The French, What a Bunch of Morons VIII

“Jacques in the box

02/20/03




French President Jacques Chirac has a soupcon of a problem: No one is listening to him.

The country of Charles de Gaulle is a has-been on the international stage. So when Chirac threatened this week to bar dissenting Eastern Europeans at the European Union door, calling them "uncivilized" and "reckless" for backing America in its prospective war against Iraq, the offenders simply shrugged. Poland's deputy foreign minister, Adam Rotfeld, called it indicative of "a certain paternal approach" and told France to respect Poland's right to decide for itself.


Information from Our Advertisers




Chirac's ill-considered diatribe against EU wannabes and his failure to manage la cacophonie, as Paris' Le Monde newspaper has termed the intra-Europe dispute, point to trouble ahead for the European Union. After spending nearly 50 years inside the Soviet bloc, central Europe's nations are not keen on taking on another dictatorship - even one run by Germany or France. Moreover, NATO stands in the balance. Bulgaria and Romania, the two EU aspirants with the most economic difficulties, want into the military alliance badly enough that they will roll over if Washington requires it.

Chirac undid weeks of posturing with his outburst, prompted by frustration at Washington's continuing ability to outmaneuver and isolate la belle France. Paris still sees itself as a natural leader of Europe. But this week at NATO, decision-makers simply bypassed the North Atlantic Council, in which France has a vote, to get military gear moving to Turkey. And at the EU, France was outflanked by nations now on record as favoring military force against Iraq "as a last resort."

Still, France may get the last laugh at the United Nations, where it still has a veto and is providing protective cover for Russia and China to oppose a war. Even the White House treats the matter gingerly. President George W. Bush "respects President Chirac, and he appreciates the fact that President Chirac told the president exactly what he thought," spokesman Ari Fleischer said Tuesday. The comment reflects the current reality - that France must be wooed for a second U.N. resolution to become possible, and that Chirac does speak for many Europeans when he criticizes war plans as hasty and ill-considered.

So bringing Chirac aboard matters, even if Washington hopes to get around his concerns with a narrowly worded resolution from which France can abstain. In this, diplomacy matters.




© 2003 The Plain Dealer.


Gtance seriously sucks, and we should boycottt anything that has to do with them,”

“there is now evidencec that JOCK CHIRAC himself was the man responsible for personally negotiating the deal to build the nuclear power plant in iraq and that he and hussien are good friends. no wonder he opposes our invasion.....his fingerprints are all over hussein's WMD's......”

“Yeah! And the french eat cheese! yeah and umm.. they are the reason that the HOLE IN THE OZONE layer is there! and umm... the french EAT THEIR YOUNG, and they have eight wives each, and they are... umm... bad and stuff! Oh yeah, and they smell! And there's EVIDENCE that they were going to sell the US to the JAPANESE in world war 1, but they couldn't BECAUSE THEY GAVE UP TOO SOON.

Yeah.

Stupid french fried frog fags!”

“yeah yeah phaedie, you just keep on tellin yerself that they are good as gold......if that makes ya feel better...


he ain't opposing us on principle....you watch and see.....there's more to this picture than meets the eye....


not only do they(and russia and china) have lucrative oil deals with hussein, they have been arming him as well....


stratdewd has spoken.....”

“"The French are sawed-off sissies who eat snails and slugs and cheese that smells like people's feet. Utter cowards who force their own children to drink wine, they gibber like baboons even when you try to speak to them in their own wimpy language."

- Pj O'Rourke, "Holidays in Hell"”

“Russia buying oil from Iraq...

OY!

France supplying weapons to Iraq...

It must be true, you heard it on the radio, right?”

“Look who we were supporting in the 80s... It was 24 years ago
this week, February 11, 1979, that a stated enemy of the U.S.,
the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, seized power in Iran, and seized
the American embassy, thereby inaugurating the modern Islamic
revolutionary movement. The Carter administration decided that
one way to contain that revolution was to keep supporting Iraq's
war with Iran. Protecting legitimate U.S. national interests
sometimes makes for strange bedfellows around the globe. However,
two wrongs -- supporting murderous regimes then and now -- don't
make a right.

