Hans Blix was reportedly arrested for phoning in bomb threats to sites suspected of concealing weapons of mass destruction.
When apprehended, witnesses say Blix repeatedly shouted "Warn them that you're coming." "You must warn them to move it!" and other cryptic messages.
No report on where Blix is currently being held.

Strike first!

I'm really excited by George Bush's latest reason for bombing Iraq: he's running out of patience.

And so am I!

For some time now I've been really pissed off with Mr Johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street.

Well, him and Mr Patel, who runs the health food shop.

They both give me queer looks, and I'm sure Mr Johnson is planning something nasty for me, but so far I haven't been able to discover what.

I've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden. That's how devious he is.

As for Mr Patel, don't ask me how I know, I just know - from very good sources - that he is, in reality, a Mass Murderer.

I have leafleted the street telling them that if we don't act first, he'll pick us off one by one.

Some of my neighbours say, if I've got proof, why don't I go to the police?

But that's simply ridiculous. The police will say that they need evidence of a crime with which to charge my neighbours. They'll come up with endless red tape and quibbling about the rights and wrongs of a pre-emptive strike and all the while Mr Johnson will be finalising his plans to do terrible things to me, while Mr Patel will be secretly murdering people.

Since I'm the only one in the street with a decent range of automatic firearms, I reckon it's up to me to keep the peace.

But until recently that's been a little difficult.

Now, however, George W. Bush has made it clear that all I need to do is run out of patience, and then I can wade in and do whatever I want!

And let's face it, Mr Bush's carefully thought-out policy towards Iraq is the only way to bring about international peace and security. The one certain way to stop Muslim fundamentalist suicide bombers targeting the US or the UK is to bomb a few Muslim countries that have never threatened us.

That's why I want to blow up Mr Johnson's garage and kill his wife and children. Strike first! That'll teach him a lesson. Then he'll leave us in peace and stop peering at me in that totally unacceptable way.
Mr Bush makes it clear that all he needs to know before bombing Iraq is that Saddam is a really nasty man and that he has weapons of mass destruction - even if no one can find them.

I'm certain I've just as much justification for killing Mr Johnson's wife and children as Mr Bush has for bombing Iraq.

Mr Bush's long-term aim is to make the world a safer place by eliminating 'rogue states' and 'terrorism'.

It's such a clever long-term aim because how can you ever know when you've achieved it? How will Mr Bush know when he's wiped out all terrorists? When every single terrorist is dead? But then a terrorist is only a terrorist once he's committed an act of terror. What about would-be terrorists? These are the ones you really want to eliminate, since most of the known terrorists, being suicide bombers, have already eliminated themselves.

Perhaps Mr Bush needs to wipe out everyone who could possibly be a future terrorist? Maybe he can't be sure he's achieved his objective until every Muslim fundamentalist is dead? But then some moderate Muslims might convert to fundamentalism. Maybe the only really safe thing to do would be for Mr Bush to eliminate all Muslims?

It's the same in my street. Mr Johnson and Mr Patel are just the tip of the iceberg. There are dozens of other people in the street who I don't like and who - quite frankly - look at me in odd ways. No one will be really safe until I've wiped them all out. My wife says I might be going too far but I tell her I'm simply using the same logic as the President of the United States. That shuts her up.

Like Mr Bush, I've run out of patience, and if that's a good enough reason for the President, it's good enough for me. I'm going to give the whole street two weeks - no, 10 days - to come out in the open and hand over all aliens and interplanetary hijackers, galactic outlaws and interstellar terrorist masterminds, and if they don't hand them over nicely and say 'Thank you', I'm going to bomb the entire street to kingdom come.

It's just as sane as what George W. Bush is proposing - and, in contrast to what he's intending, my policy will destroy only one street.

