be target of scrutiny.

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Sep 10, 2006 - 9:24 AM

Boy, way to get every single statement wrong.

MS does not epitomize what the US is all about, if they did they would never have been ruled an illegal monopoly in the first place. I'd really like to see a single article other than Microsoft's lies where the EU has stated that they want source code.

Go ahead, find one. I'm waiting.

They became successful illegally and then decided to try to play nice later.

They seemed to make it work for them too, since no one's stopped them.

Score: 0

By alphatrigon

posted Sep 10, 2006 - 10:56 AM

in no way is MS a monopoly, some may think so, some may want to believe so, you may want to think and believe so, but they simply are not. They do everything every other organization does, their only fault is they are better at it than their competition.

I'm using an example not expressly relating to the EU vs MS. Go do some research on cases where companies accuse MS of being a monopoly, than look at what they ask of MS. You'd think they want MS to stop practicing what they practice, which is capitalism. I myself don't like big business corporate operations, but don't accuse one company of being something, when it does nothing different than any other.

Companies make and break deals, if you don't like them, don't do them...if you do, well welcome to the world of big business.

Again, you tell me the logic in accusing a company of being a monopoly, than asking the courts to force them to hand over their code, which is essence, intellectual property...in other words, wanting them to give it to you freely, rather than becoming a cooperative busieness partner to share that code.

Nothing wrong with whatever I said, don't get in to that trap where you think like sheep. Just look at it, decide for yourself. All corporations do what MS does, MS does nothing differently, nothing dirtier, nothing more underhanded or anything, just stop blaming them for being good at it.

Score: 0

By fewt

edited Sep 10, 2006 - 11:03 AM

Sorry kiddo, it's been declared in three countries that MS is a monopoly so thanks for your opinion but they absolutely ARE a monopoly.

Concerning the "sheep" statement, I'm not the one blindly assuming that something isn't what in reality it really is.

Thanks.

Score: 0

By skags442

posted Sep 11, 2006 - 12:33 PM

how is it that they are a "monopoly"

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Sep 11, 2006 - 12:52 PM

How is it that they are not a monopoly, since several courts of law have found they were.

Score: 0

By terminalx

posted Sep 10, 2006 - 12:53 PM

So, by your reasoning this would mean Apple Ipod is a Monopoly as well?

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Sep 10, 2006 - 1:20 PM

Provided that they were ruled an illegal monopoly, then yes.

Since they haven't been, no.

Score: 0

By alphatrigon

posted Sep 11, 2006 - 12:30 PM

not everything the courst say is right

people should be responsible for themselves when they smoke

eating too much and making yourself fat/obese should be your responsibility, not McDonalds or KFC...etc

all the litigation doesn't always mean it's so

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Sep 11, 2006 - 12:53 PM

"not everything the courst say is right

people should be responsible for themselves when they smoke

eating too much and making yourself fat/obese should be your responsibility, not McDonalds or KFC...etc

all the litigation doesn't always mean it's so"

Thank you for your obviously highly educated opinion.

You must be an attorney, judge, or other entity capable of making such a conclusion based on your sentence structure.

Thanks.

Score: 0

By Grazer

edited Sep 11, 2006 - 1:53 PM

Couldn't refute his point so you try to attack the structure of his argument despite the fact it was perfectly clear despite its lack of punctuation?

Obviously, your response is the sign of a highly educated person. "I refuse to acknowledge your argument until you punctuate it properly."

So, do you think the courts are infallible and that every decision they make is right? Do you think every judge that hears a technology related case understands the technology enough to make a fair and accurate decision?

The only thing MS has a monopoly on is MS software.

Score: 0

By fewt

edited Sep 11, 2006 - 1:54 PM

There was nothing worth refuting, he's wrong and that's a fact.

The law is the law, whether you agree with it is irrelevant.

His comment is absolute proof that he is not educated enough to make that sort of assumption and state it as fact.

Thanks.

Score: 0

By alphatrigon

posted Sep 11, 2006 - 2:55 PM

I wonder if you'll see this now that it's off te front page, but man I just have to say, you're one arrogant person, with a touch of spite.

You wreak of "if you agree with me you're an idiot" and yes, i'm sure others would be aware you didn't say it...but that's just my opinion.

All the world to you for your opinions as well, I am not arrogant enough, or a communist enough to insult others for having a difference of opinion...go liberty

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Sep 11, 2006 - 6:16 PM

You claim to not be arrogant, and preach about liberty yet you spout crap about communism and how companies aren't guilty of laws that they are clearly guilty of.