Bush is a cowboy -- we can't go to Iraq without a unified
"international community" front... Perhaps the most widespread
mantra of the Left is to accuse President Bush of having a
"cowboy mentality" -- a foreign policy propensity to go-it-alone,
not to mention imperialistic ambitions. The President is sworn
to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United
States." This includes imminent threats to national security, with
or without international consensus. Fortunately, an international
consensus has emerged, "old Europe" notwithstanding.

Iraq is not an imminent threat... The information presented to
the UN Security Council by Sec. of State Colin Powell last week
is just the tip of the iceberg. For 16 months, the exposure of
numerous connections between Saddam Hussein's Iraqi regime and
Osama bin Laden's al-Qa'ida network provides more than adequate
justification for a preemptive strike against Iraq. And the WMD
threat from Iraq is not symmetric; rather, it is asymmetric in
that there is imminent danger that Saddam has already provided,
or certainly will provide WMD to surrogates like al-Qa'ida, who
will then deploy or detonate those weapons in a major U.S. urban
center -- or that of an ally.

There is no evidence of WMD in Iraq -- the UN has found
nothing... "No evidence"? Once again, the Left subscribes
to the notion that if you repeat a lie often enough, it will
become the truth. As for "finding nothing," UN inspectors will
find little without Iraq's mandated cooperation -- and Iraq has
NOT cooperated. Propagating the lie, the French unveiled a plan
to triple the number of UN inspectors in Iraq. UN Chief Weapons
Inspector Hans Blix panned the suggestion: "The principal problem
is not the number of inspectors but rather the active co-operation
of the Iraqi side, as we have said many times." The U.S. has now
presented ample evidence that Iraq is in possession of WMD --
most recently in the very public forum of Secretary Colin Powell's
briefing of the UN Security Council.

As for Saddam's humorous decree yesterday banning the production of
WMD in Iraq, and ordering his ministers to "take whatever measures
are necessary and punish people who do not adhere to it," that
order has already been issued, and Saddam is at the front of the
line for castigation.

We talk with North Korea, so why not Iraq?... Many pundits have
expressed concern that the Bush administration is devoting too
much time to the issue of Iraq, while the more pressing issue
of the North Korean nuclear program looms large, but is only
given lip service. (As we recall, President Bush included North
Korea prominently among the three nations forming the "Axis of
Evil.") What, exactly, has "talk" achieved in either case?

Of course, there is a substantial difference in motivations of
Baghdad and Pyongyang. While Saddam Hussein maintains ties with
terrorist organizations bent on the destruction of the West,
posing a clear and present danger to the national security of
the United States, Kim Jong Il is -- not for the first time --
applying pressure to his neighbors and the U.S. in order to obtain
economic concessions.

However, no one is ignoring the North Korean threat. The
U.S. representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency,
Kenneth Brill, noted that "the time is right for the Security
Council to begin considering this issue, [because Pyongyang's]
nuclear weapons program poses a direct threat to international
peace and security. ... [The threat that North Korea] will sell
fissile material to rogue states and terrorists is too great to
ignore." Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has already raised
the specter of this scenario; look for significant attention to
be paid to the Korean Peninsula in the aftermath of a second Gulf
War.

This war is just about oil... While some detractors suggest
prosecuting the Iraqi front is solely about oil, in the Middle
East, oil is intrinsic to regional stability, and regional
stability is intrinsic to the national security interests of the
United States -- including U.S. demand for Middle East oil.

Prosecuting Iraq will invite escalated terrorist attacks...
Indeed, the front with Iraq in our war with Jihadistan is the most
perilous yet. At best, successfully disarming Iraq will cut off one
major WMD resource for al-Qa'ida and other terrorist organizations.
At worst, al-Qa'ida has already been supplied some WMD by Iraq.
For sure, al-Qa'ida IS planning new attacks against the U.S. using
various conventional and WMD assaults, with the objective of
reducing our economy to ruins. Some analysts at the highest
levels of the intelligence and military communities believe that
al-Qa'ida will, eventually, detonate a nuclear weapon (not just
a radiological dispersion device but a fission weapon) in a major
U.S. urban center -- and that this attack IS inevitable.

