Talk:Freedom fries/Archives/2013

Salisbury Steak statement incorrect

This article includes this sentence: "Sauerkraut was renamed "liberty cabbage"[6] and hamburgers renamed "liberty steaks" or "Salisbury steaks" (a name that remains in use).[6]"

This is incorrect. Salisbury steaks are distinct from hamburgers. The actual wikipedia article on Salisbury Steaks describes how they are different from hamburgers, and that they originated in the late 1800s (making the WWI origin claim here impossible). I followed link 6 referenced as the source and found no mention of salisbury steaks there (it did describe 'liberty cabbage').

If no one objects, I will remove the mention of salisbury steaks from this article

IBrow (talk) 02:28, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much. That is ridiculous, the allegations about Salisbury steaks being a post 9-11 phenomenon, and a renaming of hamburgers. I am laughing, but I am also appalled. You did the right thing here. --FeralOink (talk) 09:48, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Historical parallels

The anecdotes in this section are not a parallel at all: the countries mentioned were at war with one another. This is entirely different from the situation in 2003, when France was a US ally and was actively involved alongside the US in Afghanistan. 92.8.112.36 (talk) 22:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

This whole section ought to be pulled out and worked into [Category:Political neologisms] somehow, to maximize xref potential and relevance. --belg4mit 18.124.2.224 21:19, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

To start with, the example of Berlin, Ontario, being changed to Kitchener should be removed due to lack of relevance. All the other examples, and this article, have to do with food. Hammerofdawn (talk) 21:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Ditto with references to House of Windsor dropping German name: not relevant to renaming of foodstuffs for perceived 'patriotic' reasons. In fact, in this context, it is noticeable that 'Battenberg' cake was never renamed 'Mountbatten' cake. Ceartas (talk) 16:23, 4 March 2011 (UTC) •

Dogs and measles? These are mentioned in the sections on the UK and the USA. Are German shepherds, Eskimo dogs and measles on the menus there? These historical parallels are supposed to relate to foodstuffs, are they not? Ceartas (talk) 16:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Greece: "Ellinikos kafes" ("Greek coffee") replaced "Turkikos kafes" ("Turkish coffee") on Greek menus after the Turkish-Greek collisions of the 1920s. <--- This is not true.At least i havent found any non-biased sources stating it. I have found that greek coffee (Ellinikos not frappe) was always called that although its accepted as a variation of the turkish one. (see [1] (Nestle Inc., go to products,coffee) claming over 100 years of commercially selling "greek coffee".

 So if it did change at some point it was prior to early 20th century. 

(I cant believe i bothered researching these stuff..... I should get a life ;P)

World War I Reference

The article is fine except for this:

Prior to World War I, Americans widely referred to french toast as German toast. This food, too, was briefly renamed "freedom toast."

I have not been able to find a well-documented source for either claim - just many dozens of webpages repeating the same unattributed source. The only documented use of "German toast" known to me is the 1918 Fannie Farmer Cookbook, which does not qualify as an attestation of widespread use, since it uses strange names for other standard recipes as well. Besides, this etymology contradicts the claims made on the French toast entry. I can't find any reference to "freedom toast" at all before the recent unpleasantness.

I'm going to remove the reference and make the source explicit on the French toast page. Anybody with additional documentation should revert the edits.