LOL

Yes, I'm arrogant yet I also take the time to see the whole picture and don't rely on an uneducated opinion.

That sure sounds arrogant.

Thanks.

Score: 0

By BigAnts

posted Sep 9, 2006 - 7:09 AM

Hi Guys

i'm from the UK and this EU business is a load of C***. in this europe the EU tries and tell the UK people that we have to stop eating yorkshire pudding and it can only be ate in yorkshire hahahaha. well i like Microsoft computers and at the end of the day the EU/EC are on a witch hunt to stop microsoft doing business i'm gonna buy the new vista system when it comes out and i hope microsoft puts in all its own software and stuff and then see what the EU/EC does about it. if microsoft delays the new vista system in europe i wouldn't blame them one bit after the witch hunt that has gone on for so long and if they don't release it here i just buy it doing some internet shopping.

Score: 0

By Frostek

posted Sep 9, 2006 - 12:46 PM

To clarify this odd thing you'd mentioned about Yorkshire Pudding I looked up the reasons given why.

The reasons are that several other countries have an almost identical foodtype already. And why should that be so surprising - the ingredients for Yorkshire Pudding are basic enough for this to have happened.

My own opinion is that it would more politic to allow Yorkshire Puddings to retain their name as long as they're sold in the *UK*, but get re-branded packages outside.

Yorkshire curd tart - another favourite of mine is virtually identical with a type of Polish cheesecake. Who invented the recipe and can lay claim to naming it? No one I suspect, as the recipe dates back to at least Roman times.

The reason is a matter of branding. If someone wants to *sell* Yorkshire Puddings in another country which already has their own local dish that's the same, local people would object. Same as if someone sold a "French Pudding" say in Yorkshire, that was identical in everyway to a Yorkshire Pudding. Wouldn't the locals object? Naturally, they would.

Personally, I'd rather we kept the name and didn't sell them elsewhere, but the food companies that make such items would probably feel that would cut into their profits.

Ultimately though it's not like you can't eat Yorkshire Pudding - it's just food companies that can't use the name, not everyday people. I wouldn't expect to see it disappear from any cookbooks either.

As for Microsoft, they are monopolists who use that monopoly in an illegal manner. Both the US and the EU have found this to be the case.

Note, it's not even having a monopoly that's bad - lots of companies have this situation. It's when a company abuses the position, which MS do in a myriad of fashions that governments have to step in and prevent it from causing very serious problems.

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Sep 11, 2006 - 1:50 PM

"The reason is a matter of branding. If someone wants to *sell* Yorkshire Puddings in another country which already has their own local dish that's the same, local people would object."

So, basically, your are saying the EU is enforcing cultural isolationism with the letter of the law. Couldn't the local people vote with their money by not buying the pudding, or are the EU politicians trying to cater to the cultural isolationists that would prefer to keep Europe divided by languages and traditions?

Score: 0

By GCoder

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 3:26 PM

too bad. Get Leopard.

Score: 0

By TC17

edited Sep 8, 2006 - 2:32 PM

This is just BS from Microsoft. They THINK they can now blackmail their way through, instead of facing fines. And thats exactly what this is.

If I was Europe, I would just say fine. Because Microsoft will lose MUCH more money by not releasing it.

Score: 0

By gedazx

edited Sep 9, 2006 - 8:49 AM

Agreed - MS will probably suffer much more in this case. We can live without Vista for another year or so, MS can't...

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 2:36 PM

"They THINK they can now blackmail their way through..."

I seriously doubt that. With all the grief the comission has given them over XP, why not wait to release it there until the comission has given it their stamp of approval...that way they can't comeback later and fine them again.

Score: 0

By x-ray

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 2:14 PM

If there cold make windows better, there shold get startede

Score: 0

By Frostek

posted Sep 9, 2006 - 12:53 PM

Are you using Microsoft's spellchecker? ;-)

Score: 0

By Zee333

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 1:34 PM

Go here for technical help

www.xolox.nl/chat

Score: 0

By Ex-Brit

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 6:51 AM

Considering the farce the EEC made with XP which just showed that they don't even know where the Start button is, if I were Microsoft, I'd refuse to release Vista at all in Europe unless the EEC pays back those billions in fines.

Score: 0

By Frostek

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 11:57 AM

If you were Microsoft they'd be out of business.