From a letter written by Terry Jones to the Observer

Sunday January 26, 2003

Here's a summary of some of the publicly available evidence against Saddam:
1) Invasion and occupation of Kuwait
2) Halabja chemical massacre
3) War against Iran
4) Unaccounted for WMD from previous declarations
5) al-Samoud 2 missiles
6) Obstruction of previous inspections missions
7) Shooting opponents during his acceptance speech

This is just SOME of the evidence. There's a lot more in declarations to the UN. The most damning and least controversial is the invasion and occupation of Kuwait, which clearly demonstrates his willingness to attack those beyond his borders.

Many opponents of action say there is 'no evidence'. These people can be divided into two groups:
1) Those who lie for geopolitical reasons
2) Those who believe them without a reality check.

To Dishman:

Quotation " Here's a summary of some of the publicly available evidence against Saddam:
1) Invasion and occupation of Kuwait
2) Halabja chemical massacre
3) War against Iran
4) Unaccounted for WMD from previous declarations
5) al-Samoud 2 missiles
6) Obstruction of previous inspections missions
7) Shooting opponents during his acceptance speech "

We all know that when he was doing those horrible things, it was with the blessing and support of perfectly-well-informed US and European administrations.

I mean that what you say is true but SH behaviour was already well known twenty years ago when he was our "friend".

So could you please be kind enough to give me more explanation about what changed to justify the present war ?

You missed "War against Saudi Arabia" and "Genocide of 250,000 Kurds," among others.

Froggie, I don't give a flying (France) about what idiot policies used to classify Hussein as a friend. He has always been a Hitler. The fact that America and Europe used to support him despite that is a damn shame, really quite disgusting. Yes, we should have been going after him years ago -- we were too stupid. What's changed is that we've woken the (France) up, and finally decided to eliminate him.

A better (Francing) analogy than the one you used might have Mr. Johnson beating and raping his wife daily (ie, genocides and secret police), and threatening our home with a flame thrower (ie, the weapons of mass destruction we know he has, his hatred of "Great Satan," his support of Palestinian terrorists, his willingness to dedicate money to alQaeda -- remember the buildings that fell down not so long ago)? Also, the idiot "police" -- more like neighborhood watch, actually, because I assume you meant the UN, by whose policies *we are not bound* -- should have tried to search the house three or four times, totally ineffectually, and skipping the rooms Mr. Johnson told them to skip. You know what? Yeah, I'd kill him. Save his wife (oppressed/slaughtered civilians) and save our home. Ignore the ineffective Neighborhood Watch and do the only safe and humane thing. How much of an imbecile would I be to choose any other action?

So you know what? (France) you, (France) Chirac, and (France) all the other idiot Froggies who have become so instinctively liberal and anti-America they're totally (Francing) incapable of actual thought. Hussein needs to go, for the sake of the Iraqis and the Americans.

-JS

Strategic thinkers in the US have been planning this stage of expansion for years. Paul Wolfowitz, now deputy secretary for defence, was writing about the need to invade Iraq in the mid-1990s.

The impending war will not be fought over terrorism, anthrax, VX gas, Saddam Hussein, democracy or the treatment of the Iraqi people. It is, like almost all such enterprises, about the control of territory, resources and other nations' economies.

Those who are planning it have recognised that their future dominance can be sustained by means of a simple economic formula: blood is a renewable resource; oil is not.

I. Don't. Give. A. (France). Why. Bush. Wants. War.

In the 1930's, Roosevelt pushed for war not to free the murdered Jews or the oppressed Germans. Evidence has mounted suggesting that he wasn't even primarily interested in protecting America -- his primary interests included riding the war to political victories (4 terms in office) and helping the US economy recover from the Great Depression (it worked). All right; these are wholly ignoble motivations to have gone to war. Who cares? It was still a just war, and some of those who fought it fought it for the right reasons (protect innocents and safeguard liberty).

You know, I happen to agree with you that Bush is an evil bastard -- an anti-Constitutional, anti-science, anti-cultural-progress un-President. So... he'll go to war for all the wrong reasons (GOP rally-'round-the-flag victories at home; economic recovery through Big Oil). Who cares? It's still a just and necessary war.

