French refuse to help non-Jewish woman attacked on train [Archive]

Semsem

07-11-2004, 10:00 AM

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1089516099595

Jul. 11, 2004 16:21 | Updated Jul. 11, 2004 19:21
Non-Jewish Paris woman suffers anti-Semitic attack
By MICHEL ZLOTOWSKI

Six Arab youths attacked a 23-year old woman and her baby because they thought she was Jewish, Friday morning in a commuter train near Paris.

The youths, aged 15 to 20, stole the backpack of a young mother traveling on the train. Rummaging through her documents for money and credit cards, they found out that her address was in the posh 16th arrondissement of Paris – in fact, her former address. "All the Jews live there," said one of the youth.

The six then pulled knives, slashed the young woman's T-shirt and trousers and cut her hair "for a souvenir," they told her. Then they daubed three swastikas on her belly with black felt pens. When the train stopped at the Sarcelles station (North of Paris), they knocked over the baby buggy holding the woman's one-year old baby and fled.

The woman, who is not Jewish, was not injured.

Some twenty people were seated in the double-decker carriage all the time the six were harassing the young mother. According to the police reports, no one tried to come to her help or even pulled the signal to warn a controller.

After the gang left the train, the young mother stayed on board with her baby and traveled another hour to reach her destination. She later went to the police station to file a complaint against her aggressors.

A French police source told The Jerusalem Post that all possible means were devoted to track down the culprits. The police requested the suburban train authority to provide the monitoring videotapes of the stations where the gang boarded and left the train. It takes twelve minutes to travel from the village of Louvres, where the six embarked, to Garges-Sarcelles, where they left the train. Large Jewish and Muslim communities live side by side in Sarcelles, 15 kilometers North of Paris.

"We asked for witnesses to come and testify," the source sid, "but no one has done so yet." In the case of aggressions, witnesses do not dare testify because they fear the culprits would retaliate. In several recent occurrences not linked to anti-Semitic attacks, indicted youths threatened witnesses inside courthouses. The witnesses then refused to testify. Even judges are often threatened in court.

French President Jacques Chirac said he was "horrified by this odious attack" that occurred only hours after he called on the French to step up the struggle against anti-Semitism and racism. All French political leaders expressed their horror and disgust at a crime "smearing France", said Jean-Louis Debr , the Chairman of the National Assembly.

Roger Cukierman, Chairman of CRIF, the umbrella body politically representing French Jews, said, "We know that the French government is up in arms against anti-Semitism. We would like the civil society to do the same. Because judges reject cases brought against perpetrators of anti-Semitic acts or aggressions, those people feel they enjoy a total impunity. It is now up to the imams and the Muslim leaders to speak out and firmly condemn anti-Semitism. If they fail to do so, the civilian peace is at stake", said Cukierman.

Ahava

07-11-2004, 10:05 AM

I don't think it's just in the French genes, this passiveness. It's in human nature.
The majority of people, especially in Europe perhaps, is chicken .

Semsem

07-11-2004, 10:06 AM

So let's analyse this. A woman and her 13 month baby are attacked by French Arabs because they think she is Jewish on a French train with 20 passengers. Incidentally she is not even Jewish.

In Egypt too in the 1940s and 1950's there were instances when they would kill people in the streets thinking they were Jewish when they really were not.

The 20 French passengers do absalutely nothing. They don't even have the courage to seek help from the conductor or pull the emergency chord.

This just shows that the French have not changed since Generale Petain and Laval. They are weasels, cowards and by remaining silent they were accomplices.

Yesterday it was the French Jews, now it's beginning to be the French non-Jews. Mark my words. Within 10 years it will be the non French Jews who will be attacked. This is only the beginning.

haganah

07-11-2004, 10:38 AM

Mother, baby attacked on Paris train after mistaken for Jews

VERSAILLES, France - A young woman and her baby were attacked in a suburban train near Paris on Saturday by unidentified men who drew swastikas on her stomach with a pen in what police said was an anti-Semitic assault.

The six attackers who were armed with knives clipped the 23-year-old woman's hair, and cut her t-shirt and pants before drawing three swastikas on her body.

The men of North African origin also overturned the pram with her baby of 13 months.

In the attack they robbed her backpack which contained her identity papers, a bank card and 200 euros ($250).

Police said the attackers erroneously assumed the woman was Jewish because she was living in Paris' posh 16th district.

"Only Jews live in the 16th district," one of the men was quoted as having said.

French President Jacques Chirac expressed his horror and condemned what he called "a shameful attack."

The perpetrators must be found, held accountable and condemned with the full severity of the law, a statement issued by his office said.

French Interior Minister Dominique de Villepin asked police to find the attackers within the shortest possible time, his ministry said in a statement.

The attack was "all the more serious because it was marked by racism and anti-Semitism," he said.

FRANCE SUCKS.

Semsem

07-11-2004, 10:43 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3884983.stm

Swastika attack on French mother
BBC

The assault follows a rise in anti-Semitic attacks
French politicians have reacted with horror to an anti-Semitic attack on a woman and her baby on a train.
A gang of young men cut her hair, slashed her clothes and drew swastikas on her body, before overturning the pram in which her infant was lying.

Other passengers failed to intervene as the six men attacked the woman, whom they accused of being Jewish.

President Jacques Chirac condemned the "shameful act", which came the day after he vowed a crackdown on racism.

He demanded that "everything be done to catch the perpetrators... and that they are judged and sentenced with all severity".

Surrounded

The 23-year-old woman was on a train just north of Paris on Friday morning, with her 13-month-old baby.

Six men - described by French media as of North African appearance - surrounded her and rifled through her bag.

According to police, they found papers referring to the wealthy 16th district of the capital, and said: "There are only Jews in the 16th."

Police said the woman was not Jewish and no longer lived in the district.

The attackers reportedly shoved the woman, used a knife to cut her hair and her shirt open, and drew swastikas on her stomach with a marker pen.

The baby was apparently tipped out of its pram in the melee.

Passengers criticised

Politicians from all sides condemned the attack.

Jean-Paul Huchon, president of the Ile-de-France region surrounding Paris, despaired of the lack of reaction from fellow passengers.

He recalled the French deportation of Jewish children during German occupation in World War II, saying: "And now, we let people be attacked like this without reacting, without doing anything."

Interior Minister Dominique de Villepin ordered police to find the culprits "as quickly as possible".

On Thursday, President Chirac complained of a spate of racist and anti-Semitic attacks, including the desecration of Jewish and Muslim graves.

Commentators have linked increasing Muslim-Jewish tension to the continuing conflict in the Middle East.

A few days previously, a report warned that poor suburban areas of French cities were becoming ethnic "ghettoes", where radical Islam was taking root.

Semsem

07-11-2004, 10:45 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3884983.stm

Gilgamesh

07-11-2004, 10:51 AM

Mother, baby attacked on Paris train after mistaken for Jews more then anything, the French, who denay being ca;;ed anti semeties, were most insulted from being considered Jews!

Well, I find it most ironic. Europeans actualy, practicly and physicly suffer from anti semetism... directed at them! Well Well Well... If that ain't a sign from the all mighty, what is?

There is a phrase common in Israel, taken from our sages, which says... "A rightous man job done by others". (Hebrew: Tzadik, Me'lachto Na'a'seit Be'yedei A'he'rim). Has many different meanings one should contemplate about. Don't get cought up with single meaning alone.

FRANCE SUCKS. So true!

Gilgamesh

07-11-2004, 10:55 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3884983.stm

Swastika attack on French mother
BBC

Interior Minister Dominique de Villepin ordered police to find the culprits "as quickly as possible".

Well, doesn't Arafat voice a strong condemnation after each bombing of his own men?

Now the French lern the words are not the same with actions. And non action is a form of collaboration. Aspecialy when the non action is taken by a man in power. (the top frog, in the French case).

Gilgamesh

07-11-2004, 10:57 AM

I don't think it's just in the French genes, this passiveness. It's in human nature.
The majority of people, especially in Europe perhaps, is chicken .
Not in Israel. Here people help one another, as much as possible. (medical help in accident site, by un authorised person, may cause more harm then good).

L@mplighterM

07-11-2004, 11:00 AM

Anything other than mass deportation of Muslims is a band-aid solution.

drexpert

07-11-2004, 11:14 AM

10 characters minimum!

golani

07-11-2004, 11:55 AM

Anything other than mass deportation of Muslims is a band-aid solution.
Yes,it would not be that expensive
Some Boeing 747 with full load (400 passengers),bound forAlgiers or Tanger would do the cleaning

Some months would suffice to empty France from his submitted goons

Maybe Air france is waiting for its new airbus A380 to do the job,each A380 can carry up to 500 passengers :D

David_in_NYC

07-11-2004, 12:28 PM

I don't think it's just in the French genes, this passiveness. It's in human nature.
The majority of people, especially in Europe perhaps, is chicken .

Too bad there are no Todd Beamers in Europe.

I guess it's true... two World Wars really did eliminate the gene for courage from the European stock.

Mil

07-11-2004, 12:29 PM

Olivier, Olivier - Isn't there a French movie with that name?

KSO

07-11-2004, 12:31 PM

Yes,it would not be that expensive
Some Boeing 747 with full load (400 passengers),bound forAlgiers or Tanger would do the cleaning

Some months would suffice to empty France from his submitted goons

Maybe Air france is waiting for its new airbus A380 to do the job,each A380 can carry up to 500 passengers :D

But there will be a problem, they'll have to make the tickets cheaper because passangers won't get the traditional small bottle of wine...

L@mplighterM

07-11-2004, 01:04 PM

Yes,it would not be that expensive
Some Boeing 747 with full load (400 passengers),bound forAlgiers or Tanger would do the cleaning

Some months would suffice to empty France from his submitted goons

Maybe Air france is waiting for its new airbus A380 to do the job,each A380 can carry up to 500 passengers :D

I’m humane let the old, young and infirm fly and let the rest walk or crawl.

KSO

07-11-2004, 01:14 PM

I’m humane let the old, young and infirm fly and let the rest walk or crawl.

There's an old Israeli Joke that goes like this...

Hitler Himler and Goebbles sitting in a coffee house and disscusing politics, than of course comes the big question what to do with the Jews.

Goebbles starts:
Let's kick them out of Europe, send them to some deserted island and never see them again.

Himler suggests: let's isolate them in some crappy place, and won't let anyone out.

Hitler sits listens and then sais: I have a great idea let's build big camps, we will make them do slave work, won't feed them and keep them in sub human conditions and then when they won't be able to work we kill them all.

Himler and Goebles together: Oh my god Hitler You are such a Nazi.

Semsem

07-11-2004, 01:27 PM

I don't think it's just in the French genes, this passiveness. It's in human nature.
The majority of people, especially in Europe perhaps, is chicken .

Maybe in Europe. But in the USA and in Israel people help. I would not have intervened but I would have gone to seek assistance or pulled the emergency button.

Semsem

07-11-2004, 01:31 PM

:) Ah so that's why they are building the A380? However I have a funny feeling that instead of French Arabs going to Algiers and Casa, they will be full of French Jews heading to Israel, Canada and the USA followed by French goyim (to Canada) 20 years after all the Jews have left.

KSO

07-11-2004, 01:33 PM

Ahava

07-11-2004, 03:19 PM

Maybe in Europe. But in the USA and in Israel people help. I would not have intervened but I would have gone to seek assistance or pulled the emergency button.

Yes, me too. How can anyone just stare and do nothing? That's beyond me.

frizzer1

07-11-2004, 03:32 PM

Ahhhh...those non-jews who look like jews are always complaining.

Mediocrates

07-11-2004, 04:02 PM

My family's Orthodox Rabbi was beat down in the street in the middle of the day in front of two dozen witnesses in a large French city in Normandy, last year. No one stepped forward before, during or after. He has lived there for over a decade and people know him. The same week the shul door was defaced and shattered and the official police response was to take a statement and file it away.

takeo

07-11-2004, 05:06 PM

I don't think it's just in the French genes, this passiveness. It's in human nature.
The majority of people, especially in Europe perhaps, is chicken .

Americans especially are chicken, they don't even take the bus or train in the us. I agree French people are rather egoistic and don't care much for their fellow citizens, they prefere to look the other way. It's typical American as well, while in Scandinavian countries I noticed there is much more social solidarity.
I don't, only last week I defended some girls who were harassed by North-African thugs in the train. Those thugs are very coward, they'll never choose a group of men as a target, and because I look Russian they'll never harass me, they know Russians, Yugoslavs and Albanians fight back and are usually armed with knifes... actually the thirth generation north-Africans is a lost one, it is the only group which creates a lot of problems, harass people and just don't fit in society. they do no longer have the values and religion of their parents but aren't fit for a western society either. Not all of course, not even the majority, but enough to make Paris unsafe.

This just shows that the French have not changed since Generale Petain and Laval. They are weasels, cowards and by remaining silent they were accomplices.

come on, what are American bystanders doing whenever there is another shooting party, run!

Yesterday it was the French Jews, now it's beginning to be the French non-Jews. Mark my words. Within 10 years it will be the non French Jews who will be attacked. This is only the beginning.

blablablabla, the us is still a lot unsafer than France, I invite you to walk around in the worst neighbourhoods of paris dressed as an orthodox Jew, most likely nothing will happen as many orthodox Jews are living here.
Than you'll have to walk in the worst neighbourhoods of NY or LA, dressed up as a wealthy businessman, now let's see which one you will survive unharmed!!!!

Not in Israel. Here people help one another, as much as possible. (medical help in accident site, by un authorised person, may cause more harm then good).

that's right, because life in Israel is much harder and they're used to war. In former yugoslavia when NATO came to bomb them, ordinary citizens grabbed their kalashnikov, went on a roof and shot at the airplanes.

I guess it's true... two World Wars really did eliminate the gene for courage from the European stock.

since you're such a hero, you can join in as well.

Maybe in Europe. But in the USA and in Israel people help. I would not have intervened but I would have gone to seek assistance or pulled the emergency button.

that's what you say now! let's see how you would have reacted in reality.
in the us people are scared in the cities, they jump in their car and go directly to their destination, afraid to walk after dark or take public transport...

Yes, me too. How can anyone just stare and do nothing? That's beyond me.

everyone was afraid that something might happen to them as well, not a very nice reaction but unfortunately quite common.

Posts: 9,823 My family's Orthodox Rabbi was beat down in the street in the middle of the day in front of two dozen witnesses in a large French city in Normandy, last year. No one stepped forward before, during or after. He has lived there for over a decade and people know him. The same week the shul door was defaced and shattered and the official police response was to take a statement and file it away.

ok, fine, reality check, which city in normandy, when did it happen and in which street, by whom was he attacked and how, what's his name, is there a jewish community in this town, I want to know it all, and don't worry I'm going to find out if you tell me lies! here you can always consult the register of each police department as long as the information isn't confidential or secret, which is unlikely in this case.

David_in_NYC

07-11-2004, 05:19 PM

I would have killed the closest one on the spot then asked, "Who's next?"

Ahava

07-11-2004, 05:30 PM

I would have killed the closest one on the spot then asked, "Who's next?"

Would you? Nah..
I never experienced anything like this, but if I did I know I'd better not interfere myself, I must activate other people or distract the perpetrators. Anything, except for doing nothing. I'm not a hero nor do I like to pretend I am but I can't imagine myself sitting idly by. I do have the tendency to step up for people when necessary, I think I would. But not in such a way that I'm just the next victim.

I don't, only last week I defended some girls who were harassed by North-African thugs in the train.

Such a hero. ;)

actually the thirth generation north-Africans is a lost one, it is the only group which creates a lot of problems, harass people and just don't fit in society.

This statement probably makes you a racist according to Northlander.

Semsem

07-11-2004, 05:50 PM

Takeo have yuo even been to the USA? At least Jews can walk around our cities knowing they will not be attacked. And American gentiles know they won't be attacked for being Jewish.

As to being a liar: oh yeah Mr. bigshot Igor the russian: I really believe yuo that you saved those poor French girls.

May B yuo will get the Legion of Honour.

MGB8

07-11-2004, 05:52 PM

Takeo,

Your post was so pathetic it actually made me laugh out loud.

Aww... was the poor frenchie's poodle pride offended? Because your bretheren have the spine of a slug? Because the Iraqi army resisted longer than your army against the Nazi's? Because France is still a Vicci state?

Yes...those cowardly americans who prefer to drive than take public transit (gee..except tons of people take public transit where its convenient..we just have more roads and cheaper gas...)

Wow, takeo... you make me laugh..

David_in_NYC

07-11-2004, 05:54 PM

takeo

07-11-2004, 05:58 PM

Would you? Nah..
I never experienced anything like this, but if I did I know I'd better not interfere myself, I must activate other people or distract the perpetrators. Anything, except for doing nothing. I'm not a hero nor do I like to pretend I am but I can't imagine myself sitting idly by. I do have the tendency to step up for people when necessary, I think I would. But not in such a way that I'm just the next victim.

problem is that people are group-animals, they will wait for a sign, for the first to cross the bridge and do something, they don't know what to do themselves and so do nothing. It has been scientifically prooved, especially in situations which are uncommon.

Such a hero.

they were threatening and insulting them (pute, saloppe, etc. ) them but didn't physically attack them, I only stood up and asked "what's the problem" and they answered "connard, tais-toi" but a few seconds later they just backed off. The girls were nice but had to go further to Bordeaux... :(

This statement probably makes you a racist according to Northlander.

I don't think so, we should face reality, most of this kind of crimes and trouble is caused by young north-African men, not by the 100's of other nationalities who live in Western Europe.

Ahava

07-11-2004, 05:59 PM

If you know Arab psychology, then you know that the least risky thing is to stand up and fight back. I sure would have ripped the head off of at least one of those punks. People who need to gang up on innocent women are cowards of the most vile sort, they wouldn't dare to confront someone who would fight back. That's why they choose the most helpless to terrorize in the first place.

I'd stand by and do nothing when you ripped their heads off. ;)
Maybe I'd take a picture for my collection of "beautiful moments" or, to place it on the internet for everyone to see, 'beheaded Arab monsters'. :o

Ahava

07-11-2004, 06:06 PM

problem is that people are group-animals, they will wait for a sign, for the first to cross the bridge and do something, they don't know what to do themselves and so do nothing. It has been scientifically prooved, especially in situations which are uncommon.

I know, but someone has to be the first and I have faith others will follow. The hard thing is that you never know how you'd react in an extraordinary or dangerous situation. Maybe I'd faint from shock. :o

The girls were nice but had to go further to Bordeaux... :(

I see. :D

I don't think so, we should face reality, most of this kind of crimes and trouble is caused by young north-African men, not by the 100's of other nationalities who live in Western Europe.

I agree of course. tell that to that northlander.

takeo

07-11-2004, 06:39 PM

Takeo have yuo even been to the USA? At least Jews can walk around our cities knowing they will not be attacked. And American gentiles know they won't be attacked for being Jewish.

they will be attacked for being white if they walk in coloured poor neighbourhoods of big cities, that's a FACT.

As to being a liar: oh yeah Mr. bigshot Igor the russian: I really believe yuo that you saved those poor French girls.

I didn't do much, but my presence was apparently enough to scare those motherers away.

Your post was so pathetic it actually made me laugh out loud.

Aww... was the poor frenchie's poodle pride offended? Because your bretheren have the spine of a slug? Because the Iraqi army resisted longer than your army against the Nazi's? Because France is still a Vicci state?

Yes...those cowardly americans who prefer to drive than take public transit (gee..except tons of people take public transit where its convenient..we just have more roads and cheaper gas...)

Wow, takeo... you make me laugh..

I won't respond any longer to your insulting posts full of meaningless carbage, you would fit in well with those violent thugs who did this.

oh just one thing, you have cheaper gas perhaps, but not more roads, and you certainly have much worse public transportation, more expensive and less comfortable. (some large city M excluded)

tandem

07-11-2004, 08:38 PM

Americans especially are chicken, they don't even take the bus or train in the us.
yeah.. and... it's not because they're afraid to take a bus or train. cars are cheaper in north america. fuel is cheaper and flexible credit and leasing options give people incentive to buy cars. but even that doesn't stop people from taking public transit. in canada, in toronto, over 1 million people take public transit every day. yet i have never read about a jew, man or woman, who was attacked on a train or on a bus. same thing in the US. but i've read plenty of these things happening all over europe, and especially in france.

I agree French people are rather egoistic and don't care much for their fellow citizens,
well no takeo. if the french don't give a about their fellow countrymen, what makes one think france gives a about other people in the world? that's why the french must be ignored.

I don't, only last week I defended some girls who were harassed by North-African thugs in the train. Those thugs are very coward, they'll never choose a group of men as a target, and because I look Russian they'll never harass me, they know Russians, Yugoslavs and Albanians fight back and are usually armed with knifes...
yeah right.

actually the thirth generation north-Africans is a lost one, it is the only group which creates a lot of problems, harass people and just don't fit in society. they do no longer have the values and religion of their parents but aren't fit for a western society either. Not all of course, not even the majority, but enough to make Paris unsafe.
that's why you discard such filth

come on, what are American bystanders doing whenever there is another shooting party, run!
unless you're wearing a bulletproof vest and have a gun yourself to participate in the party running away would be a logical choice. still, it's rather pathetic of you to compare how a woman and her baby being harassed in front of everybody by a bunch of arab ers and yet no one even came to the aid of the woman and some shooting incident in the states. there is no relevance at all. i find it hard to understand how not one man on that train stepped forward and took care of those thugs. french men are pussies! this kind of ignorance and selfishness is just sick.

blablablabla, the us is still a lot unsafer than France, I invite you to walk around in the worst neighbourhoods of paris dressed as an orthodox Jew, most likely nothing will happen as many orthodox Jews are living here.
really? i heard different. orthodox jews in france are afraid to reveal their true identities, to walk the streets dressed like orthodox jews. in fact, even some secular jews who have a chai or magen david necklace are afraid to bear it in public because they might get beaten up.

Than you'll have to walk in the worst neighbourhoods of NY or LA, dressed up as a wealthy businessman, now let's see which one you will survive unharmed!!!!
what a load of

L@mplighterM

07-11-2004, 08:59 PM

I think physiologists refer to what happen here as "the Genovese Syndrome" at least I would classify it as such.

IMO one reason that people shy away from involvement is due to poor defined laws. If one wiped out these bastards you’d most likely be charged with murder for using excessive force.

When I was younger I walked where angels feared to thread, I rescued young girls from black pimps. Unfortunately our society seems to be evolving to the point where the perpetrators of crimes are often defined as the victims.

I don’t know for certain what I would have done in this particular situation but I’d like to believe that if French law permitted it I would have drawn my knife.

Party time!

Neubill

07-11-2004, 09:13 PM

Muslims are also under attack in France. (http://start.earthlink.net/newsarticle?cat=7&aid=D83OVPQG0_story)

"The Interior Ministry said the woman was not Jewish, and police said she no longer lives in Paris' 16th district. That the attackers mistook their victim's identity did nothing to soften the horror in France, where assaults both Jews and Muslims have escalated over the past several years.

The Interior Ministry said Friday it had recorded 135 anti-Jewish acts in the first six months of this year, as well as 375 threats. The figure was nearly as high as the numbers from all of last year, when a total of 593 anti-Jewish acts or threats were registered.

Racist attacks, often against Muslims, also rose. There were 95 attacks and 161 threats through June, compared to a total of 232 such crimes reported last year.

France is home to the largest Jewish and Muslim populations in western Europe, and Muslims are often blamed for attacks on Jews.

The president of the umbrella group the French Council for the Muslim Faith, Dalil Boubakeur, called the attack "sickening" and "low-grade banditry." But he warned against blaming Muslims."

Semsem

07-11-2004, 10:33 PM

Oh yes Takeo I really believe you saved those French girls lives. Maybe you will receive the Legion of honour.

The only reason French are upset is that a non-Jew was attacked and it could be them next time.

red crabtree

07-12-2004, 12:39 AM

takeo I don't know what part of the states you've ever been to, but where I live there is no mass transit, so taking a bus or train is not an option. If I drive 30 miles to a larger town there is a bus system for only that town, it is a very rare event for any problems, I can't recall any in years. As far as taking a train my son does it regularly from that larger town to go see his girlfriend as it is much cheaper for him to do so than to drive the over 2 hours. No, attacks on the train are not usual.
The only time in my life I have ever been on a subway was in Washington DC, and I never felt afraid to get on. I was in Washington on two separate occasions, once by myself and once with my daughter. Both times I was on the subway, which is clean and from all appearances, safe. The time I was in DC alone I ended up getting hopelessly lost while leaving. I ended up in a part of town where I was the only white person to be seen. I got out at a gas station, got a few odd looks and asked the nearest person to me how the hell to get to Constitution Ave. He was an off duty cab driver who helpfully gave me very precise directions. Not a problem one. I think you watch too much TV that distorts the real America.
The vast marjority of America has no bus or train systems, there is too much space between cities and towns, not to mention the little rural communities. Mass transit has never picked up here because of that, the cost of not only building but of maintaining a transit system is prohibitive particularly when it is much easier and quicker to jump in your car and drive the vast highway system we have. No waiting on someone else's schedule.
There is a huge middle America that people like you have no idea what it is like. I can't imagine where I live ever having a young woman with a baby attacked and have no one go to the rescue. And the other thing, here we generally don't know if someone is Jewish, Catholic or whatever. We generally just don't care.
However it is not surprising to have a Frenchman point their finger at America and whatever ill's you believe we have instead of at least attempting to deal with the ill's your own country has. It's such a popular concept and all. Keep working at it and I bet you can even find a way to blame America for the ill's your country has instead of just trying to show that no matter what France is better than the US.
It's obvious you never meant a good ole boy here, or you'd know what he'd have done and wouldn't have been to stand and watch.