Score: 0

By Frostek

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 6:26 AM

Whilst I'm pleased the EU took MS to task for their highly dubious approach to OS architecture and even more dubious business practices, the end result was not what I as a consumer would have wanted to see.

IE - reverted to a real browser. A module of the OS which can then be completely removed, not deliberately woven so deeply into it that MS can then wring their hands together and say that they can't remove it without breaking things.

Same for Outlook, Media Player and other large sytsem components. All of these items should be totally removable from an operating system without breaking it. Removing the shortcuts and their other small measures is not the same, and frankly is both insulting and patronising.

The problem is now that since MS have deliberately obscured their monolithic code and have been doing it for so long, that I wonder if they actually have the capability of doing this now.

This should have been a major issue for the US and other governments 8-10 years ago. Now it's been left so long its far more complicated to do than it should have been.

Score: 0

By smarterthanyou

posted Sep 9, 2006 - 6:42 AM

Making IE a required component in Windows (like they did in Windows 98 through XP) is NOT against the law as long as Microsoft doesn't prevent people from using competing software alongside it. Microsoft was well within their right to do that and they still are. The same is true for the other software you mention.

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Sep 10, 2006 - 9:34 AM

"The appeals court found that Microsoft's commingling of Internet Explorer code with Windows 95 and 98 was an anticompetitive act."

http://news.com.com/Appe...2100-1001_3-271003.html

Score: 0

By skags442

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 11:00 AM

no one is forcing you too buy it...

if you dont like it dont buy it

Score: 0

By The Man

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 8:20 PM

"if you dont like it dont buy it"

is everything in your life this simple for you?

if you don't like car accidents - don't drive
if you don't like paper cuts - don't write
if you don't like bed bugs - don't sleep
if you don't like MS's business practices - don't use a windows compatible computer or windows related products?

i would say we're forced into most things in life, at least we should have some say in the way our lives are handled.

Score: 0

By skags442

posted Sep 11, 2006 - 12:28 PM

so how were you forced into windows... did someone hold a gun to your head or somthing ?

if you don't like MS's business practices - don't use a windows compatible computer or windows related products?

what wrong with useing a pc that is capable of running wondows... windows isnt the only os oout there

Score: 0

By cousinkix1953

edited Sep 8, 2006 - 3:52 AM

Hey wasn't it the REAL Networks bunch who started this whole fight over the Windows Media Player. Funny, that the Europe should be so involved, with a stupid catfight involving two software companies, that are based in King County Washington, USA. Something tells me that they should dueling in a local Seattle federal courthouse...

Score: 0

By girts

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 1:59 AM

Best way is to make Custom! installation and to make possibility to install or not to install Media Player, Internet Explerer, Windows Defender, ...

This is best way how to avoid lawsuits!!!

Score: 0

By Floodland

edited Sep 8, 2006 - 12:38 PM

Windows HAD the option to select components during setup in the past. That feature was removed, and I think it was no mistake. As it is no mistake that when you go to the WinXP control panel to remove some garbage (name it Windows me$$enger, M$N exploiter or Windows Media prayer) it only remove the shorcuts. That's absolutely insulting, as someone said before.
Internet explorer was deeply inserted in the core but only after the US DOJ ruled similar demands to what EU is doing and did during the last years, but only about Internet Explorer (when it was fighting for the market with Netscape). The difference there was that MS fixed the DOJ, err sorry, showed to the DOJ that IE was inserted deeply into the core, thing that finally happenned. And now, we're still paying thousands of vulnerabilities because of this forced, unnecessary and almost evil "integration".

Score: 0

By DaveBG

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 12:59 AM

Do not worry M$, we will take the CRACKED version then!!!

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 11:59 AM

...and then whine when it breaks, because we know the crack couldn't have been the problem.

Score: 0

By gedazx

edited Sep 9, 2006 - 9:02 AM

Yeah, right, cracked versions always break, don't they? ;)

IMO, if there were no cracked versions, eastern Europe and Russia (not even talking about China etc.) would have a pathetic computerization rate nowadays. Try to buy an operating system which costs more than your monthly salary - not even talking about additional programs... And Linux is still not very "looser-friendly".

Score: 0

By ladylust

posted Sep 7, 2006 - 11:42 PM

I say don't ship anything to the EU.. Fawk em... they wanna take down MS.. fine.. keep them in the dark for another 5 years with the OS... Not like they are about to upgrade every computer to Lindows.. LOL... SHUT THEM OUT!!