Why do my motivations for war have to be the same ones as Bush's?

-JS

Dear Frenchman;
The fact that a position paper, research and or book is written on military political positions do not mean the US has been desiring to invade Iraq since mid 1990s. These areas are explored for every potential problem. There were lots of thesis, papers and even war-games to prepare for war with Japan, starting in 1930. We did not want a war with Japan, simply preparing if it ever happened. There are probably scenarios written about some idiot running France and going bezerk with nuclear weapons. Obviously, don't want that to happen, but WRITING about it doesn't mean we do. It means we are prepared to handle a situation. This is something that every goverment and military does.

Danjo
(Does this mean everything I read is true?)

Please-
enough with the oil.
If all we wanted was cheap oil for our SUVs we could:
1. Stay put in Kuwait and take over the oil there.
2. Move fifty miles south and take over Saudi oil.
3. Move fifty miles north from Montana and take over Alberta
4. We could have stayed in Kuwait the first time instead of handing their oil fields back to them.
5. We could have moved into Iraq the first time.

Now, for the argument that it's all about helping "Big Oil." Has it occurred to any of you that "Big Oil" that pumps oil out of the Gulf of Mexico at a production cost of $12/barrel might NOT WANT a liberated and refurbished Iraqi oil production capability that can pump oil at $6/barrel? The American oil companies are happiest right now, when Iraq is sanctioned, can only pump 50% of what they were doing before the Gulf War, and the war anxieties are driving the prices that they sell crude for through the roof. If the US actually invades Iraq and stabilizes the country, "Big Oil's" profits will collapse.

To A Frenchman.....What a great reason for not going to war: a prior alliance. You would think the French, of all people, would understand the changing nature of relationships between nations. By the way, I don't believe you're really French. You're a little too rational and not quite egotistical enough. I'd peg you for an old time Madison, Wisconsin or Berkeley campus pinko.

Quotation : "What a great reason for not going to war: a prior alliance.You would think the French, of all people, would understand the changing nature of relationships between nations. "

Answer : I really like this blunt cynical answer.

Quotation : "I'd peg you for an old time Madison, Wisconsin or Berkeley campus pinko."

Question : Is it a compliment ? ;)

If this war is about 'Oil' then we would lift the sanctions on Iraq and buy the oil for less money than a war would cost. France don't want a war on Iraq because France built Nuclear reactors for Iraq and France (Jacques Chirach) has been doing business with them since he mid 70's. More people have died at the hands of the Iraqi rÈgime and if "So-Damn-Insane" is left alone more will die and not just on Iraq soil. Just do a search on France Nuclear reactor in Iraq at Yahoo or google and find the facts on the Chirach-Huseain relationship.

"That Bush and his clique have succeeded in shifting the rage of Americans from Osama bin Laden to Saddam Hussein constitutes one of the slickest tricks in the history of communication," Le Carre wrote.

No Frenchman, Americans stand for freedom and are not out to "Conquer the World". It's a good thing for you that we've been a nation for freedom or who knows, if we would have ignored Hitler like you want us to do with Hussein, you may not have the freedom to voice your opinion like you so eloquently do. Hussein and bin Laden are the same type people.

To DB :

Could you be kind enough to read the following article : George Monbiot Tuesday February 18, 2003 The Guardian "Too much of a good thing - Underlying the US drive to war is a thirst to open up new opportunities for surplus capital"

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-17-2003-35743.asp

And then come back on this forum and have chat with me.

To Frenchman:

I will be back to chat with you more, but just a quick note on your article of choice, or should I say the Author of the article. He has written in the past that the threat of bin Laden was fabricated, amusing to say the least.

Pssst...

frenchman...

get a freaking blog...

blogspot.com...

it's free...