Diderot

Hi. I was just reading this article, and I noticed an omission: the article compares the anti-French sentiment that led to the "renaming" of French Fries to "freedom fries" for a while with the anti-German sentiment from as early as World War I. But the article seems to overlook one fundamental detail: when the anti-German sentiment rose, the US was at war with Germany, bullets were flying, people were dying, and it's only natural for such a sentiment to rise on both sides (surely Germans weren't that fond of the US back then); in the "fries incident" the situation was quite different, France was never at war with the US, there was never even any risk of severing diplomatic relations. In light of that, the causes leading to this "renaming" appear somewhat "petty", since we read in the article that it all began with some politicians (are those guys getting re-elected??) who apparently time-traveled back to middle school and got angry when some others wouldn't share their opinion (or do as they were told, depending on the point of view). And this regretable behavior was, most unfortunately, mimicked by quite a few people in the US. Now, I'm not saying that the article should call US congressmen "children" or anything (that's a NPOV red flag for sure), but it definitely ought to be more specific about this fundamental difference between the anti-German and the anti-French sentiments: one was justified by conjuncture, the other was just plain petty (although we might try to find a way to sugarcoat it a little when writting it into the article), and although the article does explain the origins of the quid-pro-quo, it never differentiates the two directly, and most people will not make this distinction I've just explained. Regards, Redux 01:56, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

it is ok—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.65.136.71 (talk • contribs) 07:32, 17 January 2006

What is ok?--JK the unwise 14:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with redux here, or at least, his/her basic point. In all the historical parallels listed (except the renaming of Danish pastry) the "renamers" were in open wars with the "renamees". In the case of freedom fries, the US and France were still allies (NATO, at least). And, as far as I can tell, still are. If no one objects, I'll try to add a phrase mentioning that, in a week or two. Huw Powell 17:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Viewpoints on Iraq

Hi Anthere.

You added this to the article:

Throughout the international debates regarding the Iraq disarmament crisis, France maintained opposition to the invasion of Iraq planned by the United States, claimed weapons of mass destruction destruction issue could be solved through inspections and diplomacy, and insisted the weapons issue was merely an attempt to hide american desire to size oil wells and to force democracy upon an unwilling country.

My initial reaction to seeing this French viewpoint spelled out is that it should be balanced with the American viewpoint. This could, of course, lead us to needing to include (for example) the British and German and Iraqi viewpoints as well. Before you know it, the "Freedom Fries" article simply becomes yet another restating of the entire debate around Iraq, which we already cover elsewhere. Can we simply back the specific political claims out of this article and link to them instead of rehashing them here? -º¡º

I tend to agree. But I added this paragraph because the previous sentence, in particular after modification by Stevenj was unacceptable

for memory Throughout the international debates regarding the Iraq disarmament crisis, France maintained a vociferous opposition to the United States.

First, vociferous is not an acceptable terminology. Second, for memory, the opposition was about invasion in Iraq, not opposition to United States. Again, this wording was not acceptable. --Unsigned comment by Anthere on 2003-04-21 16:47:35

I edited the statement to be similar to what it was like before Stevenj changed it. Maybe it is ok like this? -º¡º

What I also find a bit risky is the way the article implies that the anti-war sentiment was purely French:

In the international debate over the decision to launch the 2003 invasion of Iraq, France expressed strong opposition in the United Nations to taking such action. The French position was not popular among conservatives in the United States, leading some Republicans to campaign for the boycotting of French goods and businesses and the removal of the country's name from products.

The French government wasn't the only group of people strongly opposed to the position of the US government. From what I gather, the international pro/anti war balance has been portrayed differently in the US from how it was portrayed throughout most of Europe (including countries which were not officially "anti-war").

The war itself, and its premises, remain controversial -- both inside and outside the US. The wording on that introduction makes it sound as if France was the only vocal opposition the US had. In the German press, for example, the French position was not given any unique significance as other governments' officials were already criticising the invasion (including Germany, Canada, et al.). Whether or not the French were picked as a handy scapegoat can be left as an exercise to the reader, but fact is, despite the way the whole affair was depicted in American media, French was not particularily significant.

I'd propose a wording along the lines of the following:

In the international debate over the decision to launch the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the French government expressed strong opposition in the United Nations to taking such action. The position held by France was not popular among conservatives in the United States, leading some Republicans to campaign for the boycotting of French goods and businesses and the removal of the country's name from products.

I can't find a decent way to add the notion that they were not alone in their views without boiling some of it down to weasel words, but changing it from France to the French government (because I think that's more specific) and from the French position to the position held by France (which removes the implication that the position was ONLY held by France, or was particularily French per se) should remove at least some of the implications stated above.

