EU's Fule attends parliamentary committee session

The report could have just as easily referred to the "territorial integrity of Serbia" to make the point that the EU is against the partition of Kosovo, but it did not. It could have followed that such a statement is "status neutral." However, it noted the "territorial integrity of Kosovo." This is the West's creeping independence drive. The "status neutral" phrase is an empty one that really means nothing as things continue to change on the ground.
We have a situation where how something is labeled [or unlabeled - i.e., status neutral] is more important than what the reality is (for Kosovo and conversely in North Mitrovica).

We have a situation where how something is labeled [or unlabeled - i.e., status neutral] is more important than what the reality is (for Kosovo and conversely in North Mitrovica).
(mms, 11 October 2012 18:23)

Yeah, but for Serbs the labels are the important part, not the reality on the ground :)

Yeah, but for Serbs the labels are the important part, not the reality on the ground :)
(icj1, 12 October 2012 03:10)

While for Albanians, the number of recognitions count, that's why there's a specially appointed bribe minister for buying new ones from corrupt African kingdoms. The reality on the ground, Kosovo being a economic black hole full of crime and corruption with no visible progress, seems to be less important.

While for Albanians, the number of recognitions count, that's why there's a specially appointed bribe minister for buying new ones from corrupt African kingdoms. The reality on the ground, Kosovo being a economic black hole full of crime and corruption with no visible progress, seems to be less important.
(Comm. Parrisson, 13 October 2012 09:47)

Of course, otherwise Kosovo risks to be both a black hole and under Serbia; at least it's eliminating the possibility of the latter...

Anyway, I thought Serbia was superior to Kosovo, but if you are saying that Serbia is like Kosovo, I have no objection to that.

We have a situation where how something is labeled [or unlabeled - i.e., status neutral] is more important than what the reality is (for Kosovo and conversely in North Mitrovica).
(mms, 11 October 2012 18:23)

Yeah, but for Serbs the labels are the important part, not the reality on the ground :)

While for Albanians, the number of recognitions count, that's why there's a specially appointed bribe minister for buying new ones from corrupt African kingdoms. The reality on the ground, Kosovo being a economic black hole full of crime and corruption with no visible progress, seems to be less important.
(Comm. Parrisson, 13 October 2012 09:47)

Of course, otherwise Kosovo risks to be both a black hole and under Serbia; at least it's eliminating the possibility of the latter...

Anyway, I thought Serbia was superior to Kosovo, but if you are saying that Serbia is like Kosovo, I have no objection to that.

The report could have just as easily referred to the "territorial integrity of Serbia" to make the point that the EU is against the partition of Kosovo, but it did not. It could have followed that such a statement is "status neutral." However, it noted the "territorial integrity of Kosovo." This is the West's creeping independence drive. The "status neutral" phrase is an empty one that really means nothing as things continue to change on the ground.
We have a situation where how something is labeled [or unlabeled - i.e., status neutral] is more important than what the reality is (for Kosovo and conversely in North Mitrovica).

Yeah, but for Serbs the labels are the important part, not the reality on the ground :)
(icj1, 12 October 2012 03:10)

While for Albanians, the number of recognitions count, that's why there's a specially appointed bribe minister for buying new ones from corrupt African kingdoms. The reality on the ground, Kosovo being a economic black hole full of crime and corruption with no visible progress, seems to be less important.