David_in_NYC

07-12-2004, 02:25 AM

originally posted by takeo
they will be attacked for being white if they walk in coloured poor neighbourhoods of big cities, that's a FACT.

I'm not sure that sentence translates well from the French... I think what you mean to say is "that's a product of my FEVERED IMAGINATION".

As someone who lives in one of these cities, has been in minority neighborhoods in many of them, and has actually lived in a black neighborhood for an extended period of time, I can testify that the only FACT is that you are TALKING OUT OF YOUR CHIRAC.

Sana

07-12-2004, 05:43 AM

~Don't worry David, If I was to ever see anything like that you can betcha my southern blood would have quickly made it to the boiling point...and I would have pounced on them like a wild animal, I would say David you take the big one I'll take the smaller dude, lol ~ :)

~That would not happen here in the south...no man down here would sit back and watch a woman being attacked like the obvious cowards on that train. ~

Sana

07-12-2004, 05:45 AM

~make sure it is a BIG KNIFE. ~

Mediocrates

07-12-2004, 06:17 AM

ok, fine, reality check, which city in normandy, when did it happen and in which street, by whom was he attacked and how, what's his name, is there a jewish community in this town, I want to know it all, and don't worry I'm going to find out if you tell me lies! here you can always consult the register of each police department as long as the information isn't confidential or secret, which is unlikely in this case.

Actually since people's lives are at stake I would not tell you because I expect you would knowingly and willfully contribute to their danger. Your very tone indicates to me you would gleefully march at the front of lynchmob. All your mindless idiocy about how apparently you've walked through every bad neighborhood in the US - {please please regale us of your rides with the Bloods and the Crips on their daily drivebys} or least the one's you see on music videos and you know they are all more dangerous if you are dressed like you stepped out of an 18th century shetl are just that - idiocy.

So here's a tip - reality check fool; sit down, shut up and stop lying.

takeo

07-12-2004, 06:55 AM

yeah.. and... it's not because they're afraid to take a bus or train. cars are cheaper in north america. fuel is cheaper and flexible credit and leasing options give people incentive to buy cars. but even that doesn't stop people from taking public transit. in canada, in toronto, over 1 million people take public transit every day. yet i have never read about a jew, man or woman, who was attacked on a train or on a bus. same thing in the US. but i've read plenty of these things happening all over europe, and especially in france.

In Europe it's usually safe to take the train, I take the train everyday and only on rare occasions there are problems as I described above. besides in every train a responsible is present and in the more difficult neighbourhoods (since we also have trains connecting suburbs to the main centre) there is police and even the army in the trains and stations. But if there are problems always Algerians or moroccans are involved. (and not muslims in general, I never had any problem with Syrians, Turks, Pakistanese, Indonesians, etc. ) . The same is true for dancings and nightlife, always problems are created by groups of young algerian or moroccan men, that's why often they are not allowed to enter.

well no takeo. if the french don't give a about their fellow countrymen, what makes one think france gives a about other people in the world? that's why the french must be ignored.

the average us-citizen doesn't give a either about their fellow countrymen, in no other western country you can see so much poverty, even visible on the streets. I heard from an American friend if anyone on the street gets beeten up no car will stop to help you and police is nowhere around to be seen, the reason why in the night American cities are so empty.

unless you're wearing a bulletproof vest and have a gun yourself to participate in the party running away would be a logical choice. still, it's rather pathetic of you to compare how a woman and her baby being harassed in front of everybody by a bunch of arab ers and yet no one even came to the aid of the woman and some shooting incident in the states. there is no relevance at all. i find it hard to understand how not one man on that train stepped forward and took care of those thugs. french men are pussies! this kind of ignorance and selfishness is just sick.

I said it, what would you have done? Not in theory but in reality? kindly ask those thugs to stop harassing that women? get beaten up yourself?

really? i heard different. orthodox jews in france are afraid to reveal their true identities, to walk the streets dressed like orthodox jews. in fact, even some secular jews who have a chai or magen david necklace are afraid to bear it in public because they might get beaten up.

that's bs, there are plenty of orthodox Jews in paris, and the the ones who have been attacked all made it to the 8 o clock AND US news. An orthodox Jew getten beaten up in paris is big news in the us while thousands of Bangadeshi's who died isn't even mentioned... every such incident is a disgrace I know, and currently measures are taken, police presence is very high in certain risky areas, cameras are being installed, etc. but more than a million jews live in paris and only a few of them have ever been attacked, none have died. Any comparison to nazi anti-semitism is just plain BS.

what a load of

so why don't you do it? Why don't you walk around during the night in the dingy neighbourhoods of the us? in paris you can, you can be attacked, but this is not very likely, however I think in certain areas of big cities in the us people are even afraid to open their window during daytime! (such as in sint-petersburg, Florida when i was there, people said close your window, we're entering a dangerous neighbourhood, I was shocked!)

I think physiologists refer to what happen here as "the Genovese Syndrome" at least I would classify it as such.

IMO one reason that people shy away from involvement is due to poor defined laws. If one wiped out these bastards you’d most likely be charged with murder for using excessive force.

that's another reason, yes, if you defend yourself and the attacker dies, YOU will be charged.

When I was younger I walked where angels feared to thread, I rescued young girls from black pimps.

yeah right...

I don’t know for certain what I would have done in this particular situation but I’d like to believe that if French law permitted it I would have drawn my knife.

I'm not sure, I think you have the right to defend yourself without using excessive force.

takeo

07-12-2004, 06:58 AM

The only reason French are upset is that a non-Jew was attacked and it could be them next time.

such a bunch of cr*p

takeo I don't know what part of the states you've ever been to, but where I live there is no mass transit, so taking a bus or train is not an option. If I drive 30 miles to a larger town there is a bus system for only that town, it is a very rare event for any problems, I can't recall any in years. As far as taking a train my son does it regularly from that larger town to go see his girlfriend as it is much cheaper for him to do so than to drive the over 2 hours. No, attacks on the train are not usual.
The only time in my life I have ever been on a subway was in Washington DC, and I never felt afraid to get on. I was in Washington on two separate occasions, once by myself and once with my daughter. Both times I was on the subway, which is clean and from all appearances, safe. The time I was in DC alone I ended up getting hopelessly lost while leaving. I ended up in a part of town where I was the only white person to be seen. I got out at a gas station, got a few odd looks and asked the nearest person to me how the hell to get to Constitution Ave. He was an off duty cab driver who helpfully gave me very precise directions. Not a problem one. I think you watch too much TV that distorts the real America.
The vast marjority of America has no bus or train systems, there is too much space between cities and towns, not to mention the little rural communities. Mass transit has never picked up here because of that, the cost of not only building but of maintaining a transit system is prohibitive particularly when it is much easier and quicker to jump in your car and drive the vast highway system we have. No waiting on someone else's schedule.

public transport in the us really sucks, in villages there isn't even public transport or once every day, and even in the cities busses are rare.
problem is too much cars create congestion, it is bad for the environment, it is costly (especially if you use a car for you alone and don't share one) (perhaps less costly in the us but still you have to pay insurance, gasoline, taxes, no?). besides this people who can't afford a car and have to rely on public transport loose their mobility, and it's much more difficult for them to find work and be on time if they live in suburbs or other cheaper towns.

the cost of building a public transport system shouldn't be prohibitive if enough people use it and if it is good, reliable and regularly, as in most European countries. in paris you can go to any suburb in a matter of minutes, even if they're 50 km. from the city center, and in the night we have special night busses.

we also have a vast highway system, but it's congested already, (since France and most of Europe is much more densely populated than the us) and many people prefere to use public transport over their own car.

There is a huge middle America that people like you have no idea what it is like. I can't imagine where I live ever having a young woman with a baby attacked and have no one go to the rescue. And the other thing, here we generally don't know if someone is Jewish, Catholic or whatever. We generally just don't care.

we don't care either, really, France is an etnic mix as well, the most mixed country in Europe I think. Even Hitler said it "French are an inpure race" since they are mixed with Italians, Polish, jews, Germans, Russians, Spanish, portuguese, Greek, north-Africans, Africans, Asians, whatever you name it, and long before other European countries started to accomodate immigrants. And on the contrary to the us there is less etnic separation here, no ghetto's except algerian ones. we also have a bas-classe as we call it, a lower class, but it's much smaller and less poor than in the us. This can be prooved by statistics. 90% of French belong to the middle class, including most immigrants, but unfortunately not all.

However it is not surprising to have a Frenchman point their finger at America and whatever ill's you believe we have instead of at least attempting to deal with the ill's your own country has. It's such a popular concept and all. Keep working at it and I bet you can even find a way to blame America for the ill's your country has instead of just trying to show that no matter what France is better than the US.

listen if you have the right to criticise France I can point to you that the same ills exist in the us, in much larger quantities than in france. Before criticising someone look in the mirror that's my device...

It's obvious you never meant a good ole boy here, or you'd know what he'd have done and wouldn't have been to stand and watch.

That's what you say, I'm not sure you would have done anything in the given circumstances. most people are chicken you know, not only French.

As someone who lives in one of these cities, has been in minority neighborhoods in many of them, and has actually lived in a black neighborhood for an extended period of time, I can testify that the only FACT is that you are TALKING OUT OF YOUR CHIRAC.

fine, where did you live? tell me? did you walk there during the night? I'm interested in your experiences...
You claim to know everything about France yet I doubt you have ever been to a french suburb...

Mediocrates

07-12-2004, 07:02 AM

Your comment about Orthodox Jews in the news is borderline "Jews run the media" paranoia straight out of some George Lincoln Rockwell inspired blog.

An orthodox Jew getten beaten up in paris is big news in the us while thousands of Bangadeshi's who died isn't even mentioned...

Or were you going for "It's the Jews' fault those poor brown people suffer"?

Mil

07-12-2004, 07:40 AM

What kills me where are the MASS DEMONSTRATIONS? Where is the PUBLIC? Where is EUROPE for God's sake?

I think it is time for Jews to start leaving Europe. I truely think that the United States should make a special provision for European Jews to come to the United States on favorable immigration bases just like it was with the Soviet Jews in the 80s and 90s (for which I am very grateful for); it will only add to the wealth of America. I am afraid that the further it goes the worst the situation will become. The European society is degrading in every possible way and in the process is becoming ignorant somehow confusing its moral obligations with political hatreds and understandings. I am sorry but if one cannot openly be a Jew then one should leave. Jews did that for centuries for exactly the reason of prosecution, harassment and intollerance and I think it is time for it to happen again.

I believe that Europe is not the place for Jews to live. Enough is enough. It is time to go.

Mediocrates

07-12-2004, 07:46 AM

Apparently it's not safe if you're a goyishe who just lives near Jews. I think that's the real panic that French people feel. Perhaps they'll now demand Jews wear a yellow star just so they don't have to.

Of course Takeo our resident French Minister of Slum Tourism declares "I have never seen anything wrong"

Mil

07-12-2004, 07:50 AM

Med, I think Takeo just has low standards of what is wrong.

takeo

07-12-2004, 08:33 AM

What kills me where are the MASS DEMONSTRATIONS? Where is the PUBLIC? Where is EUROPE for God's sake?

Why? Because a woman has been beaten up? This unfortunately happens everywhere in the world, including in the us, on a daily base. In the us every few weeks or so there's a mass shooting when some nuts kill a few dozens of people in a school or on the street.

I think it is time for Jews to start leaving Europe.

WHY???????????

I truely think that the United States should make a special provision for European Jews to come to the United States on favorable immigration bases just like it was with the Soviet Jews in the 80s and 90s (for which I am very grateful for); it will only add to the wealth of America.

it won't work, most French Jews don't like American culture, which is too superficial and devoid of culture, too capitalist. Besides working conditions in the us are much worse than in France, food in the us tastes like plastic and French Jews are both culturally and culinary among the most cultivated in the world. and, honestly, who wants to change paris for one of the us-cities who all look alike? The climate could be a reason, but we also have our sunny regions only a few hours away by ultra-rapid train (tgv).

I am afraid that the further it goes the worst the situation will become. The European society is degrading in every possible way and in the process is becoming ignorant somehow confusing its moral obligations with political hatreds and understandings. I am sorry but if one cannot openly be a Jew then one should leave. Jews did that for centuries for exactly the reason of prosecution, harassment and intollerance and I think it is time for it to happen again.

you don't live in France mill, don't compare France or western Europe to Russia please. in everyday life Jews do not suffer from discrimination or harassment, almost a quarter of French intellectuals and elite is Jewish, and they know your concern is based on wrong information and a wrong perception of the real situation here.

I believe that Europe is not the place for Jews to live. Enough is enough. It is time to go.

I'm really disappointed in you, I tought you were more realistic, this is just plain BS and if you would say so to a crowd of French Jews they would make fun of you big time.

Med, I think Takeo just has low standards of what is wrong.

No, but I don't think one human is worth more than another one, I think the life of an African or Asian is worth the same as the life of a french jew or Western citizen in general. What happened to this woman is very bad but much worse things happen in the world, it isn't a perfect world you know, and all this attention for this woman is exaggerated compared to all the other terrible things that happen in the world without anyone mentioning it.

Ahava

07-12-2004, 08:41 AM

Funny how everyone is bragging about how they saved little girls, and how they don't believe others did ("Yeah right!"), and to see how the French (takeo) slags off America and the Americans (...) bash France...really entertaining. :D

Mil: the way you describe it it sounds like a warzone. It really isn't.

red crabtree

07-12-2004, 09:13 AM

takeo

07-12-2004, 09:32 AM

takeo, where I live it is rural. It would be extremely cost prohibitive to think public transportation would work. I live in a village of some 1500 people, actually I live outside that village in the country. Main street is 4 blocks long, and there is definately not a stop light to be seen. The closest larger town is 30 miles away. A car is not a luxery, it is a necessity. I drive nearly an hour to get to work as I chose to work in a larger hospital where there is more opportunity for me as a nurse. The smaller rural hospitals near me are decent enough places, but they do not keep critical patients or even anything that requires much. Those patients go to a larger hospital. I also make substancially more money at the larger hospital.
Understand in the area I live in there are more dirt roads than there are paved ones. Public transportation is just not on anyone's agenda here. There is one small bus that does run that is a county run program so that those who are elderly or handicapped to get to a doctor appt. or do grocery shopping, but for the most part we believe it is not up to the govn't, Federal/state or county, to provide us with a way to get around or to go to work. One works for what they get. Also understand that it's not as if we feel like we are being shafted because we don't have public transportation, we like it that way. We like our cars, we like our freedom to come and go when we want to, not on someone else's schedule. We like being able to listen to whatever radio station we like, or whatever CD we like as loud or as quiet as we like. Our vehicles are extensions of our personality many times. The car is our freedom. We don't want public transportation. If we did than it wouldn't be necessary for the govn't to bail out amtrak every time you turn around. The lack of public transport is not poor govn't or should it be said oh the poor Americans don't have blah, blah blah. We like it that way.
And since you seem focused on shootings in this country, had something like what happened in France happened here, then someone could have just pulled out a gun and shot the f***er's don't you think? Or perhaps gun toting American's is a myth too.

we have such villages here as well in remote rural areas of France, and all of them have public transport at least a few times a day. actually what you're saying is, the people who do not have the means or possibility to buy or drive a car, this is indeed one of the features of an egoistic society.
we have our freedom, our car, as well (at least most people or families in rural areas have one) AND we have public transport, which isn't only for the people who don't have cars but equally for the people who do not like to spend too much money on transport, have only one car each family or simply like to relax when moving around without worrying about traffic rules, congestions, parking fees or mad drivers. (which also mean they can drink a few glasses of whine or beer without bringing their own and other people's safety in danger)

and concerning liberal gun laws as in the us, if this would be the case in France those thugs could have shot her instead of harassing her. In France fortunately not everyone carries a gun around.

Mediocrates

07-12-2004, 09:48 AM

The last time I checked about 2x as many French Jews left France for North America compared to Israel. I'm sure they don't ALL live above some boulangerie on St. Catherine street in Montreal.

PS the biggest Velvet Elvis I ever saw was @ a sidewalk bazar near St. Dennis

Ahava

07-12-2004, 09:48 AM

we have such villages here as well in remote rural areas of France, and all of them have public transport at least a few times a day. actually what you're saying is, the people who do not have the means or possibility to buy or drive a car, this is indeed one of the features of an egoistic society.

People who don't have the capibility to drive or buy a car, shouldn't live in the middle of nowhere.
France's public transport SUCKS. I guess it's not possible to get connections everywhere like in Holland, because France is much bigger and has miles of land without anyone living there. But even around big cities it's hard to get around. I had to turn down multiple apartment offers around Nantes, because there simply was no possibility to get into the centre without a car.

Mediocrates

07-12-2004, 09:51 AM

Europeans for one thing think everyplace in the USA is exactly the same and two - rarely appreciate how much physically larger our country is compared to theirs. You could easily drive for 4-5 days from one side of the US to the other. Such things don't lend themselves very well to urban style mass transit.

And why does the TGV cost more than airfare inside of France?

Neubill

07-12-2004, 09:57 AM

Takeo is obviously still bitter about France getting their butts manhandled by a bunch of Greeks. :D

Mediocrates

07-12-2004, 10:03 AM

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2004/WORLD/europe/07/12/france.attack.reut/story.swastikas.ap.jpg

Ancient archeological site in Paris. Scholars believe the curious symbols say "We love the Jews".

takeo

07-12-2004, 10:11 AM

People who don't have the capibility to drive or buy a car, shouldn't live in the middle of nowhere.

many people don't want to leave their villages they were born in, why should they?

France's public transport SUCKS. I guess it's not possible to get connections everywhere like in Holland, because France is much bigger and has miles of land without anyone living there. But even around big cities it's hard to get around. I had to turn down multiple apartment offers around Nantes, because there simply was no possibility to get into the centre without a car.

that's perhaps because you don't know how it is organised. Of course public transport in Belgium or holland is better, in belgium you even have mini-busses you can call like a taxi for the price of an ordinary bus trip. But for you it's much easier to organise, since your countries are so densily populated and you don't have mountains.
I agree public transport in Paris is superior to anywhere else in france, but any major French city has an extensive bus system, most have tramway and metro system as well. The villages are poorly served, but at least once or twice a day there is a bus. this is worse than Holland I can imagine but much better than in the US.

Europeans for one thing think everyplace in the USA is exactly the same and two - rarely appreciate how much physically larger our country is compared to theirs. You could easily drive for 4-5 days from one side of the US to the other. Such things don't lend themselves very well to urban style mass transit.

even in poor and very large sparely populated nations such as Russia every village is served at least once a day (except in the very north of Siberia where there are no roads)

And why does the TGV cost more than airfare inside of France?

it doesn't for most people, all kind of social tarifs exist, but if you buy a ticket without reduction yes it's quite expensive. and airfare in France and Europe is cheaper than in the us as well. (for example ryanair)

Mediocrates

07-12-2004, 10:16 AM

link please.

Ahava

07-12-2004, 10:32 AM

many people don't want to leave their villages they were born in, why should they?

Because they can't get to the towns otherwise. :rolleyes:

that's perhaps because you don't know how it is organised.
I'm not actually stupid, I asked the people who live there, when they say there's no bus that must be true, they must know it.

Of course public transport in Belgium or holland is better, in belgium you even have mini-busses you can call like a taxi for the price of an ordinary bus trip. But for you it's much easier to organise, since your countries are so densily populated and you don't have mountains.

I realise that.

I agree public transport in Paris is superior to anywhere else in france, but any major French city has an extensive bus system, most have tramway and metro system as well. The villages are poorly served, but at least once or twice a day there is a bus. this is worse than Holland I can imagine but much better than in the US.

Yes, in Paris it's really good. As long as you don't run into Arab thugs, that is. Especially the metro and RER, system like in London.
I have no idea what it's like in the US, but it being a much bigger country and less government interference, I suspect it's much poorer, especially on the countryside.

Mediocrates

07-12-2004, 10:39 AM

Ergo we have lots of roads and cars to drive on them.

Mediocrates

07-12-2004, 10:40 AM

Wait next we'll hear about how the Baghdad subway was the finest in the world...until you know what.....

Neubill

07-12-2004, 12:54 PM

'tees, it's not good to feed the trolls.

Ahava

07-12-2004, 04:54 PM

I couldn't find this in English yet, but it's shocking enough if true, so I translated it from Dutch myself.

Antisemitic attack on Française in train possibly made up

The story of a young French mother who claims to have been seriously assaulted by an antisemitic gang in a train stirred disgust in whole France last weekend. However, on Monday more and more doubt casted over her story.

The police still haven't found any witnesses three days after the claimed assault, although the woman said at least 20 people could see what happened to her. Also, there are no images on the security cameras of the station where the men got off the train that match with the description of the men.

Moreover, it's not the first time that the woman has gone to the police saying she was attacked, French radio channel France-Info and TV channel LCI reported. According to the LCI, the woman has gone to the police 6 times before. The police didn't want to confirm that.

The woman claimed friday morning to be attacked by six young men with knives, who cut in her clothes and drew swastikas on her belly. Her baby would have been there too. The reportedly North African men would have mistakenly thought she was Jewish.

The 'victim' had a meeting with under-minister for Victim Affairs Nicole Guedj on Monday. She strongly called upon witnesses to report themselves. A few hundreds of people held a protest manifestation in Paris.

source : De Telegraaf

Ahava

07-12-2004, 05:11 PM

In French aswell:
http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3226,36-372408,0.html

"des doutes ont surgi sur les déclarations de la victime."

doubts started to cast over her declarations.

<off topic>
While clicking through on LeMonde I came across this interesting link.
http://www.herodote.net/motantisemitisme0.htm
'Interesting' how the word antisemitism is being examined, is it that hard to just accept the meaning of the word is "hatred of Jews" and noone but Jews?
The last sentence surprised me too.
"En 1953, Staline accusera les médecins juifs d'être à l'origine du «complot des blouses blanches» et c'est seulement la mort qui l'empêchera de déporter tous les juifs de son pays."

So, if it weren't for the death of Stalin, all Jews would have been deported from there? Anyone to comment anything on that? It's an interesting thought I'd never considered.
</off topic>

takeo

07-12-2004, 07:46 PM

it's such a strange story, I wouldn't be surprised if it was entirely made up.

So, if it weren't for the death of Stalin, all Jews would have been deported from there? Anyone to comment anything on that? It's an interesting thought I'd never considered.

I think it's BS, it's not a recent rumour, noone has ever found any proof for it.

Semsem

07-12-2004, 08:16 PM

You can't trust the French authorities. A year ago a respected Rabbi was attacked and the French police tried to pretend it was all made up.

L@mplighterM

07-12-2004, 09:59 PM

You can't trust the French authorities. A year ago a respected Rabbi was attacked and the French police tried to pretend it was all made up.

You’re quite right French authorities cant be trusted.

David_in_NYC

07-12-2004, 10:28 PM

I wouldn't be surprised to see the French try and cover it up... it would be true to their cheese-eating surrender monkey Vichy ways.

humus_sapiens

07-13-2004, 12:52 AM

Police said the attackers erroneously assumed the woman was Jewish because she was living in Paris' posh 16th district.

This asks to be on a poster saying: If you don't want your daughter or mother to be next, stand with us.

Just another validation that antisemitism
a) does not require Jews to be present, and
b) making some areas Judenrein or demanding Jews to stop defending themselves won't make the problem disappear.

From another weblog:
>The practical French solution would be to force the Jews to wear yellow stars.

Ahava

07-13-2004, 06:01 AM

it's such a strange story, I wouldn't be surprised if it was entirely made up.

The first time you jumped into this thread was to attack the Americans (while defending the French: not you guys, but the Americans are the real cowards).
The second time you jump in this thread is to immediately confirm the rumours that maybe it might be made up.
Just something that struck me.

Mediocrates

07-13-2004, 06:05 AM

takeo is a placed propagandist.

Mil

07-13-2004, 07:00 AM

Posted by Takeo:

I think it's BS, it's not a recent rumour, noone has ever found any proof for it.

I understand your love of Russia and of its crystal clear history is very strong but unfortunately Stalin's death saved the Jewish community of the Soviet Union.

It is not B.S. or a rumour but a very well proven chain of historical events. If you are really interested the book is:

"Stalin's Last Crime : The Plot Against the Jewish Doctors, 1948-1953" Jonathan Brent, Vladimir Naumov

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/006019524X/ref=cm_cr_dp_2_1/103-8059639-8073440?v=glance&s=books&vi=customer-reviews&me=ATVPDKIKX0DER

I read the book. It is a very-very-very well researched book; at least to my personal historical standards.