(Ironically, several months after the German media joined the anti-US bandwagon, they reported on the American-German political relationships being improved by government officials on both sides and put it in a way that made it sound as if the German government would be apologising to the US for having an opposed position in the Iraq affair. Now, that's professional journalism for you. Fair and balanced, eh?) — Ashmodai ^{(talk · contribs)} 03:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

This whole issue was decades in the making resulting from several factors.

FOX News was one of the major media outlets pushing the insanity. FOX News is owned by News Corp., which in turned is owned by Rupert Murdoch. Rupert Murdoch is in with the Rothschilds, Jacob Rothschild, 4th Baron Rothschild being associated with his British network BSkyB, while also having oil ventures with Murdoch. Lynn Forester de Rothschild, the wife of Jacob's cousin, has appeared on FOX News. N M Rothschild & Sons, a historical company seat of the family, was a lead advocate for the War in Iraq and false Weapons of Mass Destruction claims and is run by Jacob's cousin David René de Rothschild. The Rothschilds suffered severe financial blows resulting from the French nationalisation of their banks in the 80s. Amschel Mayor James Rothschild was Jacob's brother and at the time of his death in Paris in 1996 the family was facing financial disaster.

The Wars in the Middle East are a financial scheme. George W. Bush was the pawn who orchestrated it all as President and it was attempted to blame everything Bush allegedly represented as cover for the scheme. Following the disaster which ensued resulting in Barack Obama as President to maintain the wars politically by appeasing the original opponents of it, the next financial scheme was the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, or stimulus. The Rothschilds are the modern architects of bond markets and government privatization, which has seen an unprecedented utilization in the Wars in the Middle East. The stimulus was heavily diverted into bonds through various avenues, from government treasuries and Build America Bonds, along with Industrial Development Bonds, and other issuances. In Iraq, the country's bonds doubled in return within a month of the invasion. The country, despite its energy wealth and foreign assistance, was deficit spending in 2009. Debt is the MO of the Rothschild dynasty, where countries and their taxpayers are left to foot the bill while they profit from their schemes and after their fall from grace last century they returned this one like a sewer dweller in an unguarded bank vault.

Finance is always behind any war promoted by the Rothschilds, and France opposing the largest payday in Iraq was another kick to the Rothschilds. To rectify the opposition within the governments of France and Germany to whole Middle East agenda of the Rothschilds, Nicholas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel were put into power by the Washington-London controlled Rothschild establishment to ease opposition. Finance was the lead motivational factor behind the Hate France movement.

The next factors were cultural, historical, and geopolitical. Going back to World War Two, after the diplomatic fallout of the Yalta Conference, Charles de Gualle prevented the prosection of the Muslim Hitler Mufti Mohammad Amin al-Husayni at the Nuremburg Trials. He was brought to Paris on May 19, 1945 and placed under French protection. With his links to the Muslim Brotherhood, he became a French asset, returning to Egypt in 1946 and maintaining contact with the French government through their embassy. There he continued his anti-Zionist activities. The Mufti was a lead advocate of Franco-Arab solidarity in the Islamic world.

France had long been allied with many Islamic countries going back centuries, and sought to continue to sphere of influence in Islamic regions contrary to American intentions and geopolitical positions. De Gualle would block the United Kingdom's application to join the European Economic Community in 1961 and 1967 to prevent American interference via London. French Nazi collaborators from the Vichy would serve in the uppermost levels of the post-war French government, and in the decades following World War Two begin to re-establish their networks with their Muslim allies and the Nazis who had fled to the Middle East to avoid prosecution. During the Six-Day War in 1967, de Gualle embargoed Israel and condemned the country.