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Sep 10, 2006 - 9:36 AM

Obviously never been in the real world, huh?

Score: 0

By CallMeJack

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 3:04 AM

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Microsoft should be taken down. I personnally use MS software everyday and I'm happy with it. MS does not need to act illegally to keep market share, they just need to make better products than the competition. Aren't THESE the real American values ?

Score: 0

By Frostek

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 6:10 AM

They might have been once, but not any longer.

Score: 0

By CallMeJack

edited Sep 7, 2006 - 10:54 PM

If you take the time to read the details of the EU vs Microsoft cases in the last years, you will see that the problem is the aggressive monopolistic actions that Microsoft has taken towards PC manufacturers. They have, unofficially of course, threaten them to stop providing them with Windows if they offered any other alternative OS on their PC's (like Linux and others). Unfortunately, it's very difficult to prove such actions so the EU is trying other ways to stop Microsoft from acting this way. It reminds me of the story of Al Capone who was not sentenced for the hundreds of murders he had been responsible for but because of Tax evasion ... At least in Europe someone is trying to do something about the illegal actions of Microsoft.

Score: 0

By Heero

posted Sep 7, 2006 - 2:04 PM

Just a bunch of bull... Thats all that is.

Score: 0

By drumcat

posted Sep 7, 2006 - 1:00 PM

Doesn't Apple OSX have integrated search?

These guys are hypocrites to the "N"th degree.

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 12:06 PM

Doesn't Apple OSX have integrated search?

Yeah, but their pockets aren't deep enough yet, and bundling is only illegal when you are the most successful company in your industry.

Score: 0

By Tenoq

posted Sep 7, 2006 - 9:46 PM

The problem is when you can't turn off or remove the function/program and replace it with an alternative.

Score: 0

By skags442

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 11:04 AM

sure you can... get a difrent product

if you have that much of a problem with all that is part of what the product is... dont buy or use it... find somthing else

Score: 0

By The Man

posted Sep 9, 2006 - 3:08 AM

"if you have that much of a problem with all that is part of what the product is..."

huh?

Score: 0

By Grazer

edited Sep 7, 2006 - 12:49 PM

"Meanwhile, the European Parliament is beginning to question the Commission's pursuit of Microsoft. A letter sent to Antitrust Commissioner Neelie Kroes warned that Microsoft delaying or pulling products from the European market would only hurt the EU. However, Parliament has little jurisdiction over the antitrust Commission."

You know you've stepped over the line when your own people are considering investigating you.

Personally, I wonder if the EC is clutching MS so desperately because it seems they would have nothing else to do, and people would see them for the pointless agency they are.

I am not sure why it was even formed. Did people really think increasing the job market for politicians was a good idea?

Score: 0

By spef

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 2:38 AM

You know you've stepped over the line when your own people are considering investigating you.

That the European Parliament is questioning the commissions doings is just as normal as the US senate questioning the US governement. It's their job to do so.

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 11:56 AM

That the European Parliament is questioning the commissions doings is just as normal as the US senate questioning the US governement. It's their job to do so.

You've got a point there, didn't think about it that way...however, it is usually a bad sign when the US Legislative Branch feels the need to investigate the Executive one. It usually means either there is a witch hunt, or somebody abusing their power.

Score: 0

By Scotch Moose

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 1:49 PM

In this case it's a sign that the legislators are getting big campaign donations from companies that don't want to answer to the rule of law.

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 2:33 PM

Yes, because MS must be bribing people, there is no way it could be because this whole thing has been taken way too far.

Sheesh, if I had asked my CS Professors for that much documentation, they would've asked me if I wanted them to do the assignments for me.

Score: 0

By The Man

posted Sep 9, 2006 - 3:13 AM

"Yes, because MS must be bribing people"

you don't think it happens?

intel blackmailed dell into keeping amd away for a while.
this is how the corporate world works.

Score: 0

By dhjdhj

edited Sep 8, 2006 - 1:23 PM

It's a worse sign when , in the US, the Legislative Branch does NOT feel the need to invesitage the Executive Branch!
---->however, it is usually a bad sign when the US Legislative Branch feels the need to investigate the Executive one.

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 2:30 PM

Too true, too true

Score: 0

By terminalx

posted Sep 7, 2006 - 12:44 PM

look at Windows N (what you NEVER heard of it except maybe in passing on hearing about the EU) talk about a colassal failure...a direct result of EU actually... what good have they actually done for the consumer?