However, before you read the book above I really-really-really recommend a book written by Brothers Vainer which I happened to find in FRENCH!!!!!

"L'Evangile du bourreau" or in Russian "Evangile ot Polacha" by Arkady and Georgi Vainer.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/2070749096/qid=1089726773/sr=1-9/ref=sr_1_9/103-8059639-8073440?v=glance&s=books

It's Vainer's fiction take on the "Doctor's Plot." I promise it's a book unlike anything you read before.

Olivier

07-13-2004, 10:38 AM

she confessed : the story was entirely made up

Agression du RER : la jeune femme a menti

La jeune femme qui avait porté plainte pour une agression antisémite vendredi dans le RER D aurait avoué lors de sa garde à vue mardi après-midi avoir tout inventé, selon la police. Elle aurait notamment admis avoir dessiné les croix gammées sur son ventre avec l'aide de son concubin. Cet homme a lui aussi été placé en garde à vue. (AFP)she carved the swastika on her belly with the help of her boyfriend

Ahava

07-13-2004, 10:54 AM

minusthejihad

07-13-2004, 12:08 PM

she confessed : the story was entirely made up

she carved the swastika on her belly with the help of her boyfriend

So how is her cooking?

MGB8

07-13-2004, 12:14 PM

If this woman made up this story, then she is deranged.

On the French side, maybe, just maybe, the French are waking up. Maybe French pride has a use. We can only hope.

Oh Jerusalem

07-13-2004, 12:18 PM

This woman could have use as a living display in a Stokholm art museum.

Mediocrates

07-13-2004, 12:18 PM

minusthejihad

07-13-2004, 12:31 PM

I was just going to say:

1. I'm glad this deranged woman IS NOT Jewish!
2. I'm glad this deranged woman IS French!

KSO

07-13-2004, 01:47 PM

I was just going to say:

1. I'm glad this deranged woman IS NOT Jewish!
2. I'm glad this deranged woman IS French!

Well now the police all over the world can ignore antisemitic attacks with the simple answer "They are just seeking atention".

minusthejihad

07-13-2004, 01:53 PM

Yeah, except who's seeking the attention here in your opinion?

KSO

07-13-2004, 02:01 PM

Yeah, except who's seeking the attention here in your opinion?

the crazy woman...

Olivier

07-13-2004, 04:23 PM

It was Jewday in the paper today. A page with only Jewnews. Why are we so interesting?
One article was about this particular incident questioning whether it was true or not, and characterizing the various reactions to the incident.
Second was about the general rise in antisemitic attacks on Jews in France.
Third was a piece about how Israel tried to get the French Jews to emigrate to Israel.
Then there was a photo of the demonstration that was a reaction to the RER-incident.

The reaction in France after the attack showed me that the French are NOT all apathic and careless. All politicians strongly condemned the acts, one even more emotional than another. The story made big headlines. People gathered for a demonstration in Paris.This in fact is not news.

Just days ago, Chirac made a landmark appeal to the nation to fight anti-Semitism.

Don't try to search the forum for "chambon" or antyhing related, it just does not match with the agenda of the political trend represented on this forum: a campaign of unabated anti-french hatred.

just in case, the meager coverage by haaretz (they did not even bother to write an article themselves, they just copied reuter).

Chirac urges French to fight racism
By Reuters

LE CHAMBON-SUR-LIGNON - French President Jacques Chirac appealed to his nation yesterday to do more to fight racism, anti-Semitism, xenophobia and homophobia which he said were threatening national unity.

In a speech in this southern village which protected Jews in World War II, Chirac told public officials to lead the fight against "the darkest side of human nature" and urged ordinary people to teach their children the dangers of fanaticism.

Anti-Semitic attacks in particular have risen in recent months and Chirac's comments highlighted his concern that widening divisions in French society are damaging France's image. They could also dent his own record as head of state.

"Discrimination, anti-Semitism, racism - all kinds of racism are spreading insidiously," Chirac told a crowd gathered under rain-soaked plane trees. "All these acts reflect the darkest side of human nature. They are unworthy of France. I will do everything to stop them. In the face of the risk of everyday indifference and passivity, I appeal solemnly for vigilance from each French woman and man."

Chirac appealed to government officials, local and regional leaders, teachers, police and judges to set an example. He urged state prosecutors to appeal against any sentences they consider too lenient for racist, homophonic or xenophobic crimes.

Standing in front of the French and European Union flags, Chirac said France could be a more tolerant and united country, where people showed more respect for each other's differences.

Chirac's speech was one of his longest in recent months on internal political matters. He regards guaranteeing national unity as his responsibility as head of state, and doing so could be especially important if he decides to seek a third term in an election due in 2007.

He delivered the speech in Le Chambon-sur-Lignon because it is a symbol of tolerance after villagers saved thousands of Jews fleeing the Nazis or their French collaborators. Some residents hid Jews in their homes for years. The village is in a mountainous region about 90 km southwest of Lyon.

In recent weeks, neo-Nazis have spray-painted swastikas and hate slogans on Jewish, Muslim and Christian cemeteries in the eastern region of Alsace. Many of France's five million Muslims are also unhappy, following a ban on headscarves in state schools that comes into force in September.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=449345

Mediocrates

07-13-2004, 04:32 PM

Great speech. Apre moi le deluge and all that.

I just love it when the most powerful leader in a modern society whines and wrings his hands imploring someone to do something. What next? A UN resolution? Installation of several Islamic imams over "Affairs over the Jewish Question in the Republic"?

Donna

07-13-2004, 04:35 PM

Mediocrates

07-13-2004, 04:46 PM

I zam zo tired. Zo ver'ry tired. I cannut eefen light my Galouise.

Semsem

07-13-2004, 07:55 PM

<<Just days ago, Chirac made a landmark appeal to the nation to fight anti-Semitism.Don't try to search the forum for "chambon" or antyhing related, it just does not match with the agenda of the political trend represented on this forum: a campaign of unabated anti-french hatred.<<

So what? The French Courts do nothing. And yes I detest any country that has a corrupt anti-Israeli, biased, unjust foreign policy that is pro Arab and encourages the destruction of Israel.

David_in_NYC

07-13-2004, 09:30 PM

Olivier, the thought that Chirac is actually doing something about anti-semitism is laughable.

Let's face it, Chiraq and the rest of the French establishment are cowering in fear of the Muslims that they are allowing to inherit your country. This thread connects everything about Chirac - his history, his domestic policies, and his foreign policies.

Not that the French wouldn't be cowering in fear anyway out of their basic nature...

Sana

07-14-2004, 05:34 AM

France: A "Anti-Semitic" Hoax ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ French police have announced the detention of an unnamed woman who alleged that she was the victim of a horrific anti-Jewish assault on a Paris train. "The 23-year-old woman said six men cut her clothes and drew swastikas on her body, accusing her of being Jewish." The notional thugs also threatened her infant. The BBC said the lurid attack had "stunned France" and led to the usual outpouring of self-righteous fury and pro-Zionist hysteria. President Jacques Chirac expressed “horror” and condemned the incident, while Interior Minister Dominique de Villepin vowed to apprehend the assailants and stated that the attack was “more serious because it was marked by racism and anti-Semitism”, unlike the numerous non-White crimes French immigration policy has unleashed on Whites. The incident occurred in a climate of paranoia, reflected in President Chirac's wild pledge to smash politically-incorrect expressions, with world Zionism especially targeting France for negative attention. Such hoaxes occur frequently, especially when pro-White organizations make inroads, as happened recently in the French elections, with the pro-White Front National taking numerous votes off the conservative President Chirac. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3891425.stm

Mediocrates

07-14-2004, 05:36 AM

It's a tilde rich environment.

Olivier

07-14-2004, 05:43 AM

Ahava

07-14-2004, 05:50 AM

Olivier, the thought that Chirac is actually doing something about anti-semitism is laughable.

I'm sorry, but I don't think that's true. I think it's hard to act against antisemitism, but Chirac does make an effort to do whatever he can do. What do you base the statement on that he does nothing about it?

I am David

07-14-2004, 10:02 AM

Wow what a bitch for faking it. Now this gives an excuse for every snobby Frenchman to say "Oh it was faked!!!" everytime an anti-Semitic attack happens again. She should be fined big time.

Oh Jerusalem

07-14-2004, 10:15 AM

Wow what a bitch for faking it. Now this gives an excuse for every snobby Frenchman to say "Oh it was faked!!!" everytime an anti-Semitic attack happens again. She should be fined big time.
Make the punishment fit the crime! :mad:

Circumcise her. :o

MichaelC

07-14-2004, 10:21 AM

Originally posted by I am David

Wow what a bitch for faking it. Now this gives an excuse for every snobby Frenchman to say "Oh it was faked!!!" everytime an anti-Semitic attack happens again. She should be fined big time.

Is it possible that the point of this whole thing was to create an environment in which anti-semitic attacks can be easily dismissed? Only real explanation that I can conjure for such an act.

Ahava

07-14-2004, 10:41 AM

Is it possible that the point of this whole thing was to create an environment in which anti-semitic attacks can be easily dismissed? Only real explanation that I can conjure for such an act.

I have a way more logical explanation, some sort of psychological disorder, or personality disorder which makes her seek attention and fantasise in a compulsive way.

Olivier

07-14-2004, 12:40 PM

Is it possible that the point of this whole thing was to create an environment in which anti-semitic attacks can be easily dismissed? Only real explanation that I can conjure for such an act.Is it possible that the point of this whole thing was to create an environment in which anti-france attacks can be easily made? Only real explanation that I can conjure for such an act. :rolleyes:

Ahava

07-14-2004, 12:47 PM

Is it possible that the point of this whole thing was to create an environment in which anti-france attacks can be easily made? Only real explanation that I can conjure for such an act. :rolleyes:

Why does it seem like it was my statement up there? I don't want to be associated with that statement because I do not support it at all, can you please edit it? Thanks.

edit:merci

Northlander

07-14-2004, 03:48 PM

Is it possible that the point of this whole thing was to create an environment in which anti-france attacks can be easily made? Only real explanation that I can conjure for such an act.

:)

Not that it matters that the whole story was fake. Now you´ll have to live with the image of all french women being deranged AND that arabs in the paris metro carves svastikas in jewish women.

I think we can start to talk about a real frenchophobia over in USA right now.

I cant resist tough to drop a french joke I´ve heard just to show how neutral I stand in this little clash between your two great nations and to create a more happy atmosphere. This one I actually found funny.

Q: Why are there trees planted along every french road?
A: So that the german soldiers can rest in the shadows.

Mediocrates

07-14-2004, 03:54 PM

I thought it was to provide urinals.

Ahava

07-14-2004, 04:01 PM

Just what I was afraid of :( :

After fake anti-Semitic attack, Jews see sympathy turning into criticism

First the already well-known facts, then this interesting part:

While Muslim leaders had expressed solidarity with the Jewish community after initial reports of the attack, the woman’s detention provoked a sharp change in tone.

In a statement issued Tuesday, the Movement Against Racism and for Friendship Between Peoples — an organization that traditionally has had sour relations with the organized Jewish community — said that “stigmatized populations in the suburbs had been thrown out to pasture.”

The group also blasted “irresponsible statements used by people who profited from this fabrication to once more instrumentalize anti-Semitism against a specific population and to increase intercommunal tensions.”

The thing is, this incident turned out to be untrue, but it could have easily been true.
No freaking reason whatsoever to again blame the Jews! :mad:

After the embarrassment of this incident, the Jewish community must face the possibility that government ministers will be far more reticent in the future to immediately condemn anti-Semitic acts.
Whatcha gonna do......

takeo

07-14-2004, 04:48 PM

The second time you jump in this thread is to immediately confirm the rumours that maybe it might be made up.

I didn't confirm it, I just said it could be true. But actually it IS true as confirmed today by the women herself (of course according to semsem nand medio she will be drugged/tortured/violated by the French police...)

MichaelC

07-14-2004, 04:53 PM

originally posted by oliver

Is it possible that the point of this whole thing was to create an environment in which anti-france attacks can be easily made? Only real explanation that I can conjure for such an act.

Nothing is easier than to attack the french. They cannot readily defend themselves and generally just hide from their betters anyway.

takeo

07-14-2004, 04:56 PM

I understand your love of Russia and of its crystal clear history is very strong but unfortunately Stalin's death saved the Jewish community of the Soviet Union.

how do you know so sure?
Stalin (commander in chief of de Red Army) liberated 100's of 1000's of Jews from the concentration camps. In the meanwhile the Bush family were trading with nazi-Germany untill the late 30's...

"Stalin's Last Crime : The Plot Against the Jewish Doctors, 1948-1953" Jonathan Brent, Vladimir Naumov

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...e=ATVPDKIKX0DER

who ar those people? I've read so many anti-communist literature based on hot air instead of rel historic investigation.

However, before you read the book above I really-really-really recommend a book written by Brothers Vainer which I happened to find in FRENCH!!!!!

ok, whch title?

"L'Evangile du bourreau" or in Russian "Evangile ot Polacha" by Arkady and Georgi Vainer.

ok

La jeune femme qui avait porté plainte pour une agression antisémite vendredi dans le RER D aurait avoué lors de sa garde à vue mardi après-midi avoir tout inventé, selon la police. Elle aurait notamment admis avoir dessiné les croix gammées sur son ventre avec l'aide de son concubin. Cet homme a lui aussi été placé en garde à vue. (AFP)

yep, it has been confirmed

It was Jewday in the paper today. A page with only Jewnews. Why are we so interesting?
One article was about this particular incident questioning whether it was true or not, and characterizing the various reactions to the incident.
Second was about the general rise in antisemitic attacks on Jews in France.
Third was a piece about how Israel tried to get the French Jews to emigrate to Israel.
Then there was a photo of the demonstration that was a reaction to the RER-incident.
The reaction in France after the attack showed me that the French are NOT all apathic and careless. All politicians strongly condemned the acts, one even more emotional than another. The story made big headlines. People gathered for a demonstration in Paris.

exactly, France isn't Russia or an anti-semitic hellhole as people who don't know France at all are bragging around.

takeo

07-14-2004, 05:10 PM

Well I sleep fine knowing she isn't Jewish. You crazy French for the most part deserve one another. So now what will happen is that every attack will first be questioned and didled over because now the French don't want to be seen as:

a) looking stupid following up on false claims.
b) helping the Jews to begin with.

Seems to me that if anyone had anything to gain in fabricating this its the ziphead fascists, Islamic hate gangs and vogueishly ennervated French civil service.

whatever you will still hate the French whatever they do or don't do, some people will always complain, my advice is go to live in Alasca.

Viva La Ennui !!!

but before becoming a specialist on France the first step would be to learn some propper French...

Just days ago, Chirac made a landmark appeal to the nation to fight anti-Semitism.

Don't try to search the forum for "chambon" or antyhing related, it just does not match with the agenda of the political trend represented on this forum: a campaign of unabated anti-french hatred.

just in case, the meager coverage by haaretz (they did not even bother to write an article themselves, they just copied reuter).

exactly, but France criticised the US for invading Iraq, inciting terrorism and lying to the world, and Israel for ignoring human rights and UNSC-resolutions, so they MUST be the worst anti-semites walking around on this earth...

So what? The French Courts do nothing. And yes I detest any country that has a corrupt anti-Israeli, biased, unjust foreign policy that is pro Arab and encourages the destruction of Israel.

this is an illustration of wht I wrote above, we criticised israel so we must be anti-semitic. I can tell you that my israeli friends are more critical for israeli policy than i am, and they are right, this belligerent policy has prevented peace for decades, I only hope people will see that ending the occupation, entirely, is the only option for peace.
Youthe us can embargo Cuba or invade countries because they are not observing human rights or ignoring un-resolutions (according to you), you are criticising dozens of countries for infractions minor to the ones committed by israel, but noone has the right to criticise israel?

Let's face it, Chiraq and the rest of the French establishment are cowering in fear of the Muslims that they are allowing to inherit your country. This thread connects everything about Chirac - his history, his domestic policies, and his foreign policies

actually Chirac is conservative and not popular among the Arab minority in our country, which mainly supports the socialist opposition.

Olivier

07-15-2004, 12:49 AM

:)

Not that it matters that the whole story was fake. Now you´ll have to live with the image of all french women being deranged AND that arabs in the paris metro carves svastikas in jewish women.

I think we can start to talk about a real frenchophobia over in USA right now.No doubt the US opinion is not well-informed of foreign matters and very easy to influence. In the USA today, even huge lies can easily make it to the wider opinion (just look at the invasion of Iraq).

..... but the next problem is to expose where this anti-french campaign originates

Mediocrates

07-15-2004, 05:32 AM

It originates with arrogance like yours. [Gee I hope I spelled everything correctly - you how us dumb no shoe wearing hillbillies are...]

Mediocrates

07-15-2004, 05:33 AM

Just think how BELIEVEABLE the story was...even if it turned out not to be true. That's where it comes from.

MGB8

07-15-2004, 07:45 AM

Olivier

07-15-2004, 11:26 AM

Of course, the Anti-French "campaign" is really just a response to the anti-Americanism of France - a longstanding anti-Americanism that goes back at least to the cold war.
I'm afraid the level and quantity of anti-french hatred is much beyond what you can find in france against the US. On this forum people are *extremely* aggressive and routinely use false information. Sometimes it's not even information it's only hatred and insults.

I really do not see where you intend to go by spreading so much hatred. But at least, please don't complain about hatred against israel. You are haters.

After all, it is Jaque Chirac that has talked extensively about challenging the "anglo-saxon" hegemony...
So what? You think the Bush administration is not unilateral enough? That the result of these decisions imposed on the world is so brilliant? France just doesn't accept to obey Bush.

Lets not forget that 80% of the major media in Iraq is owned by France's 2 largest military firms....I think it's another false information, but please tell me more.

You want the difference between the US, the UK and France? In the US many people challenged their position on the war, and there was ongoing debate and introspection. France, arrogant in their infalibilty, has only recently begun to question its own anti-war campaign.There was several pretty strong pro-war campaigns, actually. Lead by Pierre Lelouche (right-wing) Bernard Kouchner (left) and various intellectuals. But clearly the overwhelming majority was against this mad invasion.

And as you know the strongest (if not the loudest :) ) opposition to the invasion of iraq originates in Germany. And opposition to war signalled the emergence of a european-wide opinion, it's not a french phenomenon.

As for your "recently begun questionning its own anti-war campaign", you must be joking. Everything proves the "slam dunk" information given by the US were phony, and that the slip of iraq into chaos is in fact accelerating... so it's the opposite which is happening.

remember Chirac said he would send troops right away in case the presence of WMD proved true. Of course the commitment was not reflect in the US media. It was right at the start of the invasion and... you were talking about arrogance? "arrogance" it's the most striking attribute of Mr Bush.

I think you are underestimating the importance of repairing the divide that has been created between western nations. Maybe, you should set yourself this major task instead of conducting this hate campaign.
You won't get more unity by repeatedly insulting us. You rather create some kind of irreversibility and more of the hatred you pretend to fight.
Adding more hate only serves the terrorists and chaos.

Or is it in fact the real goal of haters here?

?

Mil

07-15-2004, 12:14 PM

Posted by Oliver:

I'm afraid the level and quantity of anti-french hatred is much beyond what you can find in france against the US.

Source.

On this forum people are *extremely* aggressive and routinely use false information. Sometimes it's not even information it's only hatred and insults.

As you said before, to me, that I would have to talk politics everytime I visit France. In the US nobody gives....

I really do not see where you intend to go by spreading so much hatred. But at least, please don't complain about hatred against israel. You are haters.

I hate Europe. You killed half of my family - no offense.

So what? You think the Bush administration is not unilateral enough? That the result of these decisions imposed on the world is so brilliant? France just doesn't accept to obey Bush.

The problem is not who obeys who. The issue is that of POLITICAL COMMITMENT. While France screams and yells it does not offer absolutely any alternatives and does not show any signs of any kind of political commitment. I would respect your leadership if France would offer an alternative. It did not.

And as you know the strongest (if not the loudest ) opposition to the invasion of iraq originates in Germany. And opposition to war signalled the emergence of a european-wide opinion, it's not a french phenomenon.

Oh yeah!!!! I remember when certain politicians were making careers out of American foreign policy. Amazing. Imagine an American president making a career off French foreign policy. But though it does make me feel good that my country has such an enfluence and yours doesn't.

remember Chirac said he would send troops right away in case the presence of WMD proved true. Of course the commitment was not reflect in the US media. It was right at the start of the invasion and... you were talking about arrogance? "arrogance" it's the most striking attribute of Mr Bush.

As I said before no matter who would be the president post 9/11 we still would be in Iraq.

I think you are underestimating the importance of repairing the divide that has been created between western nations. Maybe, you should set yourself this major task instead of conducting this hate campaign.

You are the one calling us arrogant and unilateral. What's the difference?

You won't get more unity by repeatedly insulting us. You rather create some kind of irreversibility and more of the hatred you pretend to fight.
Adding more hate only serves the terrorists and chaos.

I promise you Iraq will succeed and what will you personally say afterwards?

MGB8

07-15-2004, 01:39 PM

The idea that it was Germany not France that was the heart of the Political opposition to the war is simply false. It was France, not Germany, that went from nation to nation (particularly in Africa) trying to sway votes against the US. It was France who told East European potential EU members who supported the war to "shut up."

Unilatteral? Of course, the US is expending the vast majority of the money and troops for the Iraq war, but so is the case in most modern conflicts, and the US was the main proponent of this war. POLITICALLY, on the other hand, the term unilaterral insults the UK, Australia, Italy, Spain, Poland, etc.

The coalition against the war was mainly 4 party - France, Germany, Russia and China. Maybe you could add Canada, Belgium and some of the Arab nations.

As for "repairing the trans-Atlantic rift" - this "rift" is nothing new. France tried to play both sides in the cold war. Germany and the US have pretty much patched up any issues. Frankly, France is for the most part a non-factor in world events, unless it wants to become a Pakistan and start proliferating WMD to unstable regimes that house large islamist populations - and hey, France has tried that before....

Meanwhile, you exhibit more arrogance than Bush ever did, Olivier. Bush simply stated - this is what we believe, this is why we believe it, and we are going to act on it, and you can either join in, stand aside, or get out of our way. France, OTOH, tries to hide its self-interested positions in some argument of moral superiority...while in reality all that France has been trying to do is protect its own investment in Saddam Hussein.

As for the Military contractors ownership of French Media, its part of a book written by a well known French journalist, I forget his name, who was recently fired from a major newspaper (I don't think it was Le Monde) for writing the book. So much for lack of censorship....

I believe there is a thread on this forum somewhere describing this.

takeo

07-15-2004, 04:38 PM

Of course, the Anti-French "campaign" is really just a response to the anti-Americanism of France - a longstanding anti-Americanism that goes back at least to the cold war.

After all, it is Jaque Chirac that has talked extensively about challenging the "anglo-saxon" hegemony...and he's repeating an often taken line. American travelers to France often come back reinforcing the French (particulary Parisian) reputation for arrogance.

we have the right to oppose us,arrogancem which is also a common complain of French tourists returning from the us, no you do NOT have the right to invade whtever country you wish to and you do not have the right to be wrld hegemons, if that shocks you so be it

The stench of hypocrisy from a nation that lays claim to libertym fraternity, equality, blah blah blah ... but tells other European nations to "shut up", and has huge problems with anti-semitism, racism, and on a national level essentially sells itself to the highest bidder. A country who continuously tries to "play both sides", guided not even by the arguable oversimplified values of the US, but by utter self interest deviod of any concience.

all this is equally valid for the us, you lay claim on liberty and de;ocracy but do not respect a country to have its own opinion if it is different fromyours< despite all your values you also sell yourself to the higest bidder such as saudi arabia and you have huge racial problems which makes france look like eurodisney

Lets not forget that 80% of the major media in Iraq is owned by France's 2 largest military firms....who had contracts with...Iraq...

loads of BS
lets not forget that most major media in the us is owned by friends of the republican party ich has equally high level contacts with the largest military firms in the us zho zere the preferate companies to profit from the war against iraq

You want the difference between the US, the UK and France? In the US many people challenged their position on the war, and there was ongoing debate and introspection.

yeah despite an overwelming majority against the war Blair still listened to his only real master which is NOT the brittish people apparently
in france there was ongoing discussion as well but you didn4t knowsince you don4t speak French< in france however people saw the argu;ents of the anti=war supporters were much more believable and as a matter of fact they turned out to have truth on their side

France, arrogant in their infalibilty, has only recently begun to question its own anti-war campaign (lets remember it wasn't just a position, but a concerted effort to keep Saddam Hussein...and also to soon remove the sanctions...), its own media, its own beliefs.

even the people who supported the wqr 2 years ago have ad;itted they were wrong, had we re

Olivier

07-15-2004, 04:43 PM

Posted by Oliver:
I'm afraid the level and quantity of anti-french hatred is much beyond what you can find in france against the US.
Source. I suggest you just read this thread over (or what you wrote in this very post).