France would sell Muammar al-Gaddafi and Libya 110 Mirage jets and would continue to supply military arms to Arab nations throughout the periods to follow while maintaining a boycott of Israel. Pro Euro/Arab political lobbies were created to create anti-Israel/U.S. populations. Through the EEC, Paris was the center of the anti-Zionist European world. During the 1973 oil crisis, France bolstered relations with Arab nations and established relations with the PLO, while maintaining a boycott of Israel. The EEC would eventually adopt an anti-Israel resolution as a result of the crisis, one that would pave the way for Euro-Arab economic integration and the elimination of Israel. France would help anti-Israel Iraq construct the Osirak Nuclear Reactor, which Israel would bomb.

Thus, all these factor parlayed into the dhimmi Zionist event of the Hate France movement and Freedom Fries during the height of their powertrip after years of obscurity and irrelevance, like a sewer dweller going shopping after robbing an unguarded bank vault.

Petey Parrot (talk) 06:18, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Cites

I'd be a bit happier with the following paragraph if we could get some cites:

The word play is reminiscent of anti-German sentiment during the First World War in which sauerkraut was renamed liberty cabbage, and hamburgers were transformed into liberty steaks. (Even the German measles got a new name: liberty measles.) This similarity is intentional: Rowland described a conversation about these renamed foods during World War I as the inspiration for "freedom fries."

and

Previous attempts to rename food during wartime have been largely unsuccessful, with one notable exception being the change of frankfurter to hot dog during World War II...

The problem is that these paragraph are just a slight rewrite of Neal Rowland's statement to CNN [2], and so is pretty well every other web reference. Two other claims — that the North Sea was renamed from the "German Sea", and that French toast was renamed from "German toast" — have already been demonstrated to be false and have been removed, although these did not appear to originate with Rowlands.

Now it's clear that some things were renamed due to anti-German sentiment (especially place names), but I wonder if people have gotten that idea into their heads and been carried away with some folk etymology. Let's look at the some of Rowlands' claims:

• "frankfurters" → "hot dogs". The most widely reported etymology (e.g. Douglas Smith, "Ever wonder why?") claims that the name "hot dog" was coined in 1901 by cartoonist T. A. Dorgan, and previously they were usually called "wienies" or "dachshund sausages". (Dorgan also coined many other American slang terms.) However there is also evidence they were referred to simply as "dogs" in slang long before that. Vendors' carts existed since the 1880s, and were widely called "dog wagons" by the 1890s. A student fraternity poem penned in 1895 specifically refers to them as "dogs". And it is obviously no great stretch to add the adjective "hot" to something that is served hot. Finally, when we do find reference to "frankfurters" around that time, it is almost invariably abbreviated to "franks". So, unless someone can find evidence of an actual campaign to suppress "frankfurter" as a name, I would like this claim to be referred to as a "widely held belief" rather than a fact, or else removed.
• "sauerkraut" → "liberty cabbage". This seems to be true [3], although it's not clear how widely it was actually practiced [4].
• "hamburgers" → "liberty steaks" ("liberty sandwich" in some variants). Problem: there are many distinct claims for the origin of the foodstuff now known as the "hamburger". Originally, the term was "Hamburger steak" and referred to the ground beef patty. This dates back to at least the mid-nineteenth century and probably earlier. Commercial vendors of sandwiches incorporating hamburger patties started appearing in the US in the 1880s, at the time using sliced bread rather than buns. However the "hamburger sandwich" as we know it today did not appear until 1916 - after World War I had already started. This doesn't rule out the possibility of a name change but it does make one wonder. Can anyone find a more detailed cite? Another variant of this one - "Salisbury steak" - is even less plausible since Salisbury steak isn't the same as a hamburger, and Dr. Salisbury (who invented it) died in 1905.
• "German measles" → "liberty measles". Now come on! How can we include such a patently unlikely claim without cross-checking it!? Why would anyone name a disease "liberty"? If they wanted to malign the Germans you would think they would name more diseases for them. And in any case a far more sensible alternative name already existed; the name "rubella" is far older than "German measles". The only supporting evidence I can find on-line (as against bloggers endlessly quoting each other) is this German-American heritage page which claims one doctor did it.