Will the prosecution of the Iraqi front "invite" these attacks --
make the inevitable happen sooner rather than later? Perhaps it
will accelerate some conventional, biological or chemical attacks.
Disarming Iraq will, in effect, disarm a great number of al-Qa'ida
operatives -- but it will NOT disarm all of them. However,
failing to put Saddam out of business will ensure that al-Qa'ida
operatives are fully armed.

The good news -- for the 17 months since 9-11, al-Qa'ida
"sleeper cells" now positioned in the U.S. have been quiet.
Our intelligence sources estimate that there may not be enough of
those cells to expend them on conventional attacks (car bombs,
homicide bombers, et al.). They conclude this means that those
cells have not yet acquired nuclear-strike capability.

The Iraqi front with Jihadistan is replete with pitfalls. There are
going to be many casualties -- both military and civilian. Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declared: "There are moments in history
when the judgment and the resolve of free nations are put to
the test. This is such a moment. The security environment we
are entering is the most dangerous the world has seen. The lives
of our children and grandchildren could well hang in the balance."

President Bush understands the enormous risks and implications
of this conflict. No one has suggested that prosecuting the
front with Iraq is a panacea; the war with Jihadistan does not
end there.”

“Blah blah blah cut and past opinion blah blah blah.

And I'm the hack.

Pfft.”

“oh yeah....nice comeback man.....you really shot down all the points.....we believe you phead....really we do.....”

“okay, strat:

According to the White House, we're not going to invade Iraq because of the oil. We're not going to invade because Saddam Hussein has been less than forthcoming about destroying his weapons. We're not going to invade to save the Middle East from tyranny. We're going to invade because our President knows in his infallible "gut" that Saddam has to be taken out for the safety of the world.

That's the message from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Damn our European "allies." Damn the UN. Damn NATO - trust George Bush's gut.

Damn tens of millions of protestors - trust George Bush's gut.



Damn US Military Advisers and Republicans like Brent Scowcroft and Weapons Inspectors like Hans Blix - trust George Bush's gut.

If we're going to trust his gut, shouldn't we perform some quick due diligence on just how accurate his gut has been in the past?

After bumbling through Yale, dodging service in Vietnam and getting Poppy to deep-six a drunk driving arrest, Dubya decided to try the oil business - a classic launching pad for wildcatters to make millions trusting their gut instincts.

Bush trusted his gut at four different companies - Arbusto, Bush Exploration, Spectrum 7 and Harken. Guess what? His gut failed him every single time. He failed to make a dime for his investors, drilled dry hole after dry hole, bumbled from collapse to catastrophe...and got rich in the process. How? Bush was always bailed out by his daddy's pals, who obviously figured that, with his family connections, he might become useful.

As Governor, Bush's gut told him that rapacious corporations would "self-regulate" themselves into responsible civic institutions. That's how Houston became America's smoggiest city in the calamity that became known as "Smokestack Texas." His gut told him he didn't need to apply for Federal funds to feed hungry schoolchildren, so Texas slid from 29th to 48th place in the list of "Best Places In America To Raise Kids." His gut told him he had too many living citizens, so George barbecued 131 death row inmates (publicly chuckling about their deaths), despite documented tales of underpaid, incompetent defense attorneys sleeping through trials. His gut told him to cut taxes without cutting spending, and now Texas is as good as bankrupt.

As President, Bush's fabled gut told him to ignore the warnings of the outgoing Clinton Administration to pay attention to this dangerous dude named Osama bin Laden. Nope, the Golden Gut of G.W. Bush told him that his Administration would ignore the rest of the world. Blow off the Kyoto Accords? Why not? They were ginned up by a lot of strange-talkin' furriners. Let the Middle East Peace Process take care of itself. No foreign "adventures," no "nation-building," no pokin' our nose where it doesn't belong.

Then came September 11. Let history record that George Bush's gut told him he wasn't needed back at the White House on that day, looking straight into the camera eye, acting Churchillian, reassuring his terrified countrymen and telling Osama bin Laden that he couldn't be intimidated. No, his gut told him to fly all over the country in Air Force One, and then put out a clumsy, self-serving lie that the presidential flying fortress had been "targeted by the terrorists."