Has anyone considered the fact that the French have never forgiven us for liberating them, perhaps the cause of their recent action?

hans blix has shown its color - it has just done a Pontius Pilate. To cover his failure to do his job of disarming saddam, he now follows the more popular side - more inspection. Popularity doesn't necessarily mean the right path. Popularity can easily be influenced by those with "financial interest" as the case of france and other european weasels. But of course blix is a european. The fact is; if saddam wants to

Yes American leaders are naÔve!! How will you explain the rationality behind their decision to include the UN, france and germany to participate in the debate regarding the security of America?? These weasels envy and hate USA so much that they will do the opposite of any plan and proposal suggested by the US. If not for these weasels the problem with iraq is over by now. The fact is; if saddam wants to disarm, it can be done in a period of one (1) week and not indefinitely as advocated by the weasels. Their intention is to let saddam ìoff-the-hookî without disarming to assure their financial and economic interest. The Secretary of State is at fault in this situation. Collin Powell played politics at the expense of USA. Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney is correct all along when they advocated for a unilateral American action. The US military can handle the problem by its own. The weasels can only contribute very small military force (which is really negligible). Press G. Bush must ëdecide, lead, and actí soon and not wait for the political maneuvering at the UNÖ

The UN has shown its color ñ it is doing a Pontius Pilate. To cover its failure to disarm saddam, it now follows the more popular side - more inspection. Popularity doesn't necessarily mean the right path. Popularity can easily be influenced by those with "financial interest" as the case of france . The fact is; if saddam wants to disarm, it can be done in a period of one (1) week and not indefinitely as advocated by the weasels. Their intention is to let saddam ìoff-the-hookî without disarming to assure their financial and economic interest. The Secretary of State is at fault in this situation. Collin Powell played politics at the expense of USA. Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney are correct all along when they advocated for unilateral American action. The US military can handle the problem by its own. The weasels can only contribute very small military force (which is really negligible). Press G. Bush must show leadership. He must ëdecide and actí soon and not wait for the political maneuvering at the UNÖ

Ladies and Gentlemen of this forum;

Stop the whining! If you are not with the US military ñ whoís in the frontline of this war, the best way to get even with those weasels is to fight them economically. Organize and START to ìboycott and trashî their mercedes, bmw, volkswagen, airbus, airfrance, lufthansa, renault, peugot, nissan, alcatel,michelin, siemens, and all of their products. For every dollar that you spend to purchase either of these products -- you contribute and finance their arrogance and disdain to the USA. They must not be able to do trade with America.
Simply purchase "MADE IN USA" and trash all foreign products. Trash their products out of the US market! This will help American companies, workforce, economy, and the country. UNITE !

The QUESTION; Does USA needs UN and france? UN being an irrelevant organization, which canít impose its own resolution, has libya as its chairman for their human right commission and irag as its chairman for their disarmament commission.-bizarre or strange? As for france, what can it do if ever it will join or continuously object to any US plan to solve the crisis with irag?-Nothing.
The intransigence of france is based on its hidden ëfinancial and economicí interest with irag. A French oil company ëTOTALí is the biggest beneficiary for its violation of UN economic sanction. It is afraid that the world will uncover the extent of their collaboration with saddam.
The decision of the Secretary of State Collin Powell to involve the UN into the discussion concerning USA security is a big plunder. Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney are correct all along when they advocated for unilateral American action. The US military can handle the problem by its own. The weasels can only contribute very small military force (which is really negligible).
The US government must stop wasting American taxpayerís money by HALTING or reducing its contribution to UN and NATO. The budget will be better spent and reinvested to the US military and economy.

To France and European COLLABORATORS of Saddam;

Every Iraqi and Kurds has the right to be free (like the Europeans) from the dictatorship and tyranny of Saddam.

SHAMELESS France supports Saddam as a way to protect their oil contracts at the expense of every Iraqi and Kurds. Your DEPLORAPLE business with Saddam are all in violation of the UN trade embargo and therefore illegal. DESPICABLE France must be tried as an accessory and accomplice to all atrocities and genocide committed by Saddam to its own people particularly the Kurds.

Stop your sabotage at the effort of America to liberate Iraq from Saddam.