-- Securiger 16:34, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• I so TOTALLY agree with this previous measles comment. But, if it finally turns out to be right, please, please, pretty please, could Bushie get mad enough with Zapatero so the infamous Spanish flu can be renamed as Liberty Flu —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.145.230.2 (talk) 14:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Childish affairs

This whole affair is SO childish that well it's difficult to avoid laughing.

But there are people like this right across the world, the pity is in the USA they've got power.

But this just shows that people, even when being officially ADULTS, are not MATURE. This is so puerile, so stupid, that the very fact of spending even 10 cents on changing a menu is just... well a token of mental retardation. --80.58.9.107 14:08, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry but the whole freedom fries thing is a perfect example of how stupid Americans have become since Bush took power --Unsigned comment by 62.56.54.143 on 2005-08-12 19:17:12

While this is stupid, so is blaming Bush for someone elses stupidity. Please grow up.--ᎠᏢ462090 16:14, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the parent. I just want to let everyone around the world know that I am completely embarassed that there are people in my country who do things like this. It's horribly stupid. --mdd4696 14:47, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I find this so funny! Don't ever feel a need to be embarrassed for your country, but in all honesty the ridiculousness of this is a fantastic example of the over-patriotism within America. "Freedom Fries: And Other Stupidity We'll Have to Explain to Our Grandchildren" sums it up. But ye, to say an entire nation suddenly became stupid because of the man in power is just about as stupid.

"over-patriotism within America" I agree with this statement (American, by the way). Hell, I don't even like fries anyways, I go for the burgers the very few times that I do eat fast food. EAB 02:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

You people must be 4 years old. Who gets mad over "freeodm fries"? My God, I'm embarrassed for all of you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.87.99.235 (talk) 04:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Accusations of impositions

If the American governement wants to impose the use of "fredom fries" instead of "french fries" to punish France for not accepting being its slave, that's their problem... Us, we don't care, "french fries" are not called "french" anywhere else in the world. They are not even from France but from Belgium... --Unsigned comment by 82.224.59.166 on 2005-01-23 20:41:04

Yes they are. They are called "ranskalaiset perunat" ("French potatoes") in Finland. 195.197.240.134 (talk) 15:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

As an American citizen, I implore you and the rest of the world not to judge us based on the actions of George Bush and his idiot brethren. He actually lost the popular vote when he was originally elected, but because of our corrupted electoral system he became president anyways. His approval rating among American citizens is at 40% right now and Bob Ney went down on corruption charges. When we were attacked on September 11th Bush took advantage of the situation and ran with it, whipping up patriotism with dogmatic rhetoric and leading us down a path that it's going to take us a long time to backtrack out of. So please, don't judge us to be like George Bush, because some of us aren't. And the ones that are, their party is on the way out. Spazik007 20:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Point out the obvious

Well um, I'm late to this story, but if we rename Freedom Fries, and Freedom Toast, then as a logical conclusion, the Bush administration is opposed to policies of the Freedom Republic. That's an oops! *Ahem*. Anyway, um, just pointing that out. Kim Bruning 23:14, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Deft touch

You have a deft touch, Karada. Tannin 10:52, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)

french fries....?

Do any of you know what the percentage of people in Illinois like french fries? thanks! --Unsigned comment by 12.217.0.195 on 2004-11-12 02:14:46

No stats are taken on such trivial subjects... -- user:zanimum

Hah! You'd be surprised. I'm pretty sure that some stats along those lines are available somewhere. Not neccessarily for Illinois or french fries, but given the kind of stuff "market researchers" are paid for, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the possibility of such stats existing. — Ashmodai ^{(talk · contribs)} 02:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Frenched fries

Has it yet been pointed out that the term "french" in french fries has nothing to do with the nation of France? It is merely an abbreviated form of "frenched", meaning thinly sliced.