Bush's gut told him the way to stimulate the economy was a colossal tax cut/giveaway to our wealthiest citizens. This threw a prosperous economy into recession, spooked the financial markets and turned a colossal surplus into a crushing deficit. What does Bush's now-legendary gut tell him needs to be done? More tax cuts for his wealthy compatriots, of course, without any restraints on Republican (and Democratic) pork barrel spending. Doesn't make any sense, does it? But that's the thing about ignoring logic and "trusting your gut." Logic doesn't matter.

Quite a record. As far as I can tell, George's gut has served him well in one way only - his choice of cynical advisers (Karen Hughes, Karl Rove, etc.) who always find a way to divert public attention from his failures by any means necessary, including blatant lies about Democrats and hysterical bi-weekly security alerts.

Now we're preparing to invade a country in the middle of the most volatile "powder-keg" region on earth. We're going to toss out our history of using military force only when provoked. We're going to launch a "pre-emptive" invasion that violates two hundred-plus years of American history and culture. We're on the verge of becoming a fundamentally different kind of nation - an aggressive, "go-it-alone" rogue state - based on Bush's gut.

Be afraid. Be very, very afraid.”

“One can almost sense a palpable shifting of momentum, from an unrestricted Bush war-juggernaut rolling to its bloody unfolding to an administration caught between Iraq and a hard place, condemned if it unleashes the dogs of war (imperial warmonger), condemned if it pulls back and bides its time (wimp).

In a sense, what's transpiring reminds one of the delicious secret of "The Wizard of Oz": more and more people are beginning to sense, and sometimes even see, that the "all-powerful" governmental leader behind the curtain is just a flawed little man broadcasting to an overly-awed (and/or frightened) polity. Or, to shift fairytales: "The Emperor's New Clothes," where the leader, who has been nude all this while for all to see, suddenly finds that his subjects, heretofore willing to swallow the illusion of the emperor's new garments, realize that he's not wearing any.



In short, Bush is just another leader -- not even an elected one at that -- who, to disguise his incompetency and true motives, has lived on propaganda and falsification, and now the jig is up. His citizens are beginning to see through the charade -- even many who once supported him, including a good many ordinary, moderate Republicans, appalled at the powers assumed by Big Government and its willingness to eviserate the Constitution in its push toward more and more authoritarian control.

Certainly those outside the United States have seen through America's ostensible leader, and they, being more familiar with imperial arrogance, have not liked what they've seen. No, not at all. Even though they know they might pay a high price for telling the emperor to his face that he's full of bullbleep and that they refuse to have blood on their hands just because he says it's time to go to war, they have stood up. (Sad to say, there are some signs of wavering these days.)

What's about to come down over the next several weeks doesn't look hopeful. Bush&Co. are pulling out all the stops -- threatening, bribing, cajoling, arm-twisting, bullying -- in an effort to smooth the path to war, to give fig-leaf cover to their rush to military onslaught devoid of overt evidence to justify the haste.

There IS going to be a war, you know. Bush&Co. will not have it any other way. The Bush&Co. domestic and global agenda requires it. How can you get your extremist domestic agenda passed unless a frightened Congress and populace rallies around the flag being unfurled in a Mideast desert? How can the U.S. exercise its "benevolent hegemony" of the globe (and totally by coincidence, have effective control of the world's natural resources) unless would-be upstarts get bombed to smithereens, to demonstrate to others that they'd better not make the same mistake of getting in our way? So, it's full speed to Baghdad.

Doesn't matter if the allies are opposed, doesn't matter if thousands of Iraqi citizens get slaughtered as the missiles rain down (no wonder "Guernica" was covered up when Powell arrived at the U.N.), doesn't matter if North Korea insanely is threatening nuclear war against the U.S., doesn't matter if the American citizenry doesn't want a pre-emptive war on its conscience, doesn't matter if America is torn apart by dissension and economic disaster, doesn't matter if millions are demonstrating in the streets of America even before bombing has begun -- none of that matters. (Reminiscent of what Bush once told an ordinary citizen when that man deigned to criticize him at some public event: "What do I care what you think?")

