Vocabulary: Quite & Quiet

Quite
We use quite as an adverb, to describe something to a certain degree, or to the greatest extent.It is also used to describe something exceptional or remarkable, and also to express actuality.
Examples:
1 It was quite a sudden change for Elliot to move out of his parents' house.
2.Sasha's victory at the junior Olympics was quite something!
Quiet
As an adjective, quiet is used to describe little or no noise, or something that is calm and untroubled.As a noun, we use it to signify the quality or condition of being quiet.
Examples:
1.A menacing quiet fills the empty streets.(Time)
2.Brandon likes to spend his afternoons near a quiet lake.
Act Up
to misbehave or lose control; (for a machine) to malfunction or to break down.
Examples:
1.The washing machine is acting up again. I can't get it to work!
2. Melisa always acts up when she doesn't get what she wants.
Rice in Europe
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's soothing words went down well with French officialdom.
But not with the French media. Except for Le Figaro, the other papers expressed skepticism, even derision.
“Can we trust Rice?” France-Soir asked. Liberation said in English: “She talks the talk but can she walk the walk?” L'Est Republicaine was blunt: “Before declaring that the quarrel is over . . . we have got to convince the American hyperpower that transatlantic cohesion means offering friends even the most difficult ones. Something more than just a seat in the corner, where they can watch the debate without deciding a thing.”
Precisely. Secretary Rice's new chapter is filled only with America's concerns: Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel and the global war on terror. She did not even give a hint of the things that matter to the Europeans: global warming, multilateralism, a diplomatic demarche to Iran, Europe's Muslim populations.
However, on “the growing unity of Europe,” Secretary Rice was forthright. The US would not want Europe to become a counterweight to US power.
Her appeal “to turn away from the disagreements of the past” did not mean that the neocom agenda of unfettered exercise of US military and economic might has been abandoned or even modified.
Indeed, think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute are dead set against European consolidation. A recent Atlantic Council report said that the Bush administration regards Europe as “being on probation.” Future relations would depend on Europe acquiescing in America's strategic priorities. In Washington, some influential quarters believe that a united Europe poses a threat to American interests and advocate blocking its emergence.
Of course, European unity hinges formally on member states agreeing to the European Constitution. Practical unity as distinguished from coordination is still many years into the future.
Therefore, it's important for countries like France, Germany and the United Kingdom to keep the European optique in clear focus. They would have to convince the US that global peace and prosperity could be attained by equal partnership and principled dialogue with Europe.
While we think that it would be a mistake to follow Mr. Jurgen Habermas's advice of building European unity around “transatlantic value differences,” it would be more profitable to construct unity on those values that Europe shares with the US freedom, individual choice, democracy and the rule of law.
To begin this process the Bush administration should seriously consider a more symmetric relationship with Europe for the good of all.
1.Why was the French media skeptical regarding Condoleezza Rice's recent press release?
2.What do they think would be more profitable option for European countries?