What evidence do you have for it? See French fries and Talk:French fries for more speculation and discussion. --Macrakis 19:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

From The Straight Dope ([5]): "By the way, the verb "to french" in cooking has come to mean to cut in long, slender strips, and some people insist that "french fries" come from that term. However, the French fried potato was known since the middle 1800s, while the OED cites the first use of the verb "to french" around 1895, so it appears pretty convincing that "french fried potatoes" came before the verb "frenching." The origin of the name is thus the country of origin French and not the cooking term french." --Kvaks 18:56, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Umm, I call BS on that. the term there would be julienne. We even have a fry cut, aka, a batonet. This coming from a person who knows Culinary terms (since that's my major...). "to french" Doesn't apply in this case.Luca 8:20, 24 February 2006 (EST)

In WWII they where first served at an American outpost in a french speaking quadrent of Germany, thus the naming of them being "French Fries".Altenhofen (talk) 20:10, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

French speaking part of Belgium. Not Germany.83.101.79.5 (talk) 16:55, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Rolled back this change...ok?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Freedom_fries&diff=43591361&oldid=43590848 To me the revision smacked much more strongly of POV

I think that change has been added by anons and reverted a number of times. It's clearly POV, and somewhat useless. You did the right thing. Makemi 18:01, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion

I would favor a merger of viewpoints in order to peacefully resolve the Edit Wars currently under way.

-Thank you,

Another Point of View —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.7.23.172 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protection

I have requested semi-protection here. TacoDeposit 21:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

This article lacks a fair and balanced viewpoint

Here is a more DIVERSE point of view:

FREEDOM FRIES

Freedom fries are successful symbols of U.S. unity and resolve in the face of highly adversarial, antagonistic French policies and provocations. These enduring symbols of American resistance to hostile, anti-American French policies were first popularized by courageous U.S. Congressman Robert W. Ney and Walter B. Jones in 2003.

Freedom Fries were a symbolic change that was highly effective and took hold in a meaningful way. The direct effect was to galvanize U.S. public opinion of and highten awareness to hostile French behavior and anti-American provocations. The adversarial French nation and its people continue to provoke America and provide the U.S. government and military leaders with a cause of action justifying any and all options in dealing with the French.

Freedom Fries marked a turning point in the obsolete trans-Atlantic Alliance and signaled a strategic re-alignment of pro-Western nations that no longer included France.

If that's a fair and balanced viewpoint, I'm a 37-foot-tall alien hamster from the planet $#!%é. 64.12.116.65 00:32, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Totally POV --Danielrocks123 22:22, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not from the US, and I'm utterly fascinated by this point of view. Would someone, even someone who doesn't agree with the above post, give me an example of "hostile French behavior"? I watch the news and read the papers and saw no mention of French warships off the American coast, France pointing missiles at New York or supplying weapons to America's enemies.

All I saw was France not supporting the US invasion of Iraq, around a year after it had whole-heartedly supported and joined in the US-led NATO operations in Afghanistan. Is this viewpoint essentially that any country which doesn't loudly support every aspect deserves to be bombed- even when its troops were still engaged as allies in a US-led operation?

Also, why were Robert W. Ney and Walter B. Jones "courageous"? Declaring war on French Fries is hardly a high risk activity: unless you're worried people will think you're an idiot- and these men obviously weren't.

Obviously weren't worried, I hope you mean.Djcartwright 08:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Oops, that wasn't clear, was it. Of course I mean they weren't worried. Still, can someone who actually thinks these men were courageous explain to me why? Will this period in American history be known as the great fried potato war, with courageous warriors boldly sending out emails demanding their cafeteria change the names on the menu. Imagine if the Red Army had had to cope with anagonistically named fast food at Stalingrad! They would probably have turned round and fled.