I hate Europe. You killed half of my family - no offense.Sure, sixty years ago, I killed your family. I'm afraid I was not born, and my parents were babies. Sure I deserve your hatred - no offense.

Many people had relatives executed, killed, massacred and just don't have such a level of hatred. Stop kidding : today you belong to the haters, not just the victims.

So what? You think the Bush administration is not unilateral enough? That the result of these decisions imposed on the world is so brilliant? France just doesn't accept to obey Bush.
The problem is not who obeys who. The issue is that of POLITICAL COMMITMENT. While France screams and yells it does not offer absolutely any alternativesI know Bush said there is no alternative but invade iraq or "be with the terrorists".
In case you didn't read the polls: even in the US a wide share of the public opinion does not believe a word of this: forged evidence were plenty.

There were no alternatives, you say : false the invasion of iraq is a "war of choice". The choice of Bush, which was initiated well before 9/11.

You are the one calling us arrogant and unilateral. What's the difference? I do not attack the americans as a people, I criticize the policy of W Bush. But I guess you cannot see any difference between this and the anti-french campaign of hatred conducted here.

I promise you Iraq will succeedLike before the invasion, you are gravely wrong again. And this makes others pay for your blindness. Or, of course it depends what you call success!

MGB8

07-15-2004, 04:55 PM

Here's the Rub, Takeo, and its a Run that France has yet to come to grips with.

France is not as important as the United States. In fact, France is probably not as important as California.

Oh, and most major media is not owned by the republican party. That is a joke. The major networks are all still pretty liberal, as is CNN. FoxNews is the only really republican TV newsoutlet, while the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post are the conservative newspapers...but they are quite outmatched by their liberal counterparts. However, the SAUDI's do have an alarmingly large stake in many media corporations - of course, the Saudi's do have a lot of disposable income to invest, so that's not necessarily something nefarious.

The idea that the US doesn't have the right to go to war is, of course, ludicrous. Every country has every right to go to war with whatever party they wish to go to war with. Now, there are legal implications to the basis on which these wars were started, but the right is still there.

The Arabs states, for example, had the right to go to war with Israel (although not to attempt genocide, which they also did). The consequence of their decision to start the war, for example Jordan's decision to attack Israel in 1967, is that they lost legal claim to any land they lost in that war.

Of course, my hypocritical friend, you don't care that the Arab countries refuse to even RECOGNIZE Israel as required by the UN charter, much less issues of war and peace. Meanwhile "noble" nations like France stand aside as the Lybia heads the UN Committee on Human Rights, genocidal Sudan is invited on, and China, your lovely communist state which is the author of religious genocide, occupies Tibet, is aiming missles at Taiwan, and lets not forget Tienamin Square, presumes to judge Israel.

Of course, you can argue if the US had sufficient justification to take out Saddam Hussein's regime. But, OTOH, the sanction were crumbling, as UN officials were proved easy for Saddam to buy off while the French and Russians were pushing for the sanctions to be dropped even though Saddam had expelled the inspectors (so that France and Russia could profit from their investments!) - but, considering that Saddam had violated 17 UN resolutions, shot at US planes in the no fly zones which were the only things protecting the Kurds and the southern Iraqi's from suffering ANOTHER wave of mass murders at the hands of Saddam Hussein...coupled with the belief by every major intelligence agency in the world, including that of France and Russia, that Saddam had weapons, and the ties to terrorism that the Clinton administration laid out in its indictment of Bin Laden.......in short, Saddam was in violation of the cease fire that had ended the 91 Gulf War, and had been in violation for a long time...the fact that the US waited to act on this violation and resume hostilities isn't relevant in a legal sense.

Olivier

07-15-2004, 04:59 PM

The idea that it was Germany not France that was the heart of the Political opposition to the war is simply false.You'd have to look at the history of the events to understand what happened. (And btw you say the opposite below in your very message):
The coalition against the war was mainly 4 partyIt is absolutely impossible to understand the position of france without taking germany into account. Absolutely impossible.
And that's were the US lost a key ally. Does "partnership in leadership" strike a chord in your mind?

the term unilaterral insults the UK, Australia, Italy, Spain, Poland, etc. ask tony blair how much he feels his opinion is taken into account. As for Italy, Poland just don't ask. And for Spain, I wonder why you didn't notice they already answered the question by leaving.

Paul Krugman: Taken for a ride by Bush
Paul Krugman NYT
Saturday, March 20, 2004

PRINCETON, New Jersey 'Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." So President George W. Bush declared on Sept. 20, 2001. But what was he saying? Surely he didn't mean that everyone was obliged to support all of his policies, that if you opposed him on anything you were aiding terrorists.

Now we know that he meant just that.

A year ago, Bush, who had a global mandate to pursue the terrorists responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks, went after someone else instead. Most Americans, I suspect, still don't realize how badly this apparent exploitation of the world's good will - and the subsequent failure to find weapons of mass destruction - damaged America's credibility.

They imagine that only the dastardly French, and now maybe the cowardly Spaniards, doubt America's word. But on Thursday, according to Agence France-Presse, the president of Poland - which has roughly 2,500 soldiers in Iraq - had this to say about America's leaders: "That they deceived us about the weapons of mass destruction, that's true. We were taken for a ride."

As for "repairing the trans-Atlantic rift" - this "rift" is nothing new.you really are missing something there. France playing the difference with the US has always been a normal policy. But everytime the stake was decisive (in the cuban missile crisis, the US ambassador came to de gaulle with aerial photos. And guess what, de gaulle refused to even look at them and said 'I trust you').
I think you still do not realize the extend of what happened, and the magnitude of the damage that was done.

Meanwhile, you exhibit more arrogance than Bush ever did, Olivier.
:)

As for the Military contractors ownership of French MediaPlease don't change the subject, you wrote "80% of the major media in Iraq"

takeo

07-15-2004, 05:01 PM

You want the difference between the US, the UK and France? In the US many people challenged their position on the war, and there was ongoing debate and introspection. France, arrogant in their infalibilty, has only recently begun to question its own anti-war campaign (lets remember it wasn't just a position, but a concerted effort to keep Saddam Hussein...and also to soon remove the sanctions...), its own media, its own beliefs.

we were right and you were wrong about WMD's, about the iraqi reaction to your occupation, about terrorism, about anything you were wrong, the real debate therefor is going on in the us and GB and NOT in France.
Our solution would have left saddam in power but would have prevented a civil war and 1000's of deaths and al-quaida taking advantage of the war, our solution would also have left the coalition against terror in place which has now broken apart thanks to your incomprehensible aggression against the iraqi people. so next time the us is targetted by al-quaida, which is now much more likely than before the war in iraq, we won't care.
last time we helped you in afghanistan to fight the terrorists you created yourself during the 80's (when you were fighting the communists together with friends such as osama bin laden), and what was our reward? you just ignored our and world opinion regarding iraq and took advantage of the war on terror to destroy a country which had nothing to do with 11th september. well, I think you really deserve what's going on in iraq right now. Iraqi's go ahead kick them in the ass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm afraid the level and quantity of anti-french hatred is much beyond what you can find in france against the US. On this forum people are *extremely* aggressive and routinely use false information. Sometimes it's not even information it's only hatred and insults.

indeed, people like mg8 make me aggressive as well in response to their extreme ignorance.

I really do not see where you intend to go by spreading so much hatred. But at least, please don't complain about hatred against israel. You are haters.

but hate creates more hate, Iraq and the middle-eastern conflict is a perfect illustrration.

So what? You think the Bush administration is not unilateral enough? That the result of these decisions imposed on the world is so brilliant? France just doesn't accept to obey Bush.

I think our reaction was too weak, we should have left nato.

There was several pretty strong pro-war campaigns, actually. Lead by Pierre Lelouche (right-wing) Bernard Kouchner (left) and various intellectuals. But clearly the overwhelming majority was against this mad invasion.

but even those people are now changing their opinion.

And as you know the strongest (if not the loudest ) opposition to the invasion of iraq originates in Germany. And opposition to war signalled the emergence of a european-wide opinion, it's not a french phenomenon.

all over europe more than 90% of the population rejected the war, in great-brittain and eastern europe as well.

remember Chirac said he would send troops right away in case the presence of WMD proved true. Of course the commitment was not reflect in the US media. It was right at the start of the invasion and... you were talking about arrogance? "arrogance" it's the most striking attribute of Mr Bush.

exactly, but people like mg8 are so much indoctrinated they can't see this. Bush' attitude however has made the us loose more friends and credibility than ever before in the history of the us.

As you said before, to me, that I would have to talk politics everytime I visit France. In the US nobody gives....

most Americans are ignorant, more so than the average Frenchman. that's why Bush and his freinds in the media can so easily manipulate the public opinion.

I hate Europe. You killed half of my family - no offense.

you are european yourself, this is a fake argument. Hitler and his bastard friends killed millions of Jews, other europeans, especially the Russians, sacrificed their life to stop Hitler.

The problem is not who obeys who. The issue is that of POLITICAL COMMITMENT. While France screams and yells it does not offer absolutely any alternatives and does not show any signs of any kind of political commitment. I would respect your leadership if France would offer an alternative. It did not.

it did, we just said i saddam complies to the un-resolution let's abolish the embargo and do as we all recently did in the case of libia.

MGB8

07-15-2004, 05:16 PM

Ah yes....Takeo now argues for Iraqi's to kill more people - Americans, Britons, Philipinos, Turks, and, of course, the majority of Iraqis.

And of course, the "French Solution" would have been to take down the sanctions and let Saddam continue in his pursuit of WMD unfettered - since NO ONE has disputed that he was TRYING to develop more WMDs - people have argued simply that the stockpiles that Saddam would not account for were destroyed, and that he was, for the moment, contained.

Of course, a large part of the recent containment was him submitting to inspectors which was only possible after the US deployed 150,000 troops next door. Coincidence?

Meanwhile, the idea that Saddam, in power, wouldn't have continued to kill tens of thousands of his own people every year is at best wishful thinking.

Oh, as to Europe - Russia killed many Jews before and after Hitler. The implication that Europeans died to "save Jews" is an insult to history and everyone's intelligence. Europeans for the most part either (1) did nothing or (2) helped Hitler kill Jews. Some rightous Christians helped Jews escape, but they were the minority - and the vast majority of National policies of Europe, and even the US, did not take even the smallest steps to prevent the genocide.

Europe fought Hitler to save their own @sses...after they had let him become too strong via their policy of appeasement. Of course, 60 years later, Europe tries the same policy of appeasement towards Jihadism.... some fools never learn.

MGB8

07-15-2004, 05:19 PM

Oh...and Chirac is no De Gaul...and I don't even like De Gaul.

I'm not a big fan of Bush's.

He has no tact whatsoever. But he believes what he says and acts upon it, and while there is some spin, its nothing compared to the spin France put on their opposition to the War.

At least the Russians were always honest about it - they opposed the war because they had interests in Iraq and didn't think it was a great idea in terms of US interests, and also believed it was in their own interests. They did not campaign against the war, but they clearly and strongly opposed it - and honestly, too. The French could learn a lot from the Russians.

As to the "Change the Subject" quote - I meant about 80% of the FRENCH media is owned by France's 2 largest military corporations....I apologize for the type which must have read Iraqi media...although I thought I wrote French media...

Semsem

07-15-2004, 05:34 PM

>>[QUOTE=takeo]we have the right to oppose us,arrogancem which is also a common complain of French tourists returning from the us, no you do NOT have the right to invade whtever country you wish to and you do not have the right to be wrld hegemons, if that shocks you so be it>>

We have the right to save the Iraqi people. Maybe you Frogs should have invaded Germany in 1936, which you cowards were unable to do.

It's time you Frogs got out of New Caledonia, Tahiti, Martinique, Guadeloupe, St. Michelon, St. Barthelemy, Corsica and Brittany.

No we were not wrong to support the war in Iraq. I hope the Arabs take over France; then I will really be able to laugh. You deserve it.

Semsem

07-15-2004, 05:35 PM

<<we were right and you were wrong about WMD's, <<

Who the hell cares about the WMDs. That was not the main reason to invade.

Semsem

07-15-2004, 05:38 PM

[you are european yourself, this is a fake argument. Hitler and his bastard friends killed millions of Jews, other europeans, especially the Russians, sacrificed their life to stop Hitler. <<

No France and their bastard friends murdered Jews Takeo. And they tried to exterminate the Jews of Morocco. No the Russians fought Hitler because they were invaded. The US fought Hitler even though Germany was no threat to the USA.

Donna

07-15-2004, 05:58 PM

I'm still shaking my head over the fact that nearly 15,000 people died in the heatwave that hit France last year. That was horrible and pathetic.

If they couldn't check on gramma, grampa, or Great Aunt Flora during something like that then seeing some Jews roughed up, stabbed or beaten must not faze them at all.

MGB8

07-15-2004, 06:48 PM

Lets not forget the attempted terror attack in Jordan with Chemical weapons that would have, according to the Jordanian government, have killed 80,000.

Where did the Zarqawi related terror group get the Chemical Weapons?

I love how western lefties love to proclaim, with absolute certainty, that secular and religious Islamic groups, as well as Shi'ite and Sunni terror groups, will never work together - despite COUNTLESS examples of them doing so, whether it is Saudi funding ending up with Hezbollah which works with Shi'ite groups, or Saddam's relationship with Zarqawi, or the muhajadeen in Afghanistan....

I also love how some random frenchmen with no inside info - just what they read in the newspapers, feel that they have more information than the president of the United States - or will base their arguments on say, the Senate report or British report when they haven't actually READ it...and may not have even read detailed accounts of what the reports confirmed or renounced...for example, the British report says that the much balleywhoed (sp) 16 words in the State of the Union address that Saddam tried to purchase Uranium from Niger....were ACCURATE!

The 45 minute claim...ALSO ACCURATE..but misleading because it didn't specify that it was battle armaments (chemical shells). Like anyone with half a brain wouldn't have realized that's what they were talking about.

MGB8

07-15-2004, 07:24 PM

Takeo...here's an example of your "Republican dominated American Media". LOL...you are so wrong on the facts that its pathetic.

Rupert Murdoch and to some extent Ted Turner are the best you can do...

Knight Ridder Gets It Wrong
The news service giant puts words in the president's mouth and then looks the other way on connections between Iraq and al Qaeda.
by Stephen F. Hayes
07/14/2004 10:30:00 AM
Increase Font Size
Printer-Friendly

Email a Friend
Respond to this article

President Bush continued to insist Monday that there was an operational link between former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida despite reports by the Senate Intelligence Committee and the commission that's investigating the Sept. 11 attacks that there was no evidence that Saddam and Islamic terrorists collaborated to kill Americans.

(Jonathan Landay and William Douglas, Knight Ridder Newspapers, July 12, 2004) [Emphasis added]

THAT SENTENCE IS FALSE. It was the lead passage in a story about President Bush's speech Monday at the Oak Ridge National Laboratories in Tennessee. Bush did not claim an "operational link" between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. He could not have "continued to insist" on such an "operational link" because he has never done so before. And, finally, neither the September 11 Commission nor the Senate Intelligence Committee reported that there was "no evidence that Saddam and Islamic terrorists collaborated to kill Americans."

Other than that, the sentence was accurate. The complete text of Bush's speech is here.

By Wednesday, Knight Ridder had posted a correction. "President Bush's comments about terrorism were incorrectly reported in that saying the president insisted there was an operational link between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. The president suggested that such a link existed, but didn't explicitly make that connection."

The correction is incorrect. The president never even "suggested that such a link"--the referent is an "operational link"--existed.

The sentence was hardly the only problem with the story, which ran under the headline "Bush Again Tries to Link Saddam, al Qaeda." Knight Ridder is the second
largest newspaper chain in the United States. Its stories run in major metropolitan daily newspapers such as the Miami Herald, the Charlotte Observer and the Philadelphia Inquirer. According to a company press release from May 5, 2004, Knight Ridder "publishes 31 daily newspapers in 28 U.S. markets, with a readership of 8.7 million daily and 12.6 million Sunday."

The authors continue:

In its report, the Senate Intelligence Committee affirmed CIA analyses that found that while there had been contacts between al-Qaida and Iraqi intelligence officials during the 1990s, "these contacts did not add up to an established relationship."

Again, not true. The report is misquoted. According to Conclusion 93 of the Senate Intelligence Committee report the "contacts did not add up to an established formal relationship." [emphasis added] How many terrorist groups have "established formal relationships" with their state sponsors? State sponsors often--but not always--prefer to keep their terrorist connections loose and informal so that they might avoid detection, deniability being a major goal of states that use terrorists to do their dirty work.

The Senate Intelligence Committee language is important for another reason: Documents from the Iraqi Intelligence service do suggest an "established relationship," just not "an established formal relationship." A report in the June 25, 2004, New York Times, was based on an internal Iraqi Intelligence document: When bin Laden left the Sudan in 1996, according to the Iraqi Intelligence document, Iraqi Intelligence began "seeking other channels through which to handle the relationship, in light of [bin Laden's] current location." The report also indicates that bin Laden "had some reservations about being labeled an Iraqi operative" and that "cooperation between the two organizations should be allowed to develop freely through discussion and agreement."

WissNX01

07-16-2004, 12:04 AM

This thread is way off topic of bashing and putting down the worthless French

Mil

07-16-2004, 06:48 AM

Posted by Olivier:

I suggest you just read this thread over (or what you wrote in this very post).

No need. I've been to France plenty of times and experienced on my own skin.

Sure, sixty years ago, I killed your family. I'm afraid I was not born, and my parents were babies. Sure I deserve your hatred - no offense.

Europe does.

Many people had relatives executed, killed, massacred and just don't have such a level of hatred. Stop kidding : today you belong to the haters, not just the victims.

In my upcoming wedding in October from my wife's side there will be almost no relatives. There aren't any. I still feel it. Even sixty years since I am still a VICTIM. Or may be you should ask my grandfather who still has shrapnel in his body.

I know Bush said there is no alternative but invade iraq or "be with the terrorists".
In case you didn't read the polls: even in the US a wide share of the public opinion does not believe a word of this: forged evidence were plenty.

Which polls exactly and exactly the questions for those polls please.

There were no alternatives, you say : false the invasion of iraq is a "war of choice". The choice of Bush, which was initiated well before 9/11.

SOURCE!!!!!!!!!! I want to know the SOURCE!!!!!!!

I do not attack the americans as a people, I criticize the policy of W Bush.

French criticized the policy of every American administration ever since those beatiful DeGaulle times. I know my history very well.

But I guess you cannot see any difference between this and the anti-french campaign of hatred conducted here.

Sure. So where are the mass demonstration against anti-semitism in the humanitarian capital of the world - PARIS? Don't warry being against anti-semitism is not a political statement of Israeli/Pal conflict but a statement against xenophobia and racism. Any coming? Any you personally are planning to organize. And please don't tell me anti-semitism in France is overblown - if people are talking about it; somehow something is happening.

Like before the invasion, you are gravely wrong again. And this makes others pay for your blindness. Or, of course it depends what you call success!

Give it time. Have you ever read anything on our president Wilson. I recommend you do.

Mediocrates

07-16-2004, 06:51 AM

Isn't he starting to sound ominous like a super villian in a Marvel comicbook?

<cue echo-chortle>
Bwahahahaha....

Mil

07-16-2004, 07:02 AM

Posted by Takeo:

most Americans are ignorant, more so than the average Frenchman. that's why Bush and his freinds in the media can so easily manipulate the public opinion.

You call us ignorant. That's a direct insult.... Personally I and most of the people I know are not ignorant. Certainly all posters on this forum are not ignorant given that they have an opion which counts more then enough for me. Generalizing on popular stereotypes is sort of stupid - don't you agree?

you are european yourself, this is a fake argument. Hitler and his bastard friends killed millions of Jews, other europeans, especially the Russians, sacrificed their life to stop Hitler.

I know who I am. The impact that Europe had on my family is tramendous - what can I say. I know the history of WWII and the events that lead to that war very well and believe me Europe has nothing to be proud of. The amount of political mistakes made was enourmous and I am very saddenned that Europe is making the same again.

I know of the sacrafices that the Soviet Union gave to liberate the world of Hitler. I know how ignorant the Western world was to the fit of the Red Army - mostly due to the Cold War.

it did, we just said i saddam complies to the un-resolution let's abolish the embargo and do as we all recently did in the case of libia.

Sasha, abolishing the embargo would do exactly what? The entire idea behind the embargo was to remove Saddam Hussein from power in the only non-military way a world community has at its disposal. Sanctions is the only power the Security Council has to put its will across. Post 9/11 Saddam Hussein became a liability to American security and to regional stability. We don't know what would happen if we would not invade and remove Saddam... In any case there were many reasons why Saddam was removed and those have nothing to do with any kind of a conspiracy.

Mediocrates

07-16-2004, 07:14 AM

"French refuse to help _________"

Fill in whatever you wish, it's all valid.

Olivier

07-16-2004, 08:42 AM

I hate Europe. You killed half of my family - no offense. Posted by Olivier:
Sure, sixty years ago, I killed your family. I'm afraid I was not born, and my parents were babies. Sure I deserve your hatred.
Europe does.

Let's stop and think a bit. Can you explain me why I should spend more time discussing with someone who unconditionally hates me, my country and europe as well?

I personnally have nothing against americans, israelis, palestinians, whomever... I have no hatred for the germans although they killed members of my family
but I see you hate now and you will 'hate on' probably until the end of your life. And your are just a 'moderate', incomparable to the 'hate club' filling my ignore list.

What is the point for me to discuss? Or rather what should I do? Just campaign in favor of the invasion of iraq? Send money to israel to help build a wall that grabs around 1000km^2 from the palestinians? Believe in God and pray for Bush to become intelligent and realize what he did instead of going on parading?

MichaelC

07-16-2004, 08:55 AM

Originally posted by oliver
Can you explain me why I should spend more time discussing with someone who unconditionally hates me, my country and europe as well?

Hell, nobody can "splain you anything Lucy. Whoever doesn't bow, scrape, and lick your boots gets put on your ignore list (which by the way, I once again call upon the administration of this board to please DISABLE! ). It really doesn't matter what anyone says to you. If you can't handle the conversation, you put your head up your butt and pretend that you're the only one talking.

minusthejihad

07-16-2004, 08:57 AM

Posted by Olivier:
[b]Let's stop and think a bit. Can you explain me why I should spend more time discussing with someone who unconditionally hates me, my country and europe as well?

Um, because you have nothing better to do with your time?

Or,

You're in the middle of a new heat wave and you'd rather ignore the plight of the old?

Or,

You're in the middle of yet another worker's strike and you have nothing better to do?

Mediocrates

07-16-2004, 09:08 AM

I have to wonder about people who spend most of their free time thrashing around people and things they hate so much. He is after all the actual target demographic of Rush Limbaugh, who's show attracts more people who hate him that support him. It's kind of pathological in a way isn't it? A little like people who crave attention so much they make up alien abduction stories.

Mil

07-16-2004, 09:18 AM

Posted by Olivier:

Let's stop and think a bit. Can you explain me why I should spend more time discussing with someone who unconditionally hates me, my country and europe as well?

I do not hate you. I never said that. I just don't have too many illussions about your continent, thats all.

I personnally have nothing against americans, israelis, palestinians, whomever... I have no hatred for the germans although they killed members of my family
but I see you hate now and you will 'hate on' probably until the end of your life.

Actually what bugs me about Europe is the anti-Semitism (one of the reasons I live in America) and anti-Americanism. Neither should be a part of modern Europe.

What is the point for me to discuss? Or rather what should I do? Just campaign in favor of the invasion of iraq? Send money to israel to help build a wall that grabs around 1000km^2 from the palestinians? Believe in God and pray for Bush to become intelligent and realize what he did instead of going on parading?

Me and you have different take on the matter. I think that Europe should have rallied behind the United States for the same humanitarian reasons that you so strongly defend. I think that Europe's refusal to assist the US has more to do with political and economic realities on the ground in Europe then with any kind of genuine believe on behalf of the Chiraq's or Shroder's into some different international approach to the Middle East. Both leaders in Germany and France are not stupid, however, what bugs me is how loudly anti-American both of them made this. I agree with MG8 at least in Russia Putin simply stated that it was not in Russia's geopolitical, political, economic and other interests to be involved where I would expect the same genuine attitude from the European powers. I believe that Chiraq and Shroder played on the popular anti-American attituded already part of your societies to stir the bubble and made us here in America very upset with no particular explanation in return - especially given of how much we have done for you and how small you have done for us. All this is no secret.

MGB8

07-16-2004, 10:07 AM

What is the point for me to discuss? Or rather what should I do? Just campaign in favor of the invasion of iraq? Send money to israel to help build a wall that grabs around 1000km^2 from the palestinians? Believe in God and pray for Bush to become intelligent and realize what he did instead of going on parading?

This is the prefect example of European arrogance.