But, let's clear up something right away. Iraq War #2 already has begun. U.S. special forces are currently operating in northern Iraq, moving to protect the oilfields from Saddam's orders to destroy them. U.S./British bombing of military targets is happening on a more frequent basis. Propaganda leaflets are already being released from U.S. planes over Iraq, warning soldiers not to follow the orders of their superiors to use biological or chemical armaments or risk "war crime" trials later.

So the war is on. All that's missing is "Shock & Awe" -- the U.S. plan for the first several days of missile attacks (hundreds and hundreds of them) aimed at Baghdad and Basra and elsewhere -- this to break the back and morale of Iraq's defense forces and to keep civilians from wanting to fight when the U.S./British troops arrive in downtown Baghdad.

There is little doubt that the U.S. onslaught will defeat the Iraqi forces -- ignoring for a moment what might happen if and when Saddam uncorks his biochem agents and aims them at the invaders. But, per usual when it comes to Bush foreign/military policy, little thought has been given to the consequences of what happens when the dogs of war are loosed on the world scene, especially on that ready-to-explode part of the world. (But this is in keeping with Bush&Co.'s we'll-deal-with-the-consequences-later domestic agenda -- for example, pushing for more tax cuts for the wealthy and corporate sectors in the face of an economy that already is in shambles because of earlier take-the-money-and-run policies.)

So, here we are -- we liberals and progressives and radicals and moderates -- congratulating ourselves on our marvelous work of the past few months, building a stop-the-war coaliton here and abroad that culminated in those fantastically impressive marches and rallies and demonstrations around the world and throughout the U.S. last weekend (perhaps as many as 11 million! peacefully protesting). True, those demonstrations were effective morale boosters and put the fear of electoral defeat in the rulers of a number of countries as they saw millions of their normally passive, ordinary citizens marching in the streets.

But Bush&Co. will have their war. So, what we in the opposition need to do now is to start reckoning with an overt, shooting-war situation: How can we throw sand into our government's war machine? How can we mobilize for peace candidates? How can we help the Democrats become a true party of opposition? How can we best help educate more of our fellow citizens -- the ordinary, somewhat-troubled middle-class ones sitting on the sidelines for now -- about the duplicity of our rulers and the dangerous policies being carried out in our names? How can we move toward impeachment for this incompetent, dangerous-to-American-interests Administration?

In short, how can we use the energies displayed on the streets in the past few months to build a dynamic, unstoppable Movement for peace and justice and economic recovery?

Those of us who were active in the civil rights/anti-Vietnam War Movement of the '60s and '70s know how much work is involved in building to critical mass. it took years and years of hard, slogging work to eduate and agitate and begin to change the way the great American muddle class saw the world and their political leaders devoid of illusion.

That transition can be accomplished much faster in 2003 -- especially given the speed with which news and information and communications can be disseminated these days, via the Internet and television and cell phones.

Don't get me wrong. It's not going to be easy. And it's going to come at a heavy price for many -- who will be persecuted, arrested, beaten, perhaps killed, censored, etc. -- as the forces of reaction fight tooth and nail to hang onto their greed-and-power agenda.

But none of us doubt that the battle needs to be waged -- in as creative and life-affirming way as possible. Let's continue to try to stop the war from happening, but, if -- as seems likely -- we can't, let's get our nascent Movement in gear and revved-up for the fight ahead. If you love your country, and your Constitution, and the world, and your kids, we can do no less. Onward!”

“"Liberty can not be preserved without general knowledge among people." - (August 1765) John Adams

The war on Iraq is but the first step in the plan. The global hegemony that is sought by the Bush administration is being laid out in steps broad and intricate. Small pieces of news float out at odd moments, laying the groundwork for the desensitization of the American population. Was it just over a year ago that we were allowed to peek at Donald Rumsfeld's Nuclear Review Policy (NPR) that disclosed the targets of our future nuclear warheads? For those with a short memory, the list is as follows: Russia, China, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria and Libya.

As we are now witnessing, they are not necessarily targeted in that order, but here we go first to Iraq.



John Bolton, Undersecretary of State met with officials in Israel on Monday, February 17, 2003. He said that he had no doubt that the United States would attack Iraq and that afterwards it would be necessary to deal with the threats from Syria, Iran and North Korea.