I think the "rephrasing" with a different POV was intended as satire, humor, and a reality check. The first two because, well it has to be. The third, because it describes what was passing for the "facts on the ground" in many people's minds here in the USA at the time. I chuckle, but also wonder if there would be a way to work in representation of that attitude at the time on the part of some or many USAians. Perhaps quote a pundit or two... Huw Powell 17:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

The Congressional renaming

On March 11, 2003, Representatives Robert W. Ney (R - Ohio) and Walter B. Jones, Jr. (R - North Carolina) declared that all references to "French fries" and "French toast" on the menus of the restaurants and snack bars run by the House of Representatives would be removed. House cafeterias were ordered to re-name French fries as "freedom fries". This action was carried out without a congressional vote, under the authority of Congressman Ney's position as Chairman of the Committee on House Administration, which oversees restaurant operations in the house. The simultaneous renaming of French toast to "freedom toast" attracted less attention. [6]

According to a statement released by Ney, this move was a symbolic effort to express displeasure with France's "continued refusal to stand with their U.S. allies" (see Iraq disarmament crisis). The statement further read: "This action today is a small, but symbolic, effort to show the strong displeasure many on Capitol Hill have with our so-called ally, France."

This feeling was spread through the Internet, chain e-mails and constant 24-hour news coverage from stations like CNN and Fox News.

Congressmen Ney and Jones, however, were not the first to re-name French fries as freedom fries. A number of private restaurants across the country started the renaming movement. Neal Rowland, owner of the privately owned fast-food restaurant Cubbie's in Beaufort, North Carolina, decided to sell his fried potato strips under the name "freedom fries." Rowland claimed that his intent was not to slight the French people, but to be patriotic and support President George W. Bush. Many of Rowland's customers were among the local military troops.

'Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierté le French kiss!

(Let's eat French fries, but above all let's French kiss with pride!)

-Anti-war protest organizer, Montreal (15 March 2003)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.97.199.87 (talk • contribs) 22:00, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

What a bloody joke.

Fair and balanced? Please...

Quote

"Here is a more DIVERSE point of view:

FREEDOM FRIES

Freedom fries are successful symbols of U.S. unity and resolve in the face of highly adversarial, antagonistic French policies and provocations. These enduring symbols of American resistance to hostile, anti-American French policies were first popularized by courageous U.S. Congressman Robert W. Ney and Walter B. Jones in 2003.

Freedom Fries were a symbolic change that was highly effective and took hold in a meaningful way. The direct effect was to galvanize U.S. public opinion of and highten awareness to hostile French behavior and anti-American provocations. The adversarial French nation and its people continue to provoke America and provide the U.S. government and military leaders with a cause of action justifying any and all options in dealing with the French.

Freedom Fries marked a turning point in the obsolete trans-Atlantic Alliance and signaled a strategic re-alignment of pro-Western nations that no longer included France."

Pfft... Diverse my ass...

AllStarZ 17:24, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Why is it that nobody talks about the Statue of Liberty?

This guy who posted about a balanced POV was funny, but it's also disturbing. Stupidity should be a main concern, something to really care about.

Isn't the statue of liberty a symbol of american values and democracy? Even when america doesn't live up to those values? Yes, i think it really is. And it really meant a lot to all those immigrants back at the 1900. "The land of opportunities."

And all that was possible because Alexandre Gustave Eiffel and Eugène Viollet-le-Duc made it possible. Remember --or get informed, if you didnt know-- that the statue of liberty was a French gift.

Re-naming french fries as liberty fies was vulgar and dumb thing to do. Hope it never happens again.

Spikedude44 12:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Remove the renaming of cities portion

Too much of a tangent from the original topic. Joncnunn 22:01, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Chips

I took out the word inferior from "some new zealanders use the inferior british term chips."