Bootlickers can show their CROCODILE concern by putting Saddam as the King of France and the President of Europe. ìVive Europe - Long live Der Fuhrer Saddamî.

i j'en crois ce que j'ai pu lire, la fiertÈ amÈricaine se rÈsume aux victoires qu'ont connues les USA, c'est bien, mais Áa ne fait pas tout. Leur esprit de "supÈrioritÈ" est agaÁant (Áa doit faire sourire Monsieur Lafayette).
J'ai aussi remarquÈ que les arguments employÈs contre les FranÁais (sauf Monsieur Lafayette qui n'est finalement qui prÈfËrerait Ítre amÈricain [c'est son choix, je le respecte]) datÈs d'une Èpoque ancestrale, que pour nous prouver leur "supÈrioritÈ", certaines personnes sur ce forum se basent sur des faits passÈs. Mais je pense que de vouloir faire la guerre au bon vouloir de Mr Bush ne dÈmontre pas du tout, mais alors pas du tout, cette "supÈrioritÈ".

Merci LoÔc pour les compliments.

A Mikey, cessez donc de dire des ‚neries, le franÁais, que vous devez avoir du mal ‡ comprendre, est parlÈ par 150 000 000 de personnes (Áa ne fait pas 6 milliards, mais c'est dÈj‡ Áa). De plus, je suis fier de parler ma langue comme vous, vous parlez la votre et je trouve stupide que vous disiez ceci (Monsieur Lafayette devrait, cette fois-ci de mon avis). Mikey, tout ce que vous dites sur ma langue montre que vous n'allez pas chercher vos arguments bien loin (serait-ce le mÍme intellect que Mr Bush ?) et que vous avez une tolÈrance trËs moindre des autres cultures qui font notre humanitÈ.

Je tiens ‡ dire que certaines personnes, pro-US ou pro-franÁais, ne font qu'insulter ceux qui s'expriment librement sur ce forum. Ces personnes n'ont rien ‡ faire ici. C'est intolÈrable d'insulter et de dire des "conneries" (Cf Mickey qui m'apprÈcie tout particuliËrement, par exemple) aux gens qui expriment leurs pensÈes. (cette libertÈ de pensÈ est un droit inaliÈnable, que ce soit aux USA ou en France, donc respectez-la.)

Messieurs, ‡ plus tard.

First of all, please excuse any english mistake, since I'm part of the weasels (and on top of that, I am a young weasel).

I've read most of these posts here, and i'm really wondering if some people here are serious or not. Some are so narrow-minded that when think about France, they see the old country described in the Simpsons "The Crepes of Wrath"...

Don't be ridiculous, look at yourself before laughing at the others ; is the US that wonderful ? everyone's free ! except that your governement is voting acts in order to watch you.
Do you know something about human rights, or human dignity ? We do not condemn people to the death penalty anymore, and as someone said on a private board (Mnem, si tu me lis ;) ), when someone's under arrest, he's not considered as "guilty", until the evidences show he really is.
Time to quote Oscar Wilde : "America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between."

"In June 2000, during President Clinton's last year in office, France was the only one (talk about unilateralism) of 107 countries to refuse to sign a U.S. initiative aimed at encouraging democracy around the world." (http://slate.msn.com/id/2077874/)
Hey, just read what I've written before. I think a democracy in this world has to respect the Human Rights.
I'd also like to add something : which country didn't ratify the Kyoto Treaty in 1997 ? yeeesss ! United States of Amercia, which is by the way the most polluting country... "don't pollute ! we do."

What I mostly dislike in USA, is it's selfishness : "I don't care of what happens now in Somalia, but will you buy these Nike shoes or not ?". You'll tell me that's not true, that U.S. do a lot for the world to be better... blah blah blah...

Hey, do you know what is in Cote d'Ivoire ? there are the cola nuts pepsi needs to make your soda. Hey, don't you know who's trying to keep your intersts safe here ? France... (whether France does it badly or not is another problem).