Monday, February 17, 2003 (I know I have already used that date previously, but your memory of this date must now make you remember other things) North Korea stated that it would possibly withdraw from the Armistice Agreement of 1953 - the one that ended the conflict that so many of our United States servicemen fought and died in - because of the bellicosity of the Bush administration.

George Bush and his administration have made this world a much more dangerous place in which to live by their continual saber-rattling, name calling and treaty destroying ways.

In just over two short years, George Bush has failed to behave in a responsible manner that kept the population of this country secure in the knowledge that diplomats and level heads were occupying the highest offices of our nation. We were told that the "adults were in charge" and that a "seasoned team of experts" would comprise his cabinet. What we have been offered in actuality are Ronald Reagan Iran-Contra retreads and neo-conservative ideologues that lust for the end of the world.

If we do not wake up soon, my fellow citizens, we will have nothing. We will have no Constitutional rights, no safety behind our windows covered with duct tape and visqueen and no security in the knowledge of a planet on which to live.

The Bush administration is now planning on how to reduce the amount of warning the test sites in the western US desert would need to be reactivated to produce an entirely new nuclear arsenal.

When Bush unleashes his terror upon the world, there will be no safe hiding place. The color coded terror alerts and the Department of Homeland Security will offer no refuge. There will be nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. If you want answers, ask the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

This is not a discussion about what political party you should be aligned with. This is a warning shot across the bow.

If you do not understand death and destruction today, you will be understanding it very soon.”

“France has neither winter nor summer nor morals; apart from these drawbacks it is a fine country.

France is miserable because it is filled with Frenchmen, and Frenchmen are miserable because they live in France.

In certain public indecencies the difference between a dog & a Frenchman is not perceptible.

France has usually been governed by prostitutes.

French are the connecting link between man & the monkey.

A Frenchman's home is where another man's wife is.

A dead Frenchman has many good qualities, many things to recommend him; many attractions--even innocencies. Why cannot we have more of these?

An isolated & helpless young girl is perfectly safe from insult by a Frenchman, if he is dead.”

“ok, so the point of your lame ass article is that bush is all abou thtis for oil.....oil oil oil....oil oil oil oil......it's all about the oil?


ok, so how come we dint just stay there the first time? how come we din''/t take his oil then> how come we don't just take juwaITS OIL? THEY GOT A LOT....WHO'S GONNA STOP US? how come? tell me? you're so smart...tell me why we don't just kick his ass and take it all? it's the stupidest argument i ever heard of....”

“Nice diatribe, Phaedrus...”

“juwat=kuwait”

“Those aren't my words, FG. I was pointing out how stupid it is to cut and paste articles without an opinion of one's own.”

“Somebody needs a chill pill...”

“You certainly did a fine job.”

“i got an opinion and i'm not afraid to use it......



just providing a lil balnce here.....an opposing view to the status quo from the liberal feild manual.....”

“Thank you. Perhaps it will keep strat from posting them so much.

Strat, just post a link to the Rush Limbaugh website and FOX news Op/Ed and have it done with.”

“G'night...”

“not even close... i gotta million of um!

And former President Bill Clinton defended himself on Larry King's
CNN talkfest against allegations he was too weak with North Korea's
nuclear threat: "We had a tough time ..., but we got them to end
that program and they kept it ended until apparently today they
started again. They would have a hundred weapons if we hadn't done
that. ... It turns out they had this smaller laboratory program to
develop a nuclear bomb with enriched uranium." Only thing is, this
is yet another, uh, "Clintonism," as former adviser Dick Morris was
eager to reveal, saying Clinton's was "absolutely disingenuous" and
that Clinton persisted in maintaining the fiction of North Korean
compliance with the 1994 "Agreed Framework." Morris pointed out,
"When I hear Bill Clinton saying that he didn't know that North
Korea was building bombs in these underground caverns -- in 1998,
when he was president.... Not only did he know, but while he knew,
he was pressing Congress to give them food and fuel to honor his
'94 agreement."”

“You've proven my point.

Good night.”

“night f'G!
i'm out too...


seeya phaed, good luck on yer iraqilovefest.....”