The idea that they opposed the Iraq war on moral grounds and not because of their own investments in it - and the lack of recognition of both the horror of Saddam's Iraq and the danger which it presented and, in a different way, which we all though it presented - after all even French intelligence thought Saddam had WMD.

This is, of course, the continent that carved up the middle east and tried to put in place the foreign concept of nationalism on a tribal culture in essentially "fake countries."

As for Israel - the idea of a "land grab" from land that was never owned by the Palestinians - but by the Turks, then Brits, then JORDANIANS, and when Jordan attacked Israel in 1967...then the Israelis...but outside of the "land grab" argument, the complete dismissal of Israel's existential and security concerns, the false moral equivalence that they try to put on in order to appease their oil dealers.

Then of course, the sneering at things like prayer and other culturally conservative values...despite being the most conservative, real-politic continent in the world! No to Turkey...right? No to the Hajib!

Mil makes another great point, too - about why FRANCE AND GERMANY distanced itself from the US, how EUROPE damaged the "transatlantic alliance" - not the US....in spite of the fact that it is THE US that has ensured Europe's safety from the Soviets for all these years...and, with its troops in Germany, has ensured peace between France and Germany.

That is why I'm glad we're moving our troops out of Germany. We're through babysitting the two.

Mediocrates

07-16-2004, 10:14 AM

You're talking to a rock. Oh a rock I'm sure is charming and his mother rock is proud of. A damn fine baby rock when it was a wee pebble. But a rock all the same.

The kind of philistine who criticizes someone for eating a Picasso not because it's art but because only barbarians don't use mustard.

Olivier

07-16-2004, 10:36 AM

Posted by Olivier:
I do not hate you. I never said that. I just don't have too many illussions about your continent, thats all.

Actually what bugs me about Europe is the anti-Semitism (one of the reasons I live in America) and anti-Americanism. Neither should be a part of modern Europe.Anti-Semitism definetly is not a part of modern Europe but our nations are by tradition and geography extremely close to the arab world, hence the current surge, which is extremely hard to fight, especially when the problem rose from the Middle eastern conflict and now iraq. Only acting at the source would.

As for anti-Americanism, don't get paranoid. France's policy used to be her own way midway between the two blocks (closer to the US for obvious reason). It was not so stupid, since we rose to 4th world power.
France has always been ambitious and so she will remain, but rather through europe in the future.
If you think the rise of anti-Americanism in the world comes from france, you are gravely mistaken. It comes from american policy. Bush IS the most dangerous man on earth.

Me and you have different take on the matter. I think that Europe should have rallied behind the United States for the same humanitarian reasons that you so strongly defend. I think that Europe's refusal to assist the US has more to do with political and economic realities on the ground in Europe then with any kind of genuine believe on behalf of the Chiraq's or Shroder's into some different international approach to the Middle East. Both leaders in Germany and France are not stupid, however, what bugs me is how loudly anti-American both of them made this. I agree with MG8 at least in Russia Putin simply stated that it was not in Russia's geopolitical, political, economic and other interests to be involved where I would expect the same genuine attitude from the European powers. I believe that Chiraq and Shroder played on the popular anti-American attituded already part of your societies to stir the bubble and made us here in America very upset with no particular explanation in return - especially given of how much we have done for you and how small you have done for us. All this is no secret.I agree with some of what you said. But
- Shröder didn't played on any anti-American attitude. No way.
- ironically, Chirac himself is more pro-american than you assess. On his side it's a matter of rational decision. With such a huge error done by the americans he could help jump in the fray and do everything to stop that (or of course to mark his difference). But what did france exactly gain from this? certainly more than obeying like other countries did, but not that much.

But he gain was inevitable considering that what chirac said aloud was shared by many countries who didn't dare to oppose the US.

Can you imagine a minute what the world would be today if chirac has succeeded? Saddam would probably still be alive, OK. But would it really be such a catastrophy for the world?
Got any idea where the fight against terrorism would be today if the US spent the amount of money they spend invading and trying to stabilize iraq doing it seriously?

And do you imagine where iraq would be today if the embargo had been lifed seven years ago? It could very well be that, like in iran, we could see the emergence of the "civil society" (mm "société civile" I mean). Let societies overthrow they tyrans on their own. You can create the conditions for that, but not do this in their place.

As a consequence of this invasion:
- The huge sympathy and resolve gained on 9/11 was wasted. Terrorism racism (and indeed hatred here) were boosted.
- The whole image and meaning of the US was betrayed. Instead of a world leader setting an example, we have a corporate military power gone nuts.

and no, opposing the US does not mean "being evil". I'd say it's even good to have this kind of check and balances. Too bad it didn't work.

Mil

07-16-2004, 11:30 AM

Posted by Olivier:

- Shröder didn't played on any anti-American attitude. No way.

According to news outlets his anti-Bush stand was how he won his election.

- ironically, Chirac himself is more pro-american than you assess. On his side it's a matter of rational decision.

Chiraq played on popular attitudes. He is not stupid.

With such a huge error done by the americans he could help jump in the fray and do everything to stop that (or of course to mark his difference). But what did france exactly gain from this? certainly more than obeying like other countries did, but not that much.

France did not gain anything. The reason why France did not get involved because of the economic and political situation in your country. Combine this with at the time upcoming EU merger and the Euro the war in Iraq could have been a real political party-pooper effecting both the political and especially the economic. Your socialism is running out of money while the costs of living are going up dramatically. Those 15,000 summer heat victims was no accident and I doubt that Chiraq is stupid enough to risk a military adventure spending while France itself is lacking money.

I don't have a problem with your country refusing to join the Iraq fray but please be freaking HONEST!!!! Honesty goes a long way. Dishonesty does not fit the status of France and Germany. All in the US would understand.

But he gain was inevitable considering that what chirac said aloud was shared by many countries who didn't dare to oppose the US.

Do you know why Russia did not join Bush?

Can you imagine a minute what the world would be today if chirac has succeeded? Saddam would probably still be alive, OK. But would it really be such a catastrophy for the world?[ Got any idea where the fight against terrorism would be today if the US spent the amount of money they spend invading and trying to stabilize iraq doing it seriously?

This is all speculations. In reality after 9/11 the American administration had no illussions of who might have what and who might harm the country next. If Chiraq would have been the president of the US on 9/11 he would have invaded Iraq all the same. I asked you before - what would be your plan of action post 9/11 were you the president of the United States?

And do you imagine where iraq would be today if the embargo had been lifed seven years ago? It could very well be that, like in iran, we could see the emergence of the "civil society" (mm "société civile" I mean). Let societies overthrow they tyrans on their own. You can create the conditions for that, but not do this in their place.

You are kidding.... Right? If sanctions would be lifted Saddam would still be in power. No popular uprising would take place and his tyranny would go on until his natural death. That's not speculation but a FACT. Especially if Saddam would have WMDs, which he certainly would if embargo would be lifted, Iraq would become untouchable. God, you are really naive.

Even if there would be no 9/11 the embargo would stay till Saddam would leave power. Any leader, including Chiraq, understood that very well. In any case the embargo was a UN decision.

As a consequence of this invasion:
- The huge sympathy and resolve gained on 9/11 was wasted. Terrorism racism (and indeed hatred here) were boosted.

If racism is boosting in France because of American invasion than it's a French problem. Or rather the problem of your education system. As far as anti-semitism the Arabs were calling us pigs and monkeys for the past 55 years.

On the matter of terrorism it is all speculations of what would have happened if US did not invade Iraq.

As far as sympathy is concerned - this is a war; no sympathy is required. We could do it all by ourselves that's why we are the United States and you are France.

- The whole image and meaning of the US was betrayed. Instead of a world leader setting an example, we have a corporate military power gone nuts.

What you mean corporate? Care to explain? I really love these OIL/ISRAEL/HALIBURTON conspiracies. By the way the second largest oil company in the world is called SibNeft and is located in Russia. I bet the Russians would be diying to get into Iraq to get some "corporate" doe.

and no, opposing the US does not mean "being evil". I'd say it's even good to have this kind of check and balances. Too bad it didn't work.

Checks and balances of what exactly? Is that an organization of some sorts? And how is it supposed to work?

MGB8

07-16-2004, 11:47 AM

We, as in "the West" have had a policy of non-confrontation and real-politik support of strongmen in the middle east for a century.

What has that gotten us? Bin Laden and his ilk.

The US took a big gamble in a change of political direction, while France ACTIVELY opposed it (as opposed to simply voting against it like Russia and Germany).

Why? France opposed the war to appease the Arab block and to protect there own investments in Iraq. Pure and simple. They took the other side instead of the side of their "ally", and hoped to profit off the status quo while desperately hoping that by appeasing and ignoring the growing threat of the Arab/Muslim against the world mentality - which Saddam certainly was a figurehead of...it would just go away...just like Chamberlein hoped for peace for the next millenium.

The US figured that taking down a potentially dangerous dictatorship and trying to set up a democracy and some ideas like the rights of individuals and minorities would eventually create an alternative to the current (and 100 year ongoing) trend in the Arab world, which WASN'T changing, even if it spurred short term hostility with the people who were going to be emotionally jihadist sympathizers no matter what.

Mil

07-16-2004, 12:21 PM

By the way I really enjoy Rendez Vous, Joe Dassen, and Alyzee.

Olivier

07-16-2004, 03:19 PM

Posted by Olivier:
- Shröder didn't played on any anti-American attitude. No way.
According to news outlets his anti-Bush stand was how he won his election. ?
you could probably read them again or switching to "news outlets" that make a difference between "Bush" and "america". Germany used to be the biggest ally of the US. Bush father even asked them to take the place of the UK as first ally.

France did not gain anything.
I certainly agree on that. This invasion is a brilliant loose-loose situation. The only winner are chaos and al quaeda. And all firms working with the military.

Combine this with at the time upcoming EU merger and the Euro the war in Iraq could have been a real political party-pooper effecting both the political and especially the economic. I'm not sure I understand but that could be a monstruosity, please explain your "party-pooper" story.

Those 15,000 summer heat victims was no accident and I doubt that Chiraq is stupid enough to risk a military adventure spending while France itself is lacking money.You must be joking, it's a strategic decision about the stability of the world, not a financial question.

I don't have a problem with your country refusing to join the Iraq fray but please be freaking HONEST!!!! Honesty goes a long way. Dishonesty does not fit the status of France and Germany. All in the US would understand. so what do you exactyl understand? Do you understand invading iraq was the blunder of the century?

I'm amazed that more than one year after the invasion and all what was claimed about iraq by Bush proved false or plain lie, you still have the ability to boast. The situation in iraq is a catastrophy. More people get killed everyday, americans will end up leaving the country to civil war.
Iraq is now likely going to split into a zone of conflict and ethnic cleansing in Balkan style and with oil wells to conquer all over.
Brilliant.

And instead of working on the issue and trying to get the world behind you fix the result of Bush's idiocy, you find nothing else to do than talking about anything else, the rise of antisemitism in france is a symptom of the fire you are throwing oil upon. The US are checkmated in Iraq, you should realize it and change course. We indeed heard less insults recently (did you notice how silent Cheney is?). But that's not enough. Just stopping idiocies would be a major progress.

Were is the roadmap ? broken. Now the agenda is wall-building. Peace in israel/palestine is farther that we though it could be, and fanatics on both sides shape the situation.

Were is operation iraqi freedom? The US strawman in iraq will probably turn into another dictator backed with huge US-funded security forces, and "freedom" turns to be just chaos. No reconstruction is taking place either.

Read the polls amongst the iraqis? Any idea of the US popularity there. Of course once the population is turned into "terrorists" then you can leave them to kill one another.

I wonder how long it's going to take the both of you to realize this is a disaster.

Olivier

07-16-2004, 03:58 PM

We, as in "the West" have had a policy of non-confrontation and real-politik support of strongmen in the middle east for a century.

What has that gotten us? Bin Laden and his ilk.Well you trained him guys. And excessively backing israel did not help you either. Israel needs to be garanteed safety, not to be funded in colonizing. That's an extra that comes up with a cost. A bit like Bush negociating the right of return of the pals (good negociation, israel got it for nothing!).

You also played with fire shaking hands with saddam trying to counter iran.

I do not think the US were predestinated to do that. You just don't need to invade arabs. Terrorism is not fought by conventional warfare, the experience of israel shows it fuels it.

With escalation you can end up nuking millions of people (that's lamplighter campaign here) but even that will fuel terrorism. I'm not joking with the nukes: no country is innovating more into nuclear bombs than the US. And once they have "surgical nukes", they'll be dying to try them. On a 'limited scale' of course, but I bet the next nuke is not going to come from a rogue state.

After that, there is no garanty WMD won't become 'justified' too.

The US took a big gamble in a change of political direction, while France ACTIVELY opposed it (as opposed to simply voting against it like Russia and Germany)..... And the US lost their gamble, that's simply what happens when you have a nut as the most powerful man on earth. The chaos in iraq is a part in a whole civilization clash.
Only the israeli extreme right loves it, "just like home" for them.

Why? France opposed the war to appease the Arab block and to protect there own investments in Iraq. French investment in iraq are a tiny fraction of foreign investments. Of course the fact the US sacked france from all other gulf countries did not help.

but I repeat there is much more to opposing the invasion than this (even getting Chirac to climb on a high horse and charge is fun .... but it's not all).

The US figured that taking down a potentially dangerous dictatorship and trying to set up a democracy and some ideas like the rights of individuals and minorities would eventually create an alternative to the current (and 100 year ongoing) trend in the Arab world, which WASN'T changingthis argument is really appeals to me... unlocking the arab societies is a precondition for evolution

but
1 - This was not the way the war was sold to the world, MGB8.

2 - I think you know were the neocons who supported that theory are now.

3 - That didn't work. If it had you can trust I'd be clapping hands. But unfortunately, things just don't work like this. Like in the balkans, nation-building is very hard to do.
It does work in situation like east timor (do you know europe inject a lot of help for nation-building there? Four times more than what we had committed to spend if there was peace in iraq).
Neocon ideals are fine, but unapplicable to a situation like Iraq.

Anyway, I admire you ideals, MGB8. But I fear you are not conscious that nation-building has simply slipped out of the agenda on iraq.
Now the tune played in iraq is : hire ten of thousand of police force, state of emergency, strongman in power.... do you call that nation-building?

MGB8

07-16-2004, 04:40 PM

First, Israel did not invade the Arabs. Israel repulsed the Arabs and took some territory, but it didn't enter into Arab capitols even though it had the power to do so. Maybe Israel should have burned down Damascus and Cairo and Beirut...maybe things would be better if Israel had, but Israel chose not to.

Second, the WB is not Palestinian land, and Israel is not obligated to accept a State on it at all. The land is rightfully Israeli, won from Jordan in a war where it is undisputed that Jordan attacked first - its goal, along with those of the other Arab nations - the genocide of the Jews and destruction of Israel.

Where was the "gaurantee of security" in 67, when Egypt kicked the UN peacekeepers out of the Sinai, blockaded Israels port from which it got 95%+ of its oil (from Iran, at the time)? Where was that gaurantee in 73, when the Arabs attacked on Yom Kippur? In fact, where was Europe when the Arabs attempted genocide against the Jews in 48, 3 years after the end of the friggin Holocaust?

The only time Europe got involved, really, was when France and England wanted to keep the suez canal open...so they got an Israel with misplaced loyalty and suffering attacks based in the Sinai to do its bidding.

Where is the gaurantee when Europe funds terrorism against Israel by groups not looking for their own state, but the genocide of the Jews and destruction of Israel?

Should I bring up the French arming of Saddam, not to mention Osarik? It was a french member of the European parliament who suggested arming the Arabs with nukes in, I believe, 1998.... of course, Israel has had nukes since before 73....and no use has come of them...do you believe the same will be true of Iran who has said it will sacrifice 100 million muslims to kill 5 million Jews? Or saddam hussein's Iraq, which gassed its own people?

As for the route of the 7%wall/93% fence - understand that Israel expects rockets to keep coming from the Arabs, no matter where the route is drawn. If its drawn to close to the armistance lines, Israel large cities are vunerable to terrorist attack (although Arabs will eventually get rockets with enough range - and start a war between Israel and this new Palestinian state that will kill tens of thousands...)

meanwhile, many have described the 49 lines as suicide lines or Auschawitz lines...because they invite attack by giving the enemy a place to split Israel in two, and block the north to south movement of the army.

A conventional threat from the East may not be an issue for now...but what about 10 years from now? 20? 40? As long as dar al Islam is held by ruled by non-Muslims, a good number of Muslims will want that land back (like they still want spain)....and they'll keep trying...keep inciting... Egypt's peace treaty is very much in danger with Mubarak's regime likely to end in the near future, and the amount of hate their government controlled media has sown.

Back to Iraq... You are getting ahead of yourself. Elections are scheduled for January. If has been a little over a year. Japan and Germany took much longer.

The difference between Iraq and the Balklans...Iraq has a chance of being one country, the Balklands didn't. Oh, yeah, and the UN isn't running Iraq, and Europe isn't involved. Europe is mainly responsible for creating the mess we have now!

Olivier

07-16-2004, 05:34 PM

First, Israel did not invade the Arabs. Israel repulsed the Arabs and took some territory, but it didn't enter into Arab capitols even though it had the power to do so. Maybe Israel should have burned down Damascus and Cairo and Beirut...fine idea : Burn down, kill

probably israel didn't do that for the same type of reasons teh US should'nt have invaded iraq. As for "burning down and killing" the US are not doing so bad in iraq. I think they'd rather avoid this, actually.
But for you are you any happy with that?

Should I bring up the French arming of Saddammm please rather bring up the US arming of saddam, for a change. It's pretty much the same story (osirak was a goddam mistake, but I'm afraid it was not all that clear by the time, the project was launching in the late seventies and the US didn't see any objection either by the time - or did they?).

(I leave your - quite convicing - comments on the wall out. I think you should cut them out and post them for discussion on the proper thread).

Back to Iraq... You are getting ahead of yourself. Elections are scheduled for January. If has been a little over a year. Japan and Germany took much longer.Don't you really see *any* difference betwen Japan and Germany and iraq? You simply can't go on working with sixty years old paradigms. The world has changed. Greatly.

(what does "getting ahead of oneself" mean?)

Iraq now is chaos or dictatorship in the making, it's blatant. I still find it incredible you don't realize this.
Like with the invasion of iraq, I don't see you paying attention to what we are telling you.

The only "experts" attempting nation-building in the present days are european countries it's a damm hard task in the Balkans. It takes a lot of commitment, more patience and tolerance than the present day US have available. Maybe the US should turn to them and listen.

the UN isn't running Iraq, and Europe isn't involved. I'm afraid Bush is now trying very hard to get them both involved. There was a window of opportunity in the euphoria of the victory, it was an awfull mistake to miss it.
Now the US simply won't get Europe (or indeed any country which can avoid it) into this. Unless the US government get their brain back.

Until now, as Powell said: "you break it, you own it".

scattergood

07-16-2004, 06:22 PM

Oliver:

Don't you really see *any* difference betwen Japan and Germany and iraq? You simply can't go on working with sixty years old paradigms. The world has changed. Greatly.

Iraq now is chaos or dictatorship in the making, it's blatant. I still find it incredible you don't realize this.
Like with the invasion of iraq, I don't see you paying attention to what we are telling you.

Yes Oliver, there is a difference. Japan and Germany were truly conquered, with tens of millions of people being killed in the process, not thousands or maybe tens of thousands. The main difference is that the USA has been extremely restrained. If we wanted to 'conquer' Iraq, we would carpet bomb Falluja and that would have ended the issue. Violence solves violent problems, it is unforunate, and something to be avoided, but true.

Also, unlike you, I would prefer a dictatorship in the making to a dictatorship in reality. Saddam was a bad man no matter how you slice it, and his kids are..sorry, were worse. At least now Iraqi's have the opportunity, the chance to come into a pluralistic, open, 21st century world. But I assume, not trying to put words in your mouth, that the status quo of known strongmen killing people in the hundreds of thousands is better.

Look democracy is messy, ugly business. Jefferson said that "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure". But it is FAR better than any other form of government. Hundreds of millions of people have been killed by the twin totalitarian regimes of National Socialism, and Communism. (BTW--arent' the Batthist a reformation of the Arab National Socialists...aren't we still deaing with Nazism in its Arab form then). It's just that parts of the West aren't waiting until this form of totalitarianism becomes a real power.

Olivier

07-17-2004, 04:17 AM

(btw, it's now the third or fourth post echanged without french-bashing, or being insulted - I do not know how long it will last, but this is really a relief)

Yes Oliver, there is a difference. Japan and Germany were truly conquered, with tens of millions of people being killed in the process, not thousands or maybe tens of thousands. The main difference is that the USA has been extremely restrained. If we wanted to 'conquer' Iraq, we would carpet bomb Falluja and that would have ended the issue. Violence solves violent problems, it is unforunate, and something to be avoided, but true..mm nice arguments. But that would be interesting to add other factors.

first we live in times when there are less slaugthering alternatives to carpet bombing. Unlike japan or germany, iraq industry is already destroyed. Carpet bombing is no use. The US dropped some scatter bombs with horrible consequences (which in cities is a warcrime) but no tactical result.

second the US pretend to be "forces of good" and fight WMDs. It's hard to stand on that line and kill thousand or tens of thousands. Especially when all others are supposed to be "with the axis of evil". Note the acts of US soldiers on the ground, interacting with the population are pretty though, not to speak about what happens in prisons... note it could be worst and it's more incompentence than cruelty.

third : don't forget iraq never attacked or indeed threatened the US. It's a bit harder to come up and kill the population in this case. Isn't it?

Also, unlike you, I would prefer a dictatorship in the making to a dictatorship in reality. Saddam was a bad man no matter how you slice it, and his kids are..sorry, were worse. At least now Iraqi's have the opportunity, the chance to come into a pluralistic, open, 21st century world. But I assume, not trying to put words in your mouth, that the status quo of known strongmen killing people in the hundreds of thousands is better...I am extremely sensitive to such arguments.

still don't forget saddam was made by the western world (and not just france) and that your claim "Iraqi's have the opportunity, the chance to come into a pluralistic, open, 21st century world" is unfortunately falsified, not just by the predictions we made, but by what is happened daily in iraq. Open your eyes and adjust your discourse to reality ! Remember americans are supposed to be pragmatic and the french idealists. It's very revealing the situation is upside down today.

The intention is fine, but reality doesn't work like that considering the way you bring democracy. Democracy is conquered by a society which wants it in a long process, it's not injected by domination and occupation.
In the case of iraq, the population strongly rejects the US and unfortunately, the democratization process they try to bring.

Look democracy is messy, ugly business. Jefferson said that "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure". But it is FAR better than any other form of government. Hundreds of millions of people have been killed by the twin totalitarian regimes of National Socialism, and Communism.yes.

takeo

07-17-2004, 05:42 AM

And of course, the "French Solution" would have been to take down the sanctions and let Saddam continue in his pursuit of WMD unfettered - since NO ONE has disputed that he was TRYING to develop more WMDs - people have argued simply that the stockpiles that Saddam would not account for were destroyed, and that he was, for the moment, contained.

Saddam wasn't trying to devellop WMD's, READ the reports presented to thye UNSC by Hans Blix and Al-Baradei

Of course, a large part of the recent containment was him submitting to inspectors which was only possible after the US deployed 150,000 troops next door. Coincidence?

not a coincidence, but a lost chance to settle this dispute without violence.

Meanwhile, the idea that Saddam, in power, wouldn't have continued to kill tens of thousands of his own people every year is at best wishful thinking.

it's a fact, the last massive repression happened in 1991

Oh, as to Europe - Russia killed many Jews before and after Hitler. The implication that Europeans died to "save Jews" is an insult to history and everyone's intelligence. Europeans for the most part either (1) did nothing or (2) helped Hitler kill Jews. Some rightous Christians helped Jews escape, but they were the minority - and the vast majority of National policies of Europe, and even the US, did not take even the smallest steps to prevent the genocide.

this is an insult to the many Europeans who sacrificed themselves either to save Jews (many did hide Jews in their house) or to fight Hitler, because they didn't like the ideas of the Hitler-regime, especially not the extreme anti-semitism. Russians fought hitler to save their own ass, that's right, but if they didn't fight so hard many more millions of jews would have died. Your lack of gratitude is shocking.

I'm not a big fan of Bush's.

I'm not surprised.

He has no tact whatsoever. But he believes what he says and acts upon it, and while there is some spin, its nothing compared to the spin France put on their opposition to the War.

There was a lot of spin, a massive campaign to convince people Saddam was a danger to the world and involved in WMD, in fact a campaign of desinformation.
France only made some speeches on international level and rejected the war publically, that's all. there was a large campaign and huge anti-war manifestations (the hugest were in Great-Brittain, Italy and Spain, allies of the us in the iraq-conflict, it were the largest manifestations in the history of those countries, the large majority was outraged their country participated to this war, especially in Spain and Italy) but those were not organised by the government.