Score: 0

By Frostek

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 6:13 AM

Exactly. It was the wrong solution. If Media Player was the item that was considered inappropriate and not included in the default install, then OEMs should have had to install Win XP "N" by default.

Allowing them the choice was the foolish decision here.

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 12:04 PM

Allowing {the OEMs} the choice was the foolish decision here.

Well, they couldn't force them. The whole issue was to provide another choice...even if the other choice was a poor one.

Score: 0

By dkratter

posted Sep 7, 2006 - 12:28 PM

Are the members of the EC themselves the only ones who haven't yet realized they should be disbanded? The EC is a waste of time and money and doesn't know the first thing about protecting the consumer.

Score: 0

By Joey Deacon

posted Sep 7, 2006 - 5:03 PM

Indeed. Thank god the EU saved us by reating WindowsXP-N, so we can all rush out and buy it, and save us from the evil WMP10.

What a total waste of my taxes. Is anyone from the EU liable? Of course not, they all look out for each other, and a far too busy ensuring the bannanas are the correct shape..

Score: 0

By Frostek

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 6:16 AM

And yet it's still more than the US government did with MS, despite finding them guilty.

If the decision to remove MP from Windows XP was the decision of the EU, then why didn't they go on to enforce it?

Allowing OEMs to then have the "choice" of having Win XP N or just go on as they've been doing previously and installing default versions of XP was ludicrous. It undermined the entire effort in one fell swoop.

Score: 0

By RejZoR

posted Sep 7, 2006 - 12:20 PM

Oh give me a break. Who gives a damn about this dumb a** commision. Customers? I don't think so. Hey, i'm from EU and i don't give a damn. Lets start the "We don't give a damn" campaign!

Score: 0

By billweh

posted Sep 7, 2006 - 12:51 PM

Exactly, the EU is dying off anyway - with a negative population growth (more people dying than there are being born), the EU has about another 20-30 years before the population contains a majority of retirement age folk and we all know how well they get along with computers - not to mention change.

Rather sad really, Europe used to be a nice place. :(

Score: 0

By stiow007

edited Sep 8, 2006 - 7:23 PM

get a grip billweh you've got no idea about Europe - it's where the history and the intelligence comes from.

America used to be a nice place, when it was populated by indigenous Americans, not crazies like you!

Score: 0

By spef

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 2:02 AM

Don't post any bullsh*t.

A negative population growth isn't necessarily bad. There is too much overpopulation in the world anyways. The rate of this decrease is somewhat concerning regarding to pensions. This is somewhat less concerning to the Netherlands and the U.K. while they have a different system regarding pensionfunds.

In 20-30 years there won't be a majority of retirement age folk. This number will be around the 40 percent. It will be the most problematic in Italy, Finland and Belgium. If this number gets to high then governements will simply change the retirement date as a last resort.

Your last remark is by the way the most idiotic of them all. The retirement folk over 20-30 years are the people who now work with computers - not to mention change. So I won't foresee any problems here.

Score: 0

By Scotch Moose

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 1:52 PM

And besides the muslim immigrants more than make up for the children that Europeans don't have.

Score: 0

By stiow007

posted Sep 8, 2006 - 7:34 PM

sounds like we've got a bunch of racists living in the "land of the free"; and as if america's population is growing because of good clean americans being born, it's not. the population in america is growing because of the thousands of mexicans which are walking over the so-called protected boarder each day.

Score: 0

By cousinkix1953

posted Sep 9, 2006 - 4:42 AM

"And besides the muslim immigrants more than make up for the children that Europeans don't have."

Is that what you really want over there? They will eventually take over by sheer numbers. They will vote in their Islamic governments. You will be forced to convert to their brand of Old Time Religion. Your women will be circumcized by Allah's witch doctors. Christian infidels, who resist will be killed in horrible manners just like Afghanistan today. Europe will have the death penalty for petty crimes. You won't have the time to complain about some mass murderer being executed in the United States any more.

"the population in america is growing because of the thousands of mexicans which are walking over the so-called protected boarder each day."

True enough! King George Bush only talks about border security. He doesn't even know that Mexican drug cartels have taken over his public lands. They grow marijuana in our National Parks and destroy the enviroment. The police don't arrest many Deadheads or Rastamen for growing crops in the woods any more. And the quality of what used to be called California Gold isn't worth smoking any more...

Score: 0