Incidently, on the above (title) pseudo-conceptual distinction: Donald Rumsfeld basically used "Old Europe," to name those nations whose views were of no concern because of their reluctance to toe Washington's line. The "New Europe" was symbolized by Italy, whose prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, was at the time visiting the White House. It was, evidently, unproblematic that public opinion in Italy was overwhelmingly opposed to the war.) [This definition is indebted to Chomsky, but I forget where I read it.]
n.b., A word one frequently hears in Bushite discussions of Europe is the word 'ingratitude'. The implicit sentiment is that it is surely miraculous that the U.S. continues selflessly to serve the world when flagrant 'ingratitude' (democratic opposition) is so commonplace. The 'ingratitude' trope is also present, like some ideological meme parasitising their webspace and using it for reproductive purposes, on the 'No Pasaran' site mentioned below. Anyway, such sentiments recall nothing so much as Prospero's anger at Ariel:
I must/ Once in a month recount what thou hast been, / Which thou forget'st. This damn'd witch Sycorax, / For mischiefs manifold and sorceries terrible / To enter human hearing, from Argier, / Thou know'st, was banish'd: for one thing she did/ They would not take her life. Is not this true? (for Sycorax read 'Saddam'.)
Anyway , the only reason I mentionthe old/ new Europe distinction, is to illustrate John Berger's previously quoted words: The new tyranny, like other recent ones, depends to a large degree on a systematic abuse of language. Together we have to reclaim our hijacked words and reject the tyranny's nefarious euphemisms.'