Berlusconi now completely mad - should Germany invade?

[Angelo Scotto]

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...

[Sprayber]

Can German do anything without France's permission? I'm just wondering.

[Chris 62]

Didn't the German attack the Italian first, something about they don't want a "Godfather" running the EU?

It's stranegly ironic two former facsist nations still call the other facsists.

[Spiffor]

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:

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.

[Drake Tungsten]

Now, if you can tell me where he insulted Italy, I'm curious.

The insults might be easier to spot if you posted the article in a language we could read.

[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

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.

[BeBMan]

Neverending fun in this thread.....

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:

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:

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:

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:

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

[Giovanni Wine]

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

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

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
The insults might be easier to spot if you posted the article in a language we could read.

Sorry if I haven't done this, but translating a text from a foreign language to another foreign language is quite difficult. I have enough trouble already translating French press articles into English...

[Drake Tungsten]

Sorry if I haven't done this, but translating a text from a foreign language to another foreign language is quite difficult. I have enough trouble already translating French press articles into English...

I understand that. If you don't want to go to the trouble of translating articles, that's fine. I certainly wouldn't want to either. However, if you're going to ask questions like this...

Now, if you can tell me where he insulted Italy, I'm curious.

...it would make sense to post the article in English. The only folks who could read that speech were German and I doubt they were going to go to any trouble attempting to find insults (thereby supporting Berlusconi's point of view).

[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:

... 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?)

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:

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...

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...

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"...

[BeBMan]

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.

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]

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.