At least the Russians were always honest about it - they opposed the war because they had interests in Iraq and didn't think it was a great idea in terms of US interests, and also believed it was in their own interests. They did not campaign against the war, but they clearly and strongly opposed it - and honestly, too.

yes, that's right, because the russians were less concerned about terrorism and WMD's and moe about geo-political interests, Russians signed big contracts with saddam and sold him all kinds of weapons, France never did, for france it was more a principle question since the official reasons to go to war were not legitimate.

The French could learn a lot from the Russians.

that's right, we should have sold our most sophisticated weapons to Iraq as well and we should have lifted the embargo as well.
but don't forget Russia is an autoritarian country as well as all the other former soviet-states, which makes it much more easy to be honest. Putin will be elected anyhow. That's also why the only muslim countries joining the coalition were autoritarian ones who don't have to care about public opinion at all.

As to the "Change the Subject" quote - I meant about 80% of the FRENCH media is owned by France's 2 largest military corporations....I apologize for the type which must have read Iraqi media...although I thought I wrote French media...

it's BS, the us media is mostly owned by friends of Bush, the French media is rather diverse and divided over left-wing, rightwing and center.

MGB8

07-17-2004, 08:00 AM

You have your facts wrong, Mugabe.

The analogy is false on two points - first there was never a state or kingdom of Palestine like there is a state of Poland (the land was Turkish then British, then Jordanian, then Israeli). Second, Israel gained the land from JORDAN after JORDAN attacked Israel in 1967; Jordan has since renounced its claim on the land and later still made peace with Israel.

(the most you can get on the first point is a roman province of "Syria Filistina", which was originally named JUDEA, but the Romans changed the name after the Jewish revolts to punish the Jews for the revolts.)

Actually, a better analogy is of the Arab states to the THIRD REICH. Like the 3rd Reich claimed parts of France and Austria and Poland as part of the fatherland, because parts of those lands had people with a majority of German descent, so to do the ARABS (and make no mistake, this conflict is a lot broader than 3-4 million Palestinian Sunni Arabs - all but two of the Arab states don't recognize Israel's right to exists at all, or their existence, and one of those to has a massive anti ISRAEL, anti-JEW, not ani-"occupation" campaign in its state run media) claim the WB, and in fact all of Israel.

The Arabs will not stop making war until they get all of this land.

Europe wants to try to do the same as they did with Hitler and the Nazis - give them some of what they want, and hope that satisfies them. They haven't learned from history.

Meanwhile, under Israeli control pre the 2nd intifadah, the "occupied" Palestinian Arab had more rights an dper capita wealth than pretty much every other average Arab. The difference was that they lived under a Jewish dictatorship, with lots of local autonomy, rather than an Arab dictatorship (also usually with quite a bit of local autonomy - you have to remember that the "nation-state-system" was imposed on the Arabs by France and Britain 100 years ago over traditional tribal culture, and tribal culture still predominates).

Then the Pal Sunni Arabs started killing Jews in greater numbers as the proxy for the Muslim Jihad against Jews and Israel (since Israel has nukes and a strong army conventional war was no longer an option for the great Islamic state and its subset, the Arab league) and the Jews responded...not by ENDING the problem by wiping out the revolutionaries or expelling them - like Syria did to 20,000 so called Palestinians in Qa'na (or was it Hama - I forget the name of the town), or Jordan did to its Pals, or Saudi Arabia or Kuwait or recently Iraq....instead, Israel only targetted the militants and, instead of killing everyone, used checkpoints and curfews and is now builing a big barrier (93% fence, 7% wall) - much like the Barriers in Ireland, on the Saudi/Yemeni border, and in many other locations....

But Mugabe, you simply want to "blame the Jews" for 3rd parties hating them, I don't see you hating Arabs for supporting global Jihad, including against black muslims (and even moreso black christians) or Hindus or Europe and the US. And they don't target anyone -they just kill as many and as indiscriminately as possible. Only the Jews get the full racial-based hate.

Why? The real reason is because Jews are small in number, don't have oil, and are relatively weak, so they are easy to pick on. THAT is reality, and the combination of Jewish morality and restraint combined with European hatred of their own guilt and shame, and the fact that Jews are still easy targets...THAT is the cause of anti-semitism.

People are anti-semetic because they like to hate, and they can get away with hating Jews.

scattergood

07-17-2004, 08:08 AM

Oliver:
(btw, it's now the third or fourth post echanged without french-bashing, or being insulted - I do not know how long it will last, but this is really a relief)

Glad you are enjoying the Frenchbashing free zone! I have been to France MANY, MANY times (worked for a French company) and there are things I like and things I don't about the country, people, and culture. But I am here to deal with the arguements you put forth, not your Frenchness, just like I hope you are here to deal with the arguements I put forth, not my Americanness.

Oliver:
mm nice arguments. But that would be interesting to add other factors.

first we live in times when there are less slaugthering alternatives to carpet bombing. Unlike japan or germany, iraq industry is already destroyed. Carpet bombing is no use. The US dropped some scatter bombs with horrible consequences (which in cities is a warcrime) but no tactical result.

second the US pretend to be "forces of good" and fight WMDs. It's hard to stand on that line and kill thousand or tens of thousands. Especially when all others are supposed to be "with the axis of evil". Note the acts of US soldiers on the ground, interacting with the population are pretty though, not to speak about what happens in prisons... note it could be worst and it's more incompentence than cruelty.

third : don't forget iraq never attacked or indeed threatened the US. It's a bit harder to come up and kill the population in this case. Isn't it?

Glad you like by points. I'll deal with yours one at a time:

1) I think your logic is fallacious. Just because we have more precise bombs doesn't mean that they can't be used in just as forceful a manner as in WWII. In fact, the point is we didn't use our might in that way. It wasn't German industry's decline that led to the war, it was German societies near annihilation. In fact, their industrial output remained pretty constant through 1944, even though we were bombing everything in sight. The core and fundamental tenets of Iraqi society (power is good, tribalisim is good, take care of your clan and screw everybody else, Islam is the only true religion, disagreements NEED to be settled by force) haven't been threated by force. New technology or not isn't the issue, it's the application of the force at hand.

2) I think you have a very simplified view of the reasoning to go to war. Saddam was in violation of nearly 18 UN resolutions to verifiably prove he destroyed his WMD programs. He didn't do that. He also supported and harbored terrorists, and payed them off. He supported those who plotted to attack America, plotted to kill Bush Sr., and threw Scuds at Israel when America (not Israel) led a coalition to throw him out of Kuwait. The issue is that he was unstable, threatened tons of people, and believed to be seeking WMD or at least hiding the fact that he had destroyed his. Do you think that if he got a working nuke, he WOULND'T have used it? This THREAT of force on a scale that is unacceptable is what led us to remove him. The times of waiting until a chemical bomb or nuclear bomb goes off with a stamp 'made in Bagdad' on it and then attacking is over. It is that unilateralism that scares most people, which is understandable, but I believe the times we live in. I am unwilling to wait until downtown New York, or Paris are rendered uninhabitable because a dirty bomb went off before I react to a threat. We knew Germany was evil under Nazism but did NOTHING for a decade....

3) See above....

Oliver:
I am extremely sensitive to such arguments.

still don't forget saddam was made by the western world (and not just france) and that your claim "Iraqi's have the opportunity, the chance to come into a pluralistic, open, 21st century world" is unfortunately falsified, not just by the predictions we made, but by what is happened daily in iraq. Open your eyes and adjust your discourse to reality ! Remember americans are supposed to be pragmatic and the french idealists. It's very revealing the situation is upside down today.

Yes, Saddam was made by the USA in part. The world is an unclean, nasty place. We made a deal with communism to destroy national socialism....we made a deal with Islam to destroy communism. Just because we were part of the problem, doesn't me we can't be part of the solution. It is illogical to think, 'hey, I got into the car, I put my foot down on the pedal, I made it go, but I am not going to do anything about the approaching wall that will kill me'.

I think it is the Americans who ARE being pragmatic and the French that are being idealists. It has been made clear by decades of interaction that only being nice in that part of the world doesn't work. Arab culture doesn't respect the same liberty, democracy, and fraternity that Western culture for the most part does. It has been America that has realized that and PRAGMATICALLY moved the fight against Islamic Totalitarianism to their side of the world....unlike France's IDEALIST notion that if we acquiece, placate, and support their regimes things will get better.

Oliver:
The intention is fine, but reality doesn't work like that considering the way you bring democracy. Democracy is conquered by a society which wants it in a long process, it's not injected by domination and occupation.
In the case of iraq, the population strongly rejects the US and unfortunately, the democratization process they try to bring.

Again consider Japan and Germany, we brought them into the 20th century's version of open, liberal governments and they have been playing nice since. I mean even France hasn't been invaded by the Germans for over 50 years! And it was done extremely forcefully against an unwilling society.

Oliver

Quote:
Look democracy is messy, ugly business. Jefferson said that "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure". But it is FAR better than any other form of government. Hundreds of millions of people have been killed by the twin totalitarian regimes of National Socialism, and Communism.

yes.

Glad you see my point of view.

Olivier

07-17-2004, 09:16 AM

But I am here to deal with the arguements you put forth, not your Frenchness, just like I hope you are here to deal with the arguements I put forth, not my Americanness.Sure but you know I see no objection talking about all this as long as we remain respectfull.

2) (...) This THREAT of force on a scale that is unacceptable is what led us to remove him. The times of waiting until a chemical bomb or nuclear bomb goes off with a stamp 'made in Bagdad' on it and then attacking is over. It is that unilateralism that scares most people, which is understandable, but I believe the times we live in. I am unwilling to wait until downtown New York, or Paris are rendered uninhabitable because a dirty bomb went off before I react to a threat. We knew Germany was evil under Nazism but did NOTHING for a decade....The argument for fighting the development of WMds is a major one. But proliferation is and was not in iraq.

The Washington Post on January 7th ran a lead story titled "Iraq's Arsenal Was Only On Paper." The sub-headline reads, "Since Gulf War, Nonconventional Weapons Never Got Past the Planning Stage."

The Post story reads, in part, as follows:

"In public statements and unauthorized interviews, investigators said they have discovered no work on former germ-warfare agents such as anthrax bacteria, and no work on a new designer pathogen -- combining pox virus and snake venom -- that led U.S. scientists on a highly classified hunt for several months. The investigators assess that Iraq did not, as charged in London and Washington, resume production of its most lethal nerve agent, VX, or learn to make it last longer in storage. And they have found the former nuclear weapons program, described as a 'grave and gathering danger' by President Bush and a 'mortal threat' by Vice President Cheney, in much the same shattered state left by U.N. inspectors in the 1990s."
"A review of available evidence, including some not known to coalition investigators and some they have not made public, portrays a nonconventional arms establishment that was far less capable than U.S. analysts judged before the war. Leading figures in Iraqi science and industry, supported by observations on the ground, described factories and institutes that were thoroughly beaten down by 12 years of conflict, arms embargo and strangling economic sanctions. The remnants of Iraq's biological, chemical and missile infrastructures were riven by internal strife, bled by schemes for personal gain and handicapped by deceit up and down lines of command. The broad picture emerging from the investigation to date suggests that, whatever its desire, Iraq did not possess the wherewithal to build a forbidden armory on anything like the scale it had before the 1991 Persian Gulf War. David Kay, who directs the weapons hunt on behalf of the Bush administration, reported no discoveries last year of finished weapons, bulk agents or ready-to-start production lines. Members of his Iraq Survey Group, in unauthorized interviews, said the group holds out little prospect now of such a find."

remember scattergood,
George W. Bush and his administration promised us that Iraq possessed 26,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin, 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX gas, 30,000 munitions to deliver these agents, uranium from Africa for the development of a nuclear weapons program, and al Qaeda connections.
Were are all these now?
I think the fight against WMD proliferation is too important to be decredibilized by using it as a false pretense.

Yes, Saddam was made by the USA in part. The world is an unclean, nasty place.sure. Do you know you are one of the first americans here to state this clearly?

I think it is the Americans who ARE being pragmatic and the French that are being idealists. It has been made clear by decades of interaction that only being nice in that part of the world doesn't work. Arab culture doesn't respect the same liberty, democracy, and fraternity that Western culture for the most part does. It has been America that has realized that and PRAGMATICALLY moved the fight against Islamic Totalitarianism to their side of the world....unlike France's IDEALIST notion that if we acquiece, placate, and support their regimes things will get better.We have to disagree on that

for me I think the US are getting back to realpolitik now .... uglyly PRAGMATICALLY. When you say "Look democracy is messy, ugly business.", do you think this (http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?postid=106331#post106331) is the democracy the US are supposed to put in place in iraq ?

MGB8

07-17-2004, 11:12 AM

Olivier,

Every major intelligence agency on this planet believed that Saddam was hidding WMD. After all, we knew that he had them, and he wouldn't disclose what he did with them. He had used them against his own people, for g-d's sake! And he was still indefiance of all of the UN resolutions - and the UN didn't have the backbone to hold him to them - showing it, and the west, to be "paper tigers".

Meanwhile:

(1) The Russians have confrimed that Saddam was interested in terrorism against the US.

(2) Bill Clinton's administration had confirmed that Iraq had connection to Al-Zarqawi and other Al-quada officials.

(3) The Butler reports CONFIRMS that Saddam did ask about uranium in Niger, it just didn't get to the level of concrete talks.

(4) Saddam did build conventional armaments that were banned by the UN resolutions

(5) Jordanian terrorists had enough chemical weapons to kill 80,000...from where??? Lets recall that a US Marine magically slipped through Jordan or Syria to Lebanon undetected...so maybe the Chemical weapons weren't destroyed - the bottom line is we STILL DON'T KNOW what happened to many of his stockpiles - we still don't have PROOF that they were destroyed, only that we can't find them, so right now people ASSUME that they were destroyed (instead of handed to someone else, which is discounted for various, and I believe illegitimate, reasons)

(6) Saddam had bribed the Sanctions regime into oblivion, letting his own people starve while filling up his pockets with the money of UN officials and many Europeans...

Meanwhile, France, like Russia, opposed the War in Iraq not on principal, but because French Oil (Elf) had 100 billion dollars in contracts with Saddam Hussein for the post sanctions era...and the end of Saddam's regime of terror meant the end of those lucrative deals. Not to mention military deals, etc.

And, that has come to pass. The US invaded, and now US and British companies have these contracts. That wasn't the primary reason that the US invaded, but it certainly brought some "paleo-conservatives" on board. And France, and Russia, lost their interests in Iraq, which sucks for them. But, on the whole, the change in Western policy towards the Arab world is a good thing. By proving the west is not a bunch of Paper Tigers, and forcing Arabs to bear the horrors of terrorism on each other... we have forced a major shift in the Arab world, and maybe have averted a much larger and worse confrontation in the not so distant future.

scattergood

07-17-2004, 11:32 AM

Oliver:

The argument for fighting the development of WMds is a major one. But proliferation is and was not in iraq.

In public statements and unauthorized interviews, investigators said they have discovered no work on former germ-warfare agents such as anthrax bacteria, and no work on a new designer pathogen -- combining pox virus and snake venom -- that led U.S. scientists on a highly classified hunt for several months.....

While you focus on the fact that WMD plants haven't been found, I focus on the fact that UNTIL Iraq was rid of Saddam, we couldn't do the investigation and interviews that were needed. The THREAT of proliferation was there, and if Saddam made his scientists available as per the UN resolutions, if he kept records, as per the UN resolutions, if he turned them over to the UN investigators, as per the UN resolutions, that would have gone a long way to diffusing the sitatuion.

It was clear he was hiding, obfuscating, and not coming clean. So the USA and other powers, with additional intel, came to the conclusion that he was still pursuing WMD programs. In the MONTHS of delay between saying we are going in and going in (in large part because of French and German pussy footing), don't you think he could have dismantled, removed, transported some of the evidence?

The whole issue is that when there are reasonable, credible THREATS, we are now going to react. We are not going to wait until a city is wiped off the face of the earth before we go after these guys.

Oliver:
remember scattergood,
Quote:
George W. Bush and his administration promised us that Iraq possessed 26,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin, 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX gas, 30,000 munitions to deliver these agents, uranium from Africa for the development of a nuclear weapons program, and al Qaeda connections.

Were are all these now?
I think the fight against WMD proliferation is too important to be decredibilized by using it as a false pretense.

No Oliver, I don't believe that is what they said. What they said was that we know he had this amount of material and has yet to account for it, so we can and do assume that it is still a viable threat.

Oliver:

for me I think the US are getting back to realpolitik now .... uglyly PRAGMATICALLY. When you say "Look democracy is messy, ugly business.", do you think this is the democracy the US are supposed to put in place in iraq ?

Real politik works, and by definition it is the PRAGMATIC way of doing business, so thanks for proving my point. As for the alleged executions in the article:

1) Even the witnesses said it was a good thing, so IF true why isn't that important. And it only reinforces my point that FORCE is what the Arab culture understands and clings to. Even in America we had a few rebellions that had to be put down BY FORCE after the Revolutionary War. Americans killed Americans many times in the defense of our fragile Democracy.

2) And bluntly, so what, it isn't my place to say how Iraq implements their democracy with the exception that there should be a free press, property and contract rights for individuals, and regular elections. I mean, look at Italy they have had over 50 governments since WWII, but we don't call them an anarchy state.

Gilgamesh

07-17-2004, 01:10 PM

A lot of interesting discussions here, but most fail to adress the core issue which is the grounds on which anti-jewish attacks are happening today. The answer seems quite clear to me : just imagine Germany cutting a part from Poland and building a fence on polish grounds, cutting away "disputed land" against international laws, or imagine Germany putting all poles together into east berlin and sealing off the frontier, occasionally destroying homes of suspected gangsters and car-stealers. There would be a huge anti-german sentiment in the world and there would be a strong subliminal anti-germanism everywhere, except among those countries which would espouse the german far-right nationalist views. If you are looking for someone who is guilty of spreading antisemitism somewhere, it is the sharon regime along with the false-reading settlers. It is sad but as long as israel behaves as a criminal according to international law, jews, seen as "citizens" of israel will encounter antisemitism.

However idiotic, I'll answer this with few historical remarks.
Following WWII, Poles, Checks, Ukrains and Rassians, kicked millions of Germans out of their homes, in regions of former Germany, sealed the border, and stabilzed Europe from ethnic minority tensions ever since.

Of cours, you avoid thinking about the context. Arab Islamist terrorism. No terrorism, no fence, no roadblocks, not house demolitions ect... All begun with Terrorism.

The rest is Arab-European anti semetism, as the reason for anti Jewish feelings.

Gilgamesh

07-17-2004, 01:46 PM

Are you implying the genocide of germans following WW2 (over 12 million victims) was just or served any purpose other than anti-german ethnic hatred?

I am not aware of a "genocide". But mass relocation. It was perfectly just and perfectly coming.

Germans finished off later, by the Soviets and the communist ragime, were Nazis. If they were millions, it won't surpirse me. De-Nazification of Germany and east Europe, was probabley the second best thing the Soviet ever done. (The first is finishing off Nazi Germany and the ruin of Berlin.)

Olivier

07-17-2004, 01:57 PM

The whole issue is that when there are reasonable, credible THREATS, we are now going to react. reasonable, credible as you said. Iraq was neither of these. UN Weapons inspections worked, btw.

As for the alleged executions in the article:let's suppose his is not "alleged" but true, after that we've got some 30 witnesses, including americans.
No one videotaped it, or took pictures, but there are dead bodies.

1) Even the witnesses said it was a good thing, so IF true why isn't that important. And it only reinforces my point that FORCE is what the Arab culture understands and clings to. Ok so the program now is "dictatorship for iraq" because FORCE is what the Arab culture understands.

With that purpose that, you make terrorism a legitimate act of defense against the US... and that gives me a problem with US values.
I would like a statement by the americans who watched to confirm they think "it was a good thing".

2) And bluntly, so what, it isn't my place to say how Iraq implements their democracy.scattergood, It's not their democracy.

It's not "their" because Iyad Allawi is the US man and even executed these young insurgents in front of four US elite agents/bodyguards.

it's not a "democracy" because Allawi was in fact designated/approved at the highest US levels (US proconsul Bremer/W Bush)
Against the opinion of the UN representative, btw.
He was not elected.

The executions, tortures and the wide-scale repression which are beginning now are your doing and your problem. Do you plan to do anything about it?

(burying the bodies the bodies near Abu Ghraib was quite innappropriate too).

.

Gilgamesh

07-17-2004, 02:21 PM

Judging you by Kantian standards, i suspect you are preparing a genocide and mass relocation program of all your fellow israelis because of the Sabra&Chatilla "incident" managed by Ariel Sharon, are'nt you ? What the retaliation massacre of Arabs by Arabs, in Sabra and Chatila has to do with anything? What that massacre has to do with Israel? Nothing!

By the way, over 2 millions germans (and blonde poles) were killed during what you call just & coming mass relocation. Since creatures like you still roaming free, the 2 million figure (a number Its accuracy I greatly suspect) was not enough. More Nazis had got to be finished. More, much more. Shot on the spot or sent to Saiberia. I strongly supports and applaud Soviet handling of Germans following WWII. I only sadden for the Americans and Brits for not sharing the Soviet zeal in making justice with the German Nazis. 2 million, if this numeber has any meaning, is far too few.

scattergood

07-17-2004, 03:00 PM

oliver:
reasonable, credible as you said. Iraq was neither of these. UN Weapons inspections worked, btw.

You say Iraq wasn't a threat, I say it was. In that disagreement, the guy with the bigger stick and the will to use it wins the arguement. That's the realistic, pragmatic approach to the world, not the idealistic one.

Also, the UN Weapons Inspections DID NOT WORK. If they did, then all the materials would have been accounted for, which they were not, and which FRANCE voted for 'dire consequences' with their vote in 2003 on the Security Council resolution which passed unanimously. Basically everybody knew what that meant, but France and Germany were 'surprised' that the USA went through with it.

Furthermore, in 2002-2003 the inspectors, WHO HAD BEEN KICKED OUT contrary to UN resolutions, were only let in becuase the threat of force (200K US troops on Iraq's borders) was felt by Saddam. And when he didn't comply, they went in. It is pure fantasy to think that a UN resolution or any law matters if it isn't backed up by force.

Oliver:
let's suppose his is not "alleged" but true, after that we've got some 30 witnesses, including americans.
No one videotaped it, or took pictures, but there are dead bodies.

Where are the other witnesses? He quoted TWO who refused to be named or to go on the record. The government of Iraq is denying the story, why not believe them? Where are the bodies? Where are the graves? Where are the relatives of the executed prisoners complaining to Al-Jazzera?

Oliver:
Ok so the program now is "dictatorship for iraq" because FORCE is what the Arab culture understands.

With that purpose that, you make terrorism a legitimate act of defense against the US... and that gives me a problem with US values.
I would like a statement by the americans who watched to confirm they think "it was a good thing".

First of all, there is a difference between force and dictatorship. You can be a wimpy dictator and a forceful democracy. Second, this is the INTERIM government which was AGREED to by representatives (including Shiite cleric Al-Sistani). This is not the final form of government, nor was it inteded to be. Your complaining that the Iraqi's don't have a true democracy is like me complaining that some bubbly wine doesn't taste like chamagne before the second fermentation is done.

Terrorism, as I define it, is not a legimate act of war (and is outlawed by the Geneva Convention 4). The use of force against non-combantants with the intent of spreading fear and to coerce the public. Once somebody commits an act of terrorism, they define themselves as a combatant and thus the full weight of force can be used. Iraq is going to be racked by near civil war and it will take a lot of force to dissuade the groups from attacking each other. The Kurds in the north have enough firepower to convice people not to attack them, and they aren't attacking anybody else. Most of the violence is among Sunni's and Shiite's fighting for power in the new order of things.

Oliver:

scattergood, It's not their democracy.

It's not "their" because Iyad Allawi is the US man and even executed these young insurgents in front of four US elite agents/bodyguards.

it's not a "democracy" because Allawi was in fact designated/approved at the highest US levels (US proconsul Bremer/W Bush)
Against the opinion of the UN representative, btw.
He was not elected.

The executions, tortures and the wide-scale repression which are beginning now are your doing and your problem. Do you plan to do anything about it?

(burying the bodies the bodies near Abu Ghraib was quite innappropriate too).

Again, they don't have a fully functioning democracy so the real issue is when they do have elections will they be fair. Well, you can't have people blowing up ministers and not have voters feel safe, so what do you do, you ruthlessly destroy those who would destroy you.

What widespread oppression, oh you mean the mass graves of Sadaam, or his prison that contained 30K political dissidents?

Look, basically, you seem to prefer the 'order' of Sadaam to the chaos of an emerging democracy. I on the other hand am at least hopeful that if given the chance and tools (including force) to establish a democracy an Arab nation has the ability to.

Gilgamesh

07-17-2004, 03:08 PM

...........

Gilgamesh

07-17-2004, 03:13 PM

Mugabe

07-17-2004, 03:22 PM

Gilgamesh, are you really a member of the Likud? And how old are you?

Gilgamesh

07-17-2004, 03:25 PM

Gilgamesh, are you really a member of the Likud? And how old are you?