Actually, you need us, you need the Axis of Weasels, since we buy your products...

Another weird thing : have you ever heard of smart cards ? do you know it's France which own the patents (Gencom) ? So americans wants us to pay for using the patented techologies, but they never wanted to give a buck to be allowed use smart card... damn, you card system is less secured than ours...

well, I could give more and more reasons, which are widely shared here, but I'll finish with one thing : North Korea. Oooh, my god, they surely have nuclear weapons (and a wonderful nuclear weapons program), they hate americans above all things, but you don't care, do you ?

Iraq is more dangerous than North Korea, they have petrol. North Korea only has nuclear weapons.

Be honest, US won't attack N.K. which is obviously a bigger threat, and if you wanted to push Saddam away, "Bush Daddy" would have done it in 1991...

Alors qu'une grande partie du monde proteste dans les rues M.Bush fait mine de rien entendre.

C'est tout ce que j'avais ‡ dire et Áa en dit long en ce qui concerne l'intelligence de Bush.

Gardez la tÍte haute Arnaud et Frenchman, vous semblez porter (vous au moins :-))les vraies valeurs franÁaises qui sont l'ÈgalitÈ, la libertÈ et la fraternitÈ (je rajouterais l'intelligence!!!).

cher simon vous Ítes bien gentil et drolement culottÈ car avant d'ecrire vos enfantillages, vous devriez ouvrir un livre d'histoire sur les compromis de dalladier + chamberlain en 1938 avec hitler...

comme vous ils pensaient que l'on peux traiter
avec un dictateur, la suite a prouvÈe qu'ils
avaient totalement tort.

je vous souhaite donc bonne lecture !

ps: n'oubliez pas non plus qu'aujourd'hui vous Ítes franÁais et libre et pas teuton/germain : et ceci grace aux americains qui se sont fait casser la gueule pour vos parents, et donc pour vous !

donc respect pour ceci !

Strategic thinkers in the US have been planning this stage of expansion for years. Paul Wolfowitz, now deputy secretary for defence, was writing about the need to invade Iraq in the mid-1990s.

The impending war will not be fought over terrorism, anthrax, VX gas, Saddam Hussein, democracy or the treatment of the Iraqi people. It is, like almost all such enterprises, about the control of territory, resources and other nations' economies.

Je tiens ‡ dire que certaines personnes, pro-US ou pro-franÁais, ne font qu'insulter ceux qui s'expriment librement sur ce forum. Ces personnes n'ont rien ‡ faire ici. C'est intolÈrable d'insulter et de dire des "conneries".

"That Bush and his clique have succeeded in shifting the rage of Americans from Osama bin Laden to Saddam Hussein constitutes one of the slickest tricks in the history of communication," Le Carre wrote.

European...you know absolutely nothing about what you are talking about. The US trade deficit with Germany and France grew even higher in the last year. We're buying a lot more of your products than you are of ours.

Our government is "voting acts in order to watch" us? Damn right. And yours will too, eventually, when France becomes a dual language (Arabic) country. When I lived in North Africa, the running joke about France was "When you fly south from Paris, what's the first Arabic city you come to?" Answer...Marseilles.

Respect human rights? Now I know you're an idiot and a hypocrite. You say that we don't respect human rights, and then you get in bed with Robert Mugabe. France's single biggest PR problem right now is that many Americans think that all French people think just like you.

The single most important thing that Bush 41 taught us is that it is incredibly stupid to blindly follow the UN's will. The only reason the war was stopped was because he did not want to exceed the mandate of the UN, and it's been one of the biggest foreign policy blunders of my lifetime.

You may be right about us not being civilized. Euopean has much greater monuments than we do. We only have crass objects such as the Washington Monument, the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials, the Golden Gate Bridge, the Gateway Arch. But we really have to hand it to you Europeans. I love the great national monument of Belgium...a statue of a kid taking a leak. Now that's civilization.

Iraq more dangerous than NKorea? Damn right again, because two nuclear threats is much worse than only one.