“C'mon boys, let's keep it clean! These debates can actually be intelligent discussions like the "Saddam gases his own people" thread.

My viewpoints echo stratdewd's, but I really like hearing the other side of things, especially if it's civil and the opinions are coming out clearer.”

“Gentlemen, getting a bit wordy, eh. Not much reading going on when the posts are so long.....”

“It's obvious to me that Some People are upset that the rest of the world won't kiss George Bush's ass, LOL”

“You tell 'em, Tilt, LOL.”

“tilt, i just get tired of the same ole crap...over n over.....anything and everything that can be complained about, is....

the war protestors are a good example....they are anti bush, more than anti war, it's just another reason to hate bush. i've never seen anything like it. heck, i dodn't like clinton, but i din't march everytime i disagreed with him.

plus i had a pretty good buzz goin....heh heh”

“are there really 8 of these threads??”

“yes.”

“Chirac to the EU:

I blow my nose at you and fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries. Now, go away or I shall taunt you a second time...

PPFFFFTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!”

“LMAO @ Treebeard!!!!!!”

“The right to protest, WHATEVER the motivation, is a sacred right in this country. If you would stifle protest, what the hell are we supposed to be fighting to preserve??

And NO, I Do Not Not Trust The Bush Administration. It is my right, and it is my duty as an American to speak out against what I see as wrong.”

“juwat=kuwait"
stratdewd
12:08:43 AM
02/21/03


Im sorry but I dont understand what this means, care to explaine to me?”

“More than eight.... though some people seem to have trouble with Roman numerals.”

“"Chirac to the EU:

I blow my nose at you..."

Ya mean he launched a snot rocket, an unprovoked preemptive strike???”

“"juwat=kuwait"

stratdewd
12:08:43 AM
02/21/03


Im sorry but I dont understand what this means, care to explaine to me?"

mapleleaf
08:02:18 AM
02/21/03



I think it means Stratdewd was too drunk to type.”

“thats a pretty BIG typo.”

“i was correcting a typo, maple.



tilt, i'm not into stiffeling anything. i'm merely protesting the protestors...so you see, it works both ways.”

“Not really, maple. I don't know about your keyboard, but on MY keyboard the 'j' is right next to the 'k'. ;-)”

“was correcting a typo, maple.

stratdewd
08:12:14 AM


sorry still dont see the incorrect typo in the first place. where is it”

“You gotta love this. The two worst spellers on the site huntin' a typo, LOL!!!”

“OY!”

“GET ICE TEA IN HERE TO FIX IT!”

“Please, Phaed. We'll never read the same way again!!”

“lol FG...shup!

maple, hell i dunno....i was half crocked! move on...disreguard it. call it a brain fart......

i had just gotten home from playing the ozark blues society jam night at george's majestic lounge......had a great time jamming with some awesome musicians!

btw-kinda freaked me out hearing the news about the great white show, cuz i was jammin just like them, at the same time..”

“Phaedrus vs. Stratdewd

Both of your perspectives seem to be uninformed, uninsightful, and loaded with propaganda. Try thinking for yourselves.

And the title of this thread is another example of Buddha Bear's ignorant bigotry. Why put it on public display man? Are you proud of coming across as an idiot?

The French acting in their own self interest is not moronic; it's what's to be expected of any country. France does care about oil contracts with Iraq, but it cares much more about forming a counter-balance to U.S. power. That's their real motivation to be belligerent and contrarian to the U.S., and why they've acted this way on other issues other than Iraq. Jesus H. Christ wake up. Why do you think France pushed for the EU to begin with? Why do you think France pulled their troops out of Nato and developed nukes? Why do you think France flirts with Russia and China? The answer is, France doesn't want to be subordinate to or constrained by any other power, and they have aspirations of becoming a world leader.

:-P”

“mutt , while what you say may be trrue....it's more than that. they have something to hide. makes alot more scence than your childish theory.....


i suppose you think you came to that conclusion.....by birth? were you born with that knowledge mutt? i suppose you've never read anything about france or russia?

i get so tired of people on here saying "think for yourselves". everyone gathers information from whatever sources and then thinks through it all.”