I am a real Likud member. I met Sharon, Natanyahu and many others in person, in different party meetings.
I am also an IDF soldier in reserve, and formerly a soldier in active duty for 3 years. I was in Lebanon and in Gaza. I am very proud of my military service.

You can check my public profile by clicking on my name.
As for my age, judging from the level of your coversation I'd estimate I'm twice your age. I'm 28 years old.

MGB8

07-17-2004, 03:56 PM

Mugabe,

You either are extremely ignorant about the history of the area - for example the pointless Sabra and Shatilla reference, when Christian Arabs massacred Muslim Arabs in an area that was under the control of the IDF (Sharon was found to have "looked the other way", nothing more. This is less than what Europe has done more recently in Bosnia, Rwanda, Sudan, etc. etc., and far less than what all the Arab governments have done to groups of their own people) OR, you simply want to hate Jews.

Or both.

Olivier

07-17-2004, 04:12 PM

Oliver,
Why do you keep conteminating my "Latest messages mentioning Gilgamesh".
Do you know you are on my ignore list? Why do you respond my post while you know I won't read or comment on them?Push off!!thanks for telling me. But there are rules of behavior on this forum and I do my best to respect them, so it's a bit strange that you don't want to read me.

Anyway, if you are afraid of debate, it's your problem, not mine.

It quite worrying that some foul words are banned on this forum, while calls to genocide, or "apology of mass murder" are considered normal business.

Gilgamesh

07-17-2004, 04:26 PM

Anyway, if you are afraid of debate, it's your problem, not mine. At best, you are a bore. You are simply stupid anti Zionist European trash. Why should I waste my time posting with you.

Intelctualy speaking you are a zero. History knowladge: Zero. You are ignorant barbarian!

You arise me no intelectual difficulty, no challenge no stimulation. You only cut and paste European and Arab propaganda. Why should I bore myslef with the likes of you, when I am looking for fun?!

It quite worrying that some foul words are banned on this forum, while calls to genocide, or "apology of mass murder" are considered normal business. I see no bad in finishing off millions of Nazis and their supporters. It is alarming, on the other hand, that you don't feel the same. Alarming, but not scaring, because it is expected of you. I know that as a proven anti semite you are, you have a a big warm place in your heart for the Nazis, the same as you have for the murderus Arabs. Anti Zionist racist creatures always stick togather for one another.

As for "foul words" keep worring about those, if it gives you plessure! Now worry this: a-hole!!!

MGB8

07-17-2004, 04:53 PM

Anger against the Germans and Europeans who killed Jews, helped the Nazi's kill Jews, or simply stood by and did absolutely nothing to stop it from happening is normal, although I do disagree with a call for more people to have been killed.

There is a quite legitimate point of view that argues that without the complete removal of the Arab presence in the WB, murder of Jews by Arabs due to the Dar Al-Islam/Dar Al-Harb ideology - Jihadism -without this removal and DISTANCE, another war between Israel and the Arab nations is inevitable.

This time, however, we're talking tens, if not hundreds of thousands killed. We're talking nations with, at minimum, Chemical weapons. We're talking a real threat to the worlds energy supply. And if Israel does go to the brink of being destroyed, we are talking about the Samson option - Nukes taking out MILLIONS.

David_in_NYC

07-17-2004, 05:04 PM

Anyway, if you are afraid of debate, it's your problem, not mine.

Ironic coming from a guy with half the posters on the forum on his ignore list.

takeo

07-17-2004, 06:48 PM

first there was never a state or kingdom of Palestine like there is a state of Poland (the land was Turkish then British, then Jordanian, then Israeli).

Poland wasn't an independant state for a very long time as well...

Second, Israel gained the land from JORDAN after JORDAN attacked Israel in 1967; Jordan has since renounced its claim on the land and later still made peace with Israel.

israel attacked Egypt first in 1967, Israel knew Egypt and jordan signed a threaty of mutual assistance...

(the most you can get on the first point is a roman province of "Syria Filistina", which was originally named JUDEA, but the Romans changed the name after the Jewish revolts to punish the Jews for the revolts.)

whatever, it is a fact that palestinians were living there for many centuries, and untill 1948 they were the majority in all of current israel and current palestine.

Actually, a better analogy is of the Arab states to the THIRD REICH. Like the 3rd Reich claimed parts of France and Austria and Poland as part of the fatherland, because parts of those lands had people with a majority of German descent, so to do the ARABS

problem is that eastern jerusalem, westbank and gaza don't belong to israel officially (neither is this accepted as a part of israel by international bodies, and not even considered a part of israel by israel itself) while Alsace lorraine officially belonged and still belong to France. Another difference is that the majority of Alsaciens want to belong to France and not to germany, I don't think the majority of palestinians want to belong to Israel. besides, they are not even israeli citizens, so how can those lands belong to israel? a land where 95% of the population aren't israeli citizens?

(and make no mistake, this conflict is a lot broader than 3-4 million Palestinian Sunni Arabs - all but two of the Arab states don't recognize Israel's right to exists at all, or their existence, and one of those to has a massive anti ISRAEL, anti-JEW, not ani-"occupation" campaign in its state run media) claim the WB, and in fact all of Israel.

this is true in some cases but not in all cases, even Syria said it would recognise israel in return for the golan-heights illegally occupied by israel since 1967.

Europe wants to try to do the same as they did with Hitler and the Nazis - give them some of what they want, and hope that satisfies them. They haven't learned from history.

you can't compare defenseless palestinians with a superpower. You can compare nazi-germany with Bush' America, both attacked countries without the approval of the global institutions.

Meanwhile, under Israeli control pre the 2nd intifadah, the "occupied" Palestinian Arab had more rights an dper capita wealth than pretty much every other average Arab.

this is nonsence, just look at the latest undp-statistics who have been released yesterday.

Then the Pal Sunni Arabs started killing Jews in greater numbers as the proxy for the Muslim Jihad against Jews and Israel (since Israel has nukes and a strong army conventional war was no longer an option for the great Islamic state and its subset, the Arab league) and the Jews responded...not by ENDING the problem by wiping out the revolutionaries or expelling them - like Syria did to 20,000 so called Palestinians in Qa'na (or was it Hama - I forget the name of the town), or Jordan did to its Pals, or Saudi Arabia or Kuwait or recently Iraq....instead, Israel only targetted the militants and, instead of killing everyone, used checkpoints and curfews and is now builing a big barrier (93% fence, 7% wall) - much like the Barriers in Ireland, on the Saudi/Yemeni border, and in many other locations....

palestinians were immigrants in those countries, but the native population in palestine and israel, whiping them out would be an etnic cleansing and genocide, and it would not have been accepted by israel's allies, and i think not by the israel public opinion either.

But Mugabe, you simply want to "blame the Jews" for 3rd parties hating them, I don't see you hating Arabs for supporting global Jihad, including against black muslims (and even moreso black christians) or Hindus or Europe and the US. And they don't target anyone -they just kill as many and as indiscriminately as possible. Only the Jews get the full racial-based hate.

those are not the "arabs", but only a small part of the Arab population, you're being demogogic and manipulating facts.

takeo

07-17-2004, 06:49 PM

Why? The real reason is because Jews are small in number, don't have oil, and are relatively weak, so they are easy to pick on. THAT is reality, and the combination of Jewish morality and restraint combined with European hatred of their own guilt and shame, and the fact that Jews are still easy targets...THAT is the cause of anti-semitism.

Jews are nO loNGER easy targets, they have important positions in most western countries, and certainly in the us and France, they have money as well and they are extremely sensitive for discrimination.
In fact jews suffer, for these reasons, much less from discrimination than other peoples and if someone targets them it always gets more attention in the media than crimes against other people, maybe it's good for us so i won't complain, but the least you can say is that they are no easy targets (neither is israel by the way, the only nuclear power in the region)

People are anti-semetic because they like to hate, and they can get away with hating Jews.

French people don't hate jews, but YOU hate arabs and Europeans.

Glad you like by points. I'll deal with yours one at a time:

2) I think you have a very simplified view of the reasoning to go to war. Saddam was in violation of nearly 18 UN resolutions to verifiably prove he destroyed his WMD programs. He didn't do that.

He was doing it according to Hans blix, and he was the only one to judge on that.

He also supported and harbored terrorists, and payed them off.

which terrorists? even the commission of the us congress concluded there were no links between saddam and Al-Quaida.

He supported those who plotted to attack America, plotted to kill Bush Sr.,

Bush sr. also plotted to kill Saddam.

and threw Scuds at Israel when America (not Israel) led a coalition to throw him out of Kuwait.

This was during gulfwar I, 13 years before the latest war, since a cease-fire has been signed and he stopped attacking israel, your arguments are just ridiculous.

The issue is that he was unstable, threatened tons of people, and believed to be seeking WMD or at least hiding the fact that he had destroyed his.

He didn't hide it, he said several times he destroyed them all, you didn't believe it or presumed not to believe it, since it was your only argument to invade Iraq, which doesn't mean he was hiding the fact he had destroyed them.

Do you think that if he got a working nuke, he WOULND'T have used it?

he had lots o f chemical and biological weapons at his disposal during gulfwar I, and didn't use them. He wouldn't have used his nukes either if noone would have attacked Iraq. (the same North-Korea, North-Korea is not dangerous as long noone attacks north-Korea, Israel too will use its nukes when attacked...)

This THREAT of force on a scale that is unacceptable is what led us to remove him. The times of waiting until a chemical bomb or nuclear bomb goes off with a stamp 'made in Bagdad' on it and then attacking is over.

this chance is much smaller than an al-quaida bomb going off in the center of NY. saddam never intented to attack the west, unlike Al-Quaida, which should have been our common ennemy. You destroyed the coalition against terror.

It is that unilateralism that scares most people, which is understandable, but I believe the times we live in. I am unwilling to wait until downtown New York, or Paris are rendered uninhabitable because a dirty bomb went off before I react to a threat. We knew Germany was evil under Nazism but did NOTHING for a decade....

The only present danger is al-quaida, not Saddam or Iraq (at least, before some idiots decided to make iraq a hotspot as well by invading it!) . Al Quaida is the only winner, they have gained both sympathisers all over the muslim world and they have gained a new battlefield which was a blind spot before the invasion, Iraq...

Yes, Saddam was made by the USA in part. The world is an unclean, nasty place. We made a deal with communism to destroy national socialism....we made a deal with Islam to destroy communism.

That's right, but the last deal was totally unnecessary and criminal, you almost created Al-Quaida with your own dollars.

Just because we were part of the problem, doesn't me we can't be part of the solution. It is illogical to think, 'hey, I got into the car, I put my foot down on the pedal, I made it go, but I am not going to do anything about the approaching wall that will kill me'.

But your iraq-policy is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

I think it is the Americans who ARE being pragmatic and the French that are being idealists. It has been made clear by decades of interaction that only being nice in that part of the world doesn't work.

but bombing the hell out of countries without a particular reason doesn't help either, this has been made clear by decades of interaction (vietnam, afghanistan, Iraq, ...).

Arab culture doesn't respect the same liberty, democracy, and fraternity that Western culture for the most part does. It has been America that has realized that and PRAGMATICALLY moved the fight against Islamic Totalitarianism to their side of the world....unlike France's IDEALIST notion that if we acquiece, placate, and support their regimes things will get better.

The US supports the most evil regime in the Arab world, Saoudi arabia, as long as tjhis continues you have no right even to condamn other Arab regimes since you're obviously part of the problem.

Again consider Japan and Germany, we brought them into the 20th century's version of open, liberal governments and they have been playing nice since. I mean even France hasn't been invaded by the Germans for over 50 years! And it was done extremely forcefully against an unwilling society.

not so unwilling, Germans and japanese started the war and lost, the population accepted defeat and rejected their former governments. unlike Iraq, that has been attacked first without particular reason, this is part of the reason why iraqi's do not voluntarily cooperate with the us.

scattergood

07-17-2004, 07:17 PM

takeo:
Jews are nO loNGER easy targets, they have important positions in most western countries, and certainly in the us and France, they have money as well and they are extremely sensitive for discrimination.
In fact jews suffer, for these reasons, much less from discrimination than other peoples and if someone targets them it always gets more attention in the media than crimes against other people, maybe it's good for us so i won't complain, but the least you can say is that they are no easy targets (neither is israel by the way, the only nuclear power in the region)

I assume you aren't Jewish then. The reason we are easy targets is because non-Jews won't stand up and give us general protection. The litanny of attacks on Jews because they are Jews is unacceptable in Western Liberal Democracies.

Takeo:
He was doing it according to Hans blix, and he was the only one to judge on that.

This is where you are just flat out wrong. Hans Blix REPORTED to the Security Council, and didn't have DECISION making authority. By your logic, Hans Blix is the final and ultimate decision maker in the UN, and that is just not the case. In fact Hans said on a number of times that he KNEW the Iraqi's were playing a game of cat and mouse and hiding information. It was his job to REPORT the situation and his inability to do so, in a reasonable manner was a factor that led to the war.

takeo:

which terrorists? even the commission of the us congress concluded there were no links between saddam and Al-Quaida.

The attacker of the Achille Lauro, $25K to each Arab family that had one of their sons murder Israelis. And the commission didn't say that Saddam had no contact with Al-Quaida, just that he didn't have any contact with them with regards to the 9.11 attack.

Takeo:
This was during gulfwar I, 13 years before the latest war, since a cease-fire has been signed and he stopped attacking israel, your arguments are just ridiculous.

The point is that 13 years ago he was willing to engage a country, who had NOTHING TO DO WITH the conflict and hurl missles at them in an attempt to coerce the world to do his bidding. The point is that a ruler who will use his forces that way doesn't play nice with the rest of the world, and should he get some WMD it is reasonable to expect him to not play nice with bigger weapons.

Takeo:

not so unwilling, Germans and japanese started the war and lost, the population accepted defeat and rejected their former governments. unlike Iraq, that has been attacked first without particular reason, this is part of the reason why iraqi's do not voluntarily cooperate with the us

That's the point EXACTLY. Iraqi's and as a proxy most of the Arab world doesn't think it needs to reform, that everything is fine. It took overwhelming force to make this point to the Germans and Japanese. But in a world where one man can carry a bomb and destroy a city, you can't wait for it to happen, it is nearly impossibly to stop..you have to pre-empt the attack at the source, which we are trying to do by bringing those societies into the more liberal plurality based world.

takeo:
The US supports the most evil regime in the Arab world, Saoudi arabia, as long as tjhis continues you have no right even to condamn other Arab regimes since you're obviously part of the problem.

Well, this is the real world. Some regimes are willing to change some aren't without the threat or use of force. In SA has anybody noticed that there is a small battle going on between the terrorists and the government? Has anybody noticed that the FBI is on the ground, working with the SA to track money flow? Was that even imaginable before we went into Iraq? No, it will take decades to transform the region and each country will react to different factors at a different rate.

takeo:
israel attacked Egypt first in 1967, Israel knew Egypt and jordan signed a threaty of mutual assistance...

While Israel initiated combat, the closing of the Straights of Tiran is an ACT OF WAR under both the Geneva Conventions, and the UN Charter on the Navigation of the Seas. Add to that the fact that Egypt THREW OUT the UN Peacekeepers from the Sinai, and massed troops on the border, what was Israel supposed to do? Egypt in action, deed, and communication declared war, Israel just hit first...too bad for Egypt.

Takeo:
whatever, it is a fact that palestinians were living there for many centuries, and untill 1948 they were the majority in all of current israel and current palestine.

Yes Arabs were living there for centuries, but Jews were living there for MILLENIA. And NO, Arabs were NOT the majority in all areas of Israel, the WB and Gaza. The first UN Partition plan was EXPLICIT in granting to the Jews those areas in which there were a MAJORITY of Jews and to the Arabs those areas where there were a MAJORITY of Arabs. The Jews went for it and the Arabs said NO.

MGB8

07-17-2004, 07:26 PM

Takeo,

You have now gone to repeating age old anti-semetic canards about Jewish power.

First of all, this is NOT an Israeli Palestinian conflict - this is in fact a JEWISH-MUSLIM conflict, but, of course, there is also a CHRISTIAN-MUSLIM and HINDU-MUSLIM conflict....do you see a theme?

IRAN (Persians, non-Arabs) funds and arms the Pal Sunni Arab terror groups. So does Lybia, Syria, Lebanon, and, indirectly, Saudi Arabia. So do British and American Muslims.

Its is 6 million Jews against the Muslim world takeo, a Muslim world that also happens to live around major oil centers.

Jews are very easy targets indeed. What happens if you libel Israel or Jews. At most, some people yell. If you do the same to Muslims - violence, energy problems, and many more people yelling.

The fact that Poland didn't exist is irrelevant - the Polish people existed and were developing on their own to nation-statedom. The "Palestinians" are not an actual ethnic group, takeo. They are all the Arabs in some lines drawn up in Europe - nothing more. Part of the great Arab nation that is a part of the great Muslim nation.

The fact that Israel attacked Egypt (although Egypt had already committed acts of war on Israel, and thus Israel's pre-emptive strike was justified under international law and would still be considered a defensive war) is irrelevant to the legal consequences of Jordan attacking Israel. Jordan had the ability to remain neutral - like the US did at the beginning of both World Wars.

As for the Pal Arabs pre-2nd intifada - I think you missed the PRE-2nd Intifada part. Sure, the Pals don't get state oil money like the Saudi Arabs do, but they had more universities, a higher employment rate, and more freedoms - until they upped the intensity of their Jew-killing campain.

Takeo....I really think you are hopeless. Have you, at any point in your life, tried to put yourself in the position of an Israeli, who believes that Jews have a right to their historical homeland, and the right to one state, whereas the arabs have 22 (which were carved up into false nations by Europe, but which do not actually reflect nations in the European sense - the French and the Germans are distinct Ethnic groups - Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqi....these are just made up names imposed on ethnic groups, often across ethnic lines...)

Had the Arab accepted the right of Jews to have one state on land where they were the majority (the Partition), instead of the Muslim dar-al Islam/dar al-Harb Jihadi imperialist mentality...well, we wouldn't be in WW4 today. But we are, and after Israel they will go for Spain (actually, they are already trying), not to mention the mess in the Balklans, a war similar to the Lebanese civil war...with genocide and blood on both sides...

Oh, and Europeans certainly do hate Jews....not necesarily in the old rabid Nazi way (although I see that we have a Neo Nazi who posted), but in a way that will happilly look the other way as the Arabs kill all the Jews - in fact, they will arm the Arabs to do just that, even with Nukes. You, Takeo - are part of that group.

MGB8

07-17-2004, 07:36 PM

Takeo,

You know what is the biggest sign of your idiocy.

The belief that some lines and a name drawn up by the British after they conquered some land from the Turks is the same thing as an ethnic group.

You are so stuck in your own mind frame - the European nation-state system, that you don't understand that the Arab world doesn't work like that.

You need to do a lot of reading about Pan-Arabism, about the Muslim Brotherhood and the idea of the great Muslim State (Caliphate), and the REAL ethnic divisions in the Arab world - not lines and names assigned by Europeans from affar.

Until you understand both Pan-Arabism and Pan-Islamism, you will not understand the nature of the conflict which the world has been in since the early 20th century but only recently has come to a head, and which you would ignore until it kills you and your family, and me and my family too.

Have you ever wondered why there was an "Arab league" before there was an EU?

This war we are fighting now is to destroy the notion of the great Muslim state and the Muslim versus everyone else mentality, and to get the Muslim world to accept the European "nation-state" approach, which is now held by pretty much every non-Muslim nation. An acceptance of this will be a denial of Pan-Islamism...this is the war of ideas that we are really fighting. This is why Iraq was such an important piece.

But you are so ignorant of history and reality that you have no conception of this. So arrogant and ethnocentric that you think that every other situation is like yours....

You have a LOT of learning to do, takeo, and you need to open your mind to it. I'm afraid that you already believe what you want to believe, and are too much of a COWARD to open your eyes and do some learning.

MGB8

07-17-2004, 08:10 PM

Takeo, the idea that Israel could have avoided the 67 war is laughable. The Arabs were very clear in their intent, the genocide of the Jews, and then they took steps towards that goal - cutting off Israels oil, and putting their armies into position.

And the world, to whom lefties like you say Israel should rely on for security...the world was silent, happy to allow the Arabs to put all the Jews into proverbial gas chambers. You want to know why Jews hate Europe - That is why.

Israel tried that tact in 1973, when the Arabs invaded on Yom Kippur...Israel knew that the Arabs were planning and readying to invade....but did nothing. And the Arabs almost succeeded in the genocide of the Jews.

And the World...Europe....they sat back ready to allow another Holocaust.

You are the same.

takeo

07-17-2004, 08:35 PM

who cancelled my posts??????????

The belief that some lines and a name drawn up by the British after they conquered some land from the Turks is the same thing as an ethnic group.

an Iraqi nationality existed and still exists, despite the tribal differences. Scottish are still divided in tribes yet they are all Scottish, the same exists in Iraq, at least among the Arabs, the Kurds don't feel they are a part of the Iraqi nation.

You need to do a lot of reading about Pan-Arabism, about the Muslim Brotherhood and the idea of the great Muslim State (Caliphate), and the REAL ethnic divisions in the Arab world - not lines and names assigned by Europeans from affar.

Saddam didn't want to create a great kaliphate, he was a nationalist and pan-arabist, not a fundamentalist.

Until you understand both Pan-Arabism and Pan-Islamism, you will not understand the nature of the conflict which the world has been in since the early 20th century but only recently has come to a head, and which you would ignore until it kills you and your family, and me and my family too.

the nature of the conflict is the situation in the middle East, oppressed by several feodal and oppressive regimes supported by the west. pan-arabism and pan-islamism are just reactions to that. On top of this there's the oppression of the palestinians.

This war we are fighting now is to destroy the notion of the great Muslim state and the Muslim versus everyone else mentality, and to get the Muslim world to accept the European "nation-state" approach, which is now held by pretty much every non-Muslim nation. An acceptance of this will be a denial of Pan-Islamism...this is the war of ideas that we are really fighting. This is why Iraq was such an important piece.

well in this respect attacking Iraq was not your brightest move, Saddam's Iraq was based on the "nation"-approach and he actively oppressed pan-islamists. What we see now in Iraq is a shift towards pan-islamism as a result of the foreign occupation of the country.

But you are so ignorant of history and reality that you have no conception of this. So arrogant and ethnocentric that you think that every other situation is like yours....

on the contrary, I think my knowledge of the Arab world exceeds yours.

You have a LOT of learning to do, takeo, and you need to open your mind to it. I'm afraid that you already believe what you want to believe, and are too much of a COWARD to open your eyes and do some learning.

When will you learn? already all your arguments for the war in Iraq have been proven false, when will YOU learn???

Takeo, the idea that Israel could have avoided the 67 war is laughable. The Arabs were very clear in their intent, the genocide of the Jews, and then they took steps towards that goal - cutting off Israels oil, and putting their armies into position.

israel could have prepared for war but by acting first they were the target of international comdemnation, not the arabs. arabs threatened israel before but never openly attacked it, there was no indication it would have been any different in 1967. And why, if israel was so much afraid of the Arabs, did they annex territories where millions of Arabs where living to their country? Of course those palestinians would be hostile to israel. I think it was rather part of a great-israeli religious inspired dream than because of security reasons.

And the world, to whom lefties like you say Israel should rely on for security...the world was silent, happy to allow the Arabs to put all the Jews into proverbial gas chambers. You want to know why Jews hate Europe - That is why.

it's because israel attacked first and acted as the perpetrator. you know that Europe especially Germany each year payed billions to the state of israel, and that France has delivered the (illegal) nukes to israel.

Israel tried that tact in 1973, when the Arabs invaded on Yom Kippur...Israel knew that the Arabs were planning and readying to invade....but did nothing. And the Arabs almost succeeded in the genocide of the Jews.

Israel didn't know anything, it was totally surprised, and it almost lost the war because they didn't only had to defend ther own borders but the occupied territories as well.

And the World...Europe....they sat back ready to allow another Holocaust.

BS, the world since has given israel many advises which have most of the timenot been implemented. The world would have intervened if the existance of israel was at stake (on the condition they would relinquish the occupied territories)

You are the same.

BS, many israeli's think as I think, they want to live in peace not in constant threat of war, if this means sacrificing the occupied territories so be it. the religious extremists are hated by a large part of the israeli society, especially the ones who settled in the occupied territories looking for a fight with the palestinians, that's why the anti-religious party gained so much votes.

MGB8

07-17-2004, 08:50 PM

Germany paid money to Israel AS REPIRATIONS FOR THE HOLOCAUST. To try to make up for the lives and property that the German government took with some money.

The majority of your post, Takeo, is simply wrong on the facts.

Over and over again you prove yourself to be ignorant of history and reality, but you want so much to believe in your opinion that you will state your opinoins and beliefs as fact, regardless of what the truth is. For example, your statement about the Yom Kippur war, or that Europe would have intervened...um, Israel got VERY close to being destroyed in both 48 and 73....