European...you are right about one thing. You are a young weasel. Come back when you grow up.

>> . I love the great national monument of Belgium...a statue of a kid taking a leak. Now that's civilization.

There you got me, Robert. Until now I could still give you the benefit or the doubt. You are just an idiot, that does not know what he is talking about. The Mannekenpiss is just local folklore, but has always had a political meaning. The suits that wears have been put there for specific reasons. During the nazi occupation people even defended the jews through that small thing, that weared a striped KZ-haftling suit until the german tore it off.

If you ever come to Belgium, and more generally to Europe you will be amazed to see how, in just a few months, all the sincere sympathy that the USA had after the 9/11 tragedy has been destroyed.

By preposterous and racists idiots like you (yes racists: what's wrong with arabs? You want to put them in concentration camps?).

Moreover Marseille is a beautiful town, but you are too stupid to even realize it.

You seem quite brainwashed, my dear. And your country is losing friends every step you do. There's nothing one can do with you. May you enjoy killing iraqi children as much as you enjoyed killing vietnamese peasants, hopefully with similar results.

I've been to Marseilles, and I've been to Brussels twice. I live in Europe. The little boy's suits are for specific reasons? Explain Elvis.

America isn't losing friends...it's enemies are showing themselves for who the really are.

And you...your last line says all that needs to be said about you. I would like to see Saddam fall quickly and the Iraqis surrender with minimal casualties. You, on the other hand, are the one who is perfectly happy to let Iraqis continue to be killed by Saddam and his thugs. It's one thing to be against the war...but your last line plainly indicates that you hope America will be defeated. You truly are an enemy of our country.

BTW Jeff, the Marseilles joke was first told to me by a Muslim friend and colleague.

As I said, I do live in Europe...Eastern Europe. Of course, to you elitists in Belgium, France, and Germany, they don't count as being European. And you want to talk about racism...let's get into how you guys really feel about letting Turkey into the EU. As has been said, they aren't really "European", right??? If Iraq bordered any other NATO country, you never would have objected to planning for their defense. But since it was Turkey, a Muslim country, you couldn't care less what happens to them. Next time you want to call someone a racist...look in the mirror.

In response to the Terry Jones piece posted by Frenchman, see this:

http://cmnewman.blogspot.com/2003_02_01_cmnewman_archive.html#89606609

Dear A Frenchman,

It has come to my attention that your country is made up entirely of spineless morons who support a dictator who was perfectly willing to massacre 250,000 kurds. Tell me, how do you say, "jackass" in french?

I would just like everyone to know that I fully support Saddam and all his actions to date. I think he was fully justified in massacaring all those people. After all, who would want dirty kurds polluting the holy islamic nation of Iraq? In a final note, I would also like everyone to know that the French are superior, the Jews deserved what they got and DOWN WITH AMERICA!

Reading some of the comments I¥ve really been LMFAO.

@ Robert: We do not want Turkey in the EU because they do not share our common values, it¥s not about racism (however you might define it - you seem to base it on religion). Proof: Bulgaria and Romania are also not wanted.

Read Huntingtons "Clash of Civilizations" and you will get an idea of cultural borders and the nasty things that happen there (see Balkan). I do not want such a border within the EU. Ever looked at a map ? It¥s the European Union, not the Middle East Union. Europe has no borders with Iran and Iraq for sure.

Here¥s an map of Europe with it¥s cultural borders, which make up civilizations:

http://www.boomspeed.com/weirdteacher/europe.gif

And here¥s the article of Huntington - see chapter IV for details (and get the book)

http://www.lander.edu/atannenbaum/Tannenbaum%20courses%20folder/POLS%20364%20Terrorism%20course%20folder/364_huntington_clash_of_civilizations_full_text.htm

@ Down with the French: don¥t forget that the biggest slaughterer of Kurds is Turkey, a NATO ally and close friend to the US, you hypocritical anonymus.