I changed "The 'Fries' tag remains today, though many New Zealanders use the British word 'chips'." to "Most New Zealanders, however, use the British word 'chips'." because as the 'Fries' tag is explained to be established, it's persistence doesn't need noting. Also, as a New Zealander, the word 'chips' is the normal term, and 'fries' or 'french fries' are considered more recent terms from American TV influence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.73.65.237 (talk) 10:21, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Name

Why were they called 'freedom' fries? Was it just to keep the alliteration, or is there some deeper significance to it that I'm missing? I mean, chips are not a symbol of liberty in England; do they have a connection to the American Revolution, for instance? Andyana 16:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Comparison with Fanxiu cars

Just a suggestion: The greatest renaming compaign might be launched in China during the Cultural Revolution. "ZIM," "ZIS," "Volga," and all the other brands of the Soviet automobiles and trucks were renamed by pasting the original emblem with a piece of paper with the Chinese characters 反修 ("Fanxiu" meaning "Anti-rivisionst") written on it. All the vehecles made in the US and other "capitalist" countries got the similar treatment, but renamed 反帝 ("Fandi" meaning "Anti-imperialist"). Tens of thousands of vehecles received this renaming, but as the paper and glue way of renaming was so perfunctory, most of the vehecles regained their original brands in hours or a couple of days. (comment by User:80.47.199.4 moved from article page to Talk page)

Question

Shouldn't this article mention that it got included in the title of a movie which featured it as an example of American patriotism? It was called "Freedom Fries: And Other Stupidity We'll Have to Explain to Our Grandchildren"

http://www.amazon.com/Freedom-Fries-Stupidity-Explain-Grandchildren/dp/B000J10FOG

Jaimeastorga2000 11:53, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

French Augmented 6ths??

Do we really need "French Augmented 6th chords" in the section that mentions other American words with "French" in it? It hardly has anything to do with American culture, like French Fries, French kissing or the other words mentioned. Its mention sounds a bit ridiculous as well as irrelevant. --Chopin-Ate-Liszt! 03:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Reactions

I wonder if we could add a section on reactions, or what might be considered counter-actions (no pun intended). I'd like to mention the 2003 "renaming" of french fries at Saturn Cafe in Santa Cruz, CA to "impeach Bush fries". At the time they claimed they'd donate some amount ($0.10?) per order of "impeach Bush fries" to a cause or fund (don't remember the specifics now) aimed at starting impeachment proceedings against President Bush. Does anyone know of any other reactions against the absurdity of "freedom fries"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlandahl (talk • contribs) 16:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I know many people here in Europe (and the world, I assume) found in funny that the word menu - which like much of the terminology of cuisine, is French in origin - was still used by the restaurants (a word also of French origin). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.198.141.130 (talk) 13:09, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Added graf on "France: Lobster Amerique"

The part about the lobster is totally irrelevant in this article, the choice of the name has NOTHING to do with an anti-American feeling and is just an invented name for a recipe that is more from provence that anywhere else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.247.151.129 (talk) 16:52, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

See hed Shlishke (talk) 03:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

German sheperd & Czechoslovakia

I removed sentence Similar renaming happened in Czechoslovakia after World War II (about German sheperd being renamed). The Czechoslovak Sheperd was a new (and largely unsuccessful) breed, initiated by the army, not a renamed one. Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 18:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Turkish Delight in Cyprus

I can't find a source (hence I didn't edit the actual page), but from 8 years living there I can vouch that since the 1974 invasion, Turkish Delight is referred to and marketed as "Cyprus Delight" on the Greek side of the island. This could go alongside the "Greek coffee" part. 91.125.39.59 (talk) 00:47, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I came here to say the same thing. Perhaps this would be an adequate source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3753928.stm Zestos (talk) 21:47, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Name and Subject of this article

The subject of this article is obvious, but it covers half-"Freedom fries" and half-Parallels, which includes none food related name changes after political alterations - maybe it's a good idea to spilt the "Historical Parallels" section, maybe to "List of notable name changes for political reasons" - which I must admit is a lengthy name and not precise. If this is followed-up we could removed some of the unrelated Parallels. --George2001hi (Discussion) 21:30, 8 November 2010 (UTC)