@ Shlif: Iraq was not in war with Saudi Arabia

@ DB: So Chirac had business relationships with Saddam since the 70¥s ? Here¥s an picture of Mr. Rumsfeld shaking Saddams hand in the 80¥s, one year after he gassed the Kurds at Halabja ...

http://www.boomspeed.com/weirdteacher/rumsfeld.jpg

And France sold Iraq nuclear reactors ? Why not ? That was in the 70¥s. Rumsfeld sold nuclear power reactors to North Korea - he was on the board of the company (ABB) that won the contract ... ever heard a word of it ? In the 90¥s btw ...

Osama bin Laden + Germany + Saddam + France

The extend in which France and Germany are trying to use all possible tricks to stop the plans of USA to liberate Irag from Saddam is the same trick which Saddam uses with regards to its WMD. France objective is to guarantee their financial interest (Total-elf-fin), and most importantly;-- to prevent America from capturing Saddam and its apparatus. Franco-German are afraid that once the US military starts interrogating a captured Saddam and his henchmen, America will stumble into a hard evidence linking Osama Bin Laden, France, Germany, and Saddam on a plot against USA.

At present, the evidences linking Saddam to Osama Bin Laden are as follow:

1.) The meeting between the 9/11 ringleader Mohammad Atta and an Iraqi officer in Prague.
2.) The meeting between Osama Bin Laden and Faruk(Iraqi head of intelligence) in their Turkey embassy.
3.) The assistance Saddam extended to Al-Qaida terrorists escaping US troops from Afghanistan.
4.) Iraqi Embassy diplomat direct link with an Asian terrorist group called Abu-Sayaff (with proven Al-Qaida link).

The 9/11 terror attack against America has opened a lot of circumstances, that needs to be clarified and answered once Saddam will be under US custody.

These are:

1.) Most of the direct perpetrator of 9/11 terror attacks against America stayed and lived in Germany.
---- Why and Who financed and coordinated these terrorist??

2.) Moussaoui, the 20th hijacker is a French citizen.
---- Is he working as a coordinator for France intelligence apparatus??

3.) Most Arab terrorist who are positively identified by the CIA are presently in-captivity at Germany and France. But they vehemently refuses to handover these people to the FBI for further questioning.
---- Are they afraid that these terrorist knows too much and might spill the extent of Franco-German collaboration??

4.) The precision in which these terrorist slammed the hijacked aircrafts to the Pentagon and WTC shows thorough training. Records shows that these Arabs have trained in some flying schools in America. But the same record also shows that their performance during and after the training were below par. After the completion of their US training, these terrorists disappeared for a while.
---- Where they sent to Europe for further precision training by Lufthansa Airlines of Germany and Air France??

5.)Airline companies in the USA uses both the American Boeing Aircraft and the Franco-german Airbus in their fleet. Also, AirFrance and Lufthansa aircrafts were in the US airports during 9/11.
---- Why is it that all aircrafts used in the 9/11 attack were US built Boeing and owned by US registered airlines??
---- Is this design to divert US investigators away from the european collaborators??
---- And at the same time, to deliberately weaken American owned airlines- which the European canít compete without state subsidies??

6.)The targets of 9/11 were the World Trade Center Buildings ( Symbols of American Economic Power ) and the Pentagon ( Symbols of American Military Power ). During those times, the value of the European euro was at 0.8 US dollar ( 1 euro = 0.8 US$) from its introductory value of 1.10 US dollar ( 1 euro = 1.10 US $ ) a year before.
---- Was the WTC attack designed to weaken US economy in order to stop the decline of euro and its influence??
---- On the other hand, was the Pentagon attack a Franco-german concession to Osama Bin Ladenís cooperation with them??

These may be circumstantial. It can be proven or disputed once the US military captures Saddam and its cohorts. But for a very obvious reason, France and Germany are pulling all tricks and machinations to harass and stop USA from going into Iraq. President George HW Bush should make the proper decision of liberating the Iraqi people from a Franco-German supported Saddam with or without the irrelevant UN. The truth must be pursued...