Iraq as a nationality exists to some extent NOW, after years of being a Nation (after having been thrown together by Europe under a strong man to be followed by another strongman)...but, why is everyone so afraid of a 3 party civil war??? There ARE however, tribes that include both Shi'ite and Sunni..again you show your very superficial understanding of the Arab world - thinking at the religious level of differences between Shi'ite and Sunni instead of at the clan/tribe level.

Oh...and Saddam wanted to LEAD the great Arab State, the largest sub group of the great Muslim state - a different vision of the Islamic caliphate - one where instead of one Sharia state, instead there is a sort of Muslim United States, with Islam as a large portion of the law and culture (as it was in Iraq) just as Christianity is embeded within the law and culture of Western Nations. Have you read the reviews of Saddam's recent book? It is very enlightening about how he views the world... but of course you haven;t...

As for Shinui... they are in a coalition with Likud, to the right of Labor...another clear factual mistake.

You are hopeless, and once again, your credibility is out the window. Unlike me or many others on this board, you don't admit when your mistakes....

Sad. Very sad.

takeo

07-17-2004, 08:56 PM

You have now gone to repeating age old anti-semetic canards about Jewish power.

but it's a fact we have to aknowledge Jews are powerfull compared to other minorities.

First of all, this is NOT an Israeli Palestinian conflict - this is in fact a JEWISH-MUSLIM conflict, but, of course, there is also a CHRISTIAN-MUSLIM and HINDU-MUSLIM conflict....do you see a theme?

not really, the war in Iraq is a conflict between the US-government and the muslim world, we didn't ask for this war and we are no part of it.

The war against terrorism is a war against terrorism, not against all muslims.

the pakistani-indian conflict is mostly a political one, in india i saw muslims and hindu's were almost identical except for their religion and there were few religious troubles. In india muslims have very high fiunctions in the government as well, it is not a purely hindu country. Pakistan is a fundamentalist country, an important ally of the us during the cold war with an oppressive government and backwards economy and culture, pakistan doesn't represent the muslims in the indian subcontinent and even less the muslimworld.

IRAN (Persians, non-Arabs) funds and arms the Pal Sunni Arab terror groups. So does Lybia, Syria, Lebanon, and, indirectly, Saudi Arabia. So do British and American Muslims.

Iran indeed funds anti-israeli groups but didn't fund any anti-western terrorist groups. Iran and the taliban and al-quaida were arch-ennemies, that's also why Iran helped the us during the war in 2001 in Afghanistan.

Its is 6 million Jews against the Muslim world takeo, a Muslim world that also happens to live around major oil centers.

your view is not corresponding to reality.

Jews are very easy targets indeed. What happens if you libel Israel or Jews. At most, some people yell. If you do the same to Muslims - violence, energy problems, and many more people yelling.

come on, in France racist crimes against Arabs are unfortunately very common, anti-semitic crimes are not common, and every case will reach us-press.

The fact that Poland didn't exist is irrelevant - the Polish people existed and were developing on their own to nation-statedom. The "Palestinians" are not an actual ethnic group, takeo. They are all the Arabs in some lines drawn up in Europe - nothing more. Part of the great Arab nation that is a part of the great Muslim nation.

there is no arab nation, let alone a muslim nation. arabs from morocco have lmittle in common with their brothers in Iraq or palestine, who all have a distinctive culture. They speak the same language, but so do Australians, Americans and Brittish, are they all part of the same tribe??? (and of course your comment about muslim-identity is even more ridiculous, what do Indonesians, kenyans and Russian tatars have in common? as much as you have in common with an ethiopian jew...)

The fact that Israel attacked Egypt (although Egypt had already committed acts of war on Israel, and thus Israel's pre-emptive strike was justified under international law and would still be considered a defensive war) is irrelevant to the legal consequences of Jordan attacking Israel. Jordan had the ability to remain neutral - like the US did at the beginning of both World Wars.

it didn't, it signed a threaty of mutual assistance with egypt and Syria.

As for the Pal Arabs pre-2nd intifada - I think you missed the PRE-2nd Intifada part. Sure, the Pals don't get state oil money like the Saudi Arabs do, but they had more universities, a higher employment rate, and more freedoms - until they upped the intensity of their Jew-killing campain.

during the early 80's the most devellopped arab nations were Iraq, Lebanon, the gulf states, Libia and palestine only came after those.

Takeo....I really think you are hopeless. Have you, at any point in your life, tried to put yourself in the position of an Israeli, who believes that Jews have a right to their historical homeland, and the right to one state, whereas the arabs have 22 (which were carved up into false nations by Europe, but which do not actually reflect nations in the European sense - the French and the Germans are distinct Ethnic groups - Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqi....these are just made up names imposed on ethnic groups, often across ethnic lines...)

palestinians are no made up nation and exist as well as French, belgians and Dutch people exist, they have as much as the jews the right to have an own state. So what I'm proposing is to divide between the two peoples, as proposed by the original un-partition plan. on the condition both sides, and especially the palestinians, refrain from hostilities.
I think if you withdraw the violence will mostly stop, as happened after your withdrawel from lebanon. (even in the worst of circumstances, you gave the land to the hesbollah without a treaty, the violence almost ceased...)

Had the Arab accepted the right of Jews to have one state on land where they were the majority (the Partition), instead of the Muslim dar-al Islam/dar al-Harb Jihadi imperialist mentality...well, we wouldn't be in WW4 today. But we are, and after Israel they will go for Spain (actually, they are already trying), not to mention the mess in the Balklans, a war similar to the Lebanese civil war...with genocide and blood on both sides...

the balcans are a very different story. Here the US was on the side of the muslims and even armed and aided muslim terrorists in kosovo. the wars in the balcans are not related to religion (eastern Europeans, after decades of communism, are not really religious anymore, even the muslims) but to etnicity.

Oh, and Europeans certainly do hate Jews....not necesarily in the old rabid Nazi way (although I see that we have a Neo Nazi who posted), but in a way that will happilly look the other way as the Arabs kill all the Jews - in fact, they will arm the Arabs to do just that, even with Nukes. You, Takeo - are part of that group.

no, our aim is to create a two-state solution and to force both israel and the Arabs to accept it, this is the only way to create peace which will benefit the entire region Israel included.

MGB8

07-17-2004, 09:02 PM

Oh my G-d...your last post was so far from reality.... I can't even begin....

Your ability to ignore the religious basis of conflicts, to pretend to separate the religious from the ethinic from the political like they weren't intrinisically tied together...

My g-d.

Muslims from Morroco have TONS in common with Muslims from Saudi Arabia, but differences too. That's just like an American from California and one from Texas and one from New York all have tons in common, but many differences.

You chose to ignore the most basic realities....and the only reason is because you want to.

Have you ever asked yourself what happens if, once a Pal State comes into being, Rocket attacks continue from the Pal Arab side and more and more Jews die, takeo? What's your answer to this. Common, Takeo, show some courage...what would you have Israel do?

MGB8

07-17-2004, 09:04 PM

Oh...and Iran doesn't fund anti-Western groups...LOL...!

Um... the Marine barrack in Beirut? There are also Iranian links to Al-quaida. Do you know what the Ayatollah's rhetoric is? They'd gladly trade 100 million muslims for 5 million jews, so they say...and they hate American and the West even more! After all, Rome will fall to Islam, they say...

Your ability to be ignorant is incredible.

takeo

07-17-2004, 09:06 PM

Iraq as a nationality exists to some extent NOW, after years of being a Nation (after having been thrown together by Europe under a strong man to be followed by another strongman)...but, why is everyone so afraid of a 3 party civil war??? There ARE however, tribes that include both Shi'ite and Sunni..again you show your very superficial understanding of the Arab world - thinking at the religious level of differences between Shi'ite and Sunni instead of at the clan/tribe level.

I know, I didn't think at the religious level. Iraqi society is very complicated, you have different clans, the division between shiites and sunnites, between the countryside and the big cities, between Arabs and kurds/turkmens, between the supporters of the baath-regime and the people who resisted the baath-regime, bedeouins, you name it.

As for Shinui... they are in a coalition with Likud, to the right of Labor...another clear factual mistake.

I didn't say they were leftwing, I only say that their popularity proves Israeli's are fed up with the religious hostagetaking of the government.

You are hopeless, and once again, your credibility is out the window. Unlike me or many others on this board, you don't admit when your mistakes....

actually you don't know how to debate, people who have different opinions are not "mistaken", only in totalitarian societies they are.

takeo

07-17-2004, 09:14 PM

Your ability to ignore the religious basis of conflicts, to pretend to separate the religious from the ethinic from the political like they weren't intrinisically tied together...

did I ever say they weren't tied together?

Muslims from Morroco have TONS in common with Muslims from Saudi Arabia, but differences too. That's just like an American from California and one from Texas and one from New York all have tons in common, but many differences.

you don't know nothing about the Arab world, the differences are huge, even the physical differences, the food, the habits, you name it, it's an entirely different culture, differences which exceed the differences between french and Americans for example.

Have you ever asked yourself what happens if, once a Pal State comes into being, Rocket attacks continue from the Pal Arab side and more and more Jews die, takeo? What's your answer to this. Common, Takeo, show some courage...what would you have Israel do?

then israel would have the right to reinvade palestine and teach them a lesson (and then immidiately withdraw once again) . Israel withdrew from libanon and left southern libanon to a fundamentalist group, rightwing israel predicted catastrophy, but the inverse happened, the war almost ceased.

Oh...and Iran doesn't fund anti-Western groups...LOL...!

Um... the Marine barrack in Beirut?

this was another area, an area when the us was the ally of Saddam against Iran.......

There are also Iranian links to Al-quaida. Do you know what the Ayatollah's rhetoric is? They'd gladly trade 100 million muslims for 5 million jews, so they say...and they hate American and the West even more! After all, Rome will fall to Islam, they say...

BS, Iran even has diplomatic ties with the Vatican as well as with all European countries! Iran is also an important ally of Russia and is helping Russia to fight Chechen muslim terrorists. Iran also aided the us in fighting al-quaida and the taliban.

MGB8

07-17-2004, 10:55 PM

Gilgamesh

07-18-2004, 04:49 AM

There is a quite legitimate point of view that argues that without the complete removal of the Arab presence in the WB, murder of Jews by Arabs due to the Dar Al-Islam/Dar Al-Harb ideology - Jihadism -without this removal and DISTANCE, another war between Israel and the Arab nations is inevitable.

This time, however, we're talking tens, if not hundreds of thousands killed. We're talking nations with, at minimum, Chemical weapons. We're talking a real threat to the worlds energy supply. And if Israel does go to the brink of being destroyed, we are talking about the Samson option - Nukes taking out MILLIONS.

Right! All anti Zionist must bare this in mind. We Jews are armed, dangerous and desperate. Any one who wishes to "make my day", is more then welcomed.

Since the European and Arabs are smart enough to avoid direct conflict just now, and only fight through terrorist proxies, all the rest of the Anti Zionist trash can do is stand afar, in a safe distance from our arm reach, and whine and shout all day long their idiotic propagnada and absured accusations.

What on earth would the Olivers and Like2Talk of the world would do without forums like these...

When ever somebody whines about the security fence, he must be remembered what the allied and Soviets done, to Nazi Germany, and the German people as some retalitation and perfect means to prevent another European war.

The fence is nothing in comparison to the rightful and needed uprooting of millions of Germans from thier lands and homes and expelling them westward. This is how peace is realy made.

Had we done the same to the Arabs, there was peace with them today.

Olivier

07-18-2004, 04:56 AM

You say Iraq wasn't a threat, I say it was.It's not a matter of saying, it's a matter of proving.

You are simply proved wrong: you've had US expert searching everywhere, 'interrogating' every iraq would-be nuclear scientist for one year.

If ANYTHING conclusive had be found we'd know.

What is so worrying with Bush is the total inability to assess a situation as it is and to hold on to false ideologies. Do you know how long it took to bush to notice that the are more than "a few foreign terrorists" in iraq? Months. And even now he probably did not utter the word "insurgent". Bush is a Born-gain illuminated nut. The corporations he lead went bankrupt. It's just the same, world-scale he is doing now.

If Bush cannot recognize *past* facts, it is not even less surprising that iraq was invaded "preventatively" on the basis of imaginary assumptions of 45 minutes WMD attack. In the while you have pakistan, korea etc.. nukes proliferating

Why do you thing Bush is nominated "most dangerous man on earth" by the european opinion? It is fine to make speeches about "fighting terrorism", now you need to have a brain and to understand that invading an arab country (one of the most hostile to al-quaida) is the act Ben Laden dreamed of. There is no bigger terrorism creator on earth than Bush.

Furthermore, in 2002-2003 the inspectors, WHO HAD BEEN KICKED OUT contrary to UN resolutions, were only let in becuase the threat of force (200K US troops on Iraq's borders) was felt by Saddam. yes I do acknowledge this.

Where are the other witnesses? Funny, few are wanting to stand up... do they fear a bullet in the head too ?

Where are the bodies? Where are the graves? Where are the relatives of the executed prisoners complaining to Al-Jazzera?The names are known, the approximate location of the bodies too.

Now do you think the interior minister, who attended the shootings, will make sure that light is shed on this?

First of all, there is a difference between force and dictatorship. Well explain me. What I see here are shootings "à la Saddam" (or rather à la saddam's son) (was it oudai?)

Terrorism, as I define it, is not a legimate act of war.do you call these tortures and executions "legitimate"?

Again, they don't have a fully functioning democracy so the real issue is when they do have elections will they be fair. Well, you can't have people blowing up ministers and not have voters feel safe, so what do you do, you ruthlessly destroy those who would destroy you.If you had a "functionning democracy", the US would be kicked out
And whomever kind of authoritarian government would emerge the long civil war would not be pro-american either. Even less pro-american than saddam actually, with terrorism as a bonus.

What widespread oppression, oh you mean the mass graves of Sadaam, or his prison that contained 30K political dissidents?Wait a bit. The hidden graves we are referring to here are just a beginning.

Look, basically, you seem to prefer the 'order' of Sadaam to the chaos of an emerging democracy.This is not an emerging democracy at all. What is emerging is like saddam, but with the US behind. Remember CIA-sponsored Pinochet and the thousands who 'disappeared', the kids who lost their mother and father. The iraqi situation will create much more.

I on the other hand am at least hopeful that if given the chance and tools (including force) to establish a democracy an Arab nation has the ability toI am hopeful too, I certainly think democracy is possible for an Arab nation,

And it's just just that "I think" ... this is already a fact algeria and morrocco are democracies (very unperfect, but they are). They are so today and they largely achieved this state by themselves.

But you won't get a development of democracy unless israel makes peace with the pals. The conflict blocks the evolution of the whole region.

In the case of iraq now, the clever way the US invasion was made and managed made democracy impossible.(well not totally, I'd say 10% chances elections are held, 90% the country slides from insurgency into all-out civil war).

.

takeo

07-18-2004, 07:31 AM

Iran is not "helping" Russia in Chechnya. Iran did send a delegation, but refused to "mediate". Why? Because Russia is Iran's big arm's dealer, Iran needs Russian support to keep the US and Europe at bay over its Nukes and other policies, and Iran is terrified of Russia's power, too.

not only did iran mediate, Iran also extradited some tchechen bigshots who hoped to get refuge in iran.
Iran isn't terrified by Russia, Iran sees in Russia a usefull strong ally against us-influence in the region and vice-versa.

As for the Muslim world - you are fixated on differences but ignore the overriding similarities.

because the differences are much more obvious than similarities. suppose the "christian world", what does a southern us baptist has in common with an orthodox Iraqi or a Zimbabwen?

A better example would be Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews. Different appearance, different specific traditions, different nationalities....but much more, and more important, things in common than differences.

quite frankly they have very little in common. In Israel they get along because they have similar interests (as well as the Russians and the ethopian Jews) but the differences are still huge.

That is not to say that they're aren't differences - and Morroco is about as "left wing" a Muslim nation as you are going to find... but you are delibirately missing the point - that there is a large large minority, even a majority, of Arabs and Muslims who see the world in a very different way than you do...

of course, and morocco isn't really so liberal, actually mush less liberal than countries such as Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, or, you may find it surprising, even Iran. In soviet islamic countries such as azerbaidjan everyone drinks vodka and religious tradtions are observed like we observe jewish traditions, that means on birthdays, circumcision, bar mitsva, mariages, etc. but not in everyday life.

Now, there are lots of variations on the theme of the great Muslim State and the great Pan Arab state - the fact that they don't agree, local politics, and ethnic rivalries have slowed its development - but it has certainly developed -through things like the Arab leage and Organization of Islamic States, to the international terrorist groups that unite these factions throughout different states, to the Saudi funded Mosques which preach this one ideology everywhere they are founded, to satalite networks like Al-Jazeera.

indeed sunni fundamentalist groups are organised all over the world, the war in afghanistan in the 80's functioned as a catalyser for the internationalisation of this kind of organisations.
But those groups dont represent the muslim world, the muslim world is represented by the people who live there, and if you would have visited a few of them you would have noticed there's no such thing as muslim or even Arab unity.

Mediocrates

07-18-2004, 08:15 AM

World salad - disjointed random gibberish

scattergood

07-18-2004, 08:45 AM

Takeo:

Quote:
Furthermore, in 2002-2003 the inspectors, WHO HAD BEEN KICKED OUT contrary to UN resolutions, were only let in becuase the threat of force (200K US troops on Iraq's borders) was felt by Saddam.

yes I do acknowledge this.

Wow, I got you to agree that it was only the threat of force that let Saddam back in. However, how long is it a threat and not an empty promise? The issue is that the decision to USE American troops isn't yours, it's America's. If you don't like that way of the world, then build an army and use it the way you want. France has done so and completely missed out on various genocides and helping out in their ex-colonies in Africa.

Takeo:

Funny, few are wanting to stand up... do they fear a bullet in the head too ?

AND

The names are known, the approximate location of the bodies too.

Now do you think the interior minister, who attended the shootings, will make sure that light is shed on this?

AND

Well explain me. What I see here are shootings "à la Saddam" (or rather à la saddam's son) (was it oudai?)

This is the crux of the issue. With no bodies, two anonymous witnesses, and no actual PROOF, you say it's true. In fact you use the lack of evidence as evidence! It is like saying 'Space aliens are watchin what the Earth does, but want to remain uknown to us, the fact that we space is SO vast and there must be intelligent life somewhere and that we haven't seen a spaceship proves that they are trying to hide from the Earth' Your logic is just seriously flawed.

Takeo:

If you had a "functionning democracy", the US would be kicked out
And whomever kind of authoritarian government would emerge the long civil war would not be pro-american either. Even less pro-american than saddam actually, with terrorism as a bonus.

AND

Wait a bit. The hidden graves we are referring to here are just a beginning.

AND

This is not an emerging democracy at all. What is emerging is like saddam, but with the US behind. Remember CIA-sponsored Pinochet and the thousands who 'disappeared', the kids who lost their mother and father. The iraqi situation will create much more.

Again, you are not dealing with facts on the ground. You tell me to wait, you should believe me because what I say will come. I say, democracy is taking root. For example Baghdad has its first city council, made up of representatives from neighborhood councils. They now review a budget, set spending policies, etc..unthinkable with Sadaam in power. You take the 30 minute view and I take the 30 year view. It will take time, so screaming shrilly at the top of your lungs just makes you look like the boy who cried wolf.

takeo:
I am hopeful too, I certainly think democracy is possible for an Arab nation,

And it's just just that "I think" ... this is already a fact algeria and morrocco are democracies (very unperfect, but they are). They are so today and they largely achieved this state by themselves.

But you won't get a development of democracy unless israel makes peace with the pals. The conflict blocks the evolution of the whole region.

You mean Algeria and Morroco that have serious near civil wars? Yeah that's a working democracy.

And the whole Israel comment is COMPLETE and UTTER non-sense. It is a cannard and red-herring of the 1st degree that is lapped up by lefties, liberals, and unfortunately, lots of Europeans. If the Israel-Pal conflict is the stumbling block, then why didn't the Arabs try to fight for Democracy BEFORE Israel was even established? Why didn't they fight for it from 1948 to 1967? Why didn't they accept the WB and Gaza back from Israel after their defeat in 1967 in return for peace and the recognition of Israel? Why did at Khartoum did the Arabs say 'no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it.”

It is becase they are more concerned with destroying Israel than with helping themselves. They are more concerned with death and destruction than with life, liberty and happiness. That is the issue, not how Israel is treating some wayward immigrant population who came to territories LOST by Jordan and Egypt for a life slightly better than what they could have in their native countries.

In the case of iraq now, the clever way the US invasion was made and managed made democracy impossible.(well not totally, I'd say 10% chances elections are held, 90% the country slides from insurgency into all-out civil war).

Mediocrates

07-18-2004, 09:27 AM

What's funny is that the takeos of the world who clatter dark threats that eventually Iraq will have another Saddam-like dictator are the people cawcawing that he was a rilly rilly nice guy to begin with and he should have been left alone.

They tell you of the coming dark day of a Shiite dominated mullahocracy in Iraq and then tell you that [in their vast personal experience of course] that Shiite Iran is a paradise.

Basically they are lying to you. Every last word out of their lips is lie.

MGB8

07-18-2004, 05:01 PM

Takeo's perspective is in many ways simply backwards. For example, he things surface differences override fundamental similarities - ie. his comments about Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews, a looking glass which colours all of his opinions about, say, Europe or the Muslim world.

He confuses, maybe purposefully, CULTURAL and Political liberalism/conservatism...as in his comments about Morrocco versus Syria or Lebanon.

His version of right wing still is a complete supporter of the welfare state and socialist ideology, while his left wing requires almost a complete rejection of capitalism. Not to say that the US isn't a conservative nation...we have very few socialists to counterbalance our economic libertarians...but, otoh, Socialism has failed pretty much everywhere it has been tried, with a possibly exception of the Nordic states. Meanwhile, he ignores European fascists movements, movements which really have no contemporaries in the US except for the occassional fringe group - atlhough John Ashcroft is, admittedly, a pretty creepy character and may be one of those fringe groups in of himself.

Its like Bizzarro world, that perspective...not to mention, again, purposefully ignorance, of the fact that the FRENCH intelligence services, along with the British, were the ones who informed the US about, for example, Saddam's attempt to procure uranium from Niger.

In fact, both the Butler and Senater reports have said that there was ample evidence and reason to believe that Saddam had WMD and was pursuing more, but that we, along with every other nation in the world, believed that all the circumstantial evidence amounted to a "slam dunk" when apparently it didn't (although the book isn't closed - again, the attempted chemical weapon terror attak in Jordan and Syria's sudden supply of Chemical Warheads didn't come from nowhere....).

Bush can simply reply, rightfully, that post 911, a hostile government with a lot of evidence of malfeasance bares the burden of proving their innocense...the West cannot risk an innocent until proven guilty approach - because that proof could well be the death of 10's of thousands of western citizens.

Meanwhile, I've never seen a more purposful misunderstanding of Arab political history and the current paradigms. Huge amounts of ethnocentrism and naivete.

takeo

07-19-2004, 11:27 AM

His version of right wing still is a complete supporter of the welfare state and socialist ideology, while his left wing requires almost a complete rejection of capitalism. Not to say that the US isn't a conservative nation...we have very few socialists to counterbalance our economic libertarians...but, otoh, Socialism has failed pretty much everywhere it has been tried, with a possibly exception of the Nordic states. Meanwhile, he ignores European fascists movements, movements which really have no contemporaries in the US except for the occassional fringe group - atlhough John Ashcroft is, admittedly, a pretty creepy character and may be one of those fringe groups in of himself.

our rightwing is not socialist, but favors a capitalism with a human face, where there is still care for the poor and especially the middle Class (if this is socialism according to you than even Jesus Christ was a socialist)
our socialist don't reject capitalism but want to combine it with a determining role of the state in the economy.

Its like Bizzarro world, that perspective...not to mention, again, purposefully ignorance, of the fact that the FRENCH intelligence services, along with the British, were the ones who informed the US about, for example, Saddam's attempt to procure uranium from Niger.

this are pure lies that can be verified any time.

In fact, both the Butler and Senater reports have said that there was ample evidence and reason to believe that Saddam had WMD and was pursuing more, but that we, along with every other nation in the world, believed that all the circumstantial evidence amounted to a "slam dunk" when apparently it didn't (although the book isn't closed - again, the attempted chemical weapon terror attak in Jordan and Syria's sudden supply of Chemical Warheads didn't come from nowhere....).

those commissions were organised by the respective governments to cover up the truth. besides those commissions still conclude that the secret services of both the us and GB made capital mistakes. please read the book recently published by Hans Blix and you will know everything about "the threat of Iraqi WMD's in 2003..."

Bush can simply reply, rightfully, that post 911, a hostile government with a lot of evidence of malfeasance bares the burden of proving their innocense...the West cannot risk an innocent until proven guilty approach - because that proof could well be the death of 10's of thousands of western citizens.

Iraq wasn't really hostile and Saddam was prepared to agree to any western demand to stay in power. much more dangerous are your good friends Saoudi Arabia.

Mediocrates What's funny is that the takeos of the world who clatter dark threats that eventually Iraq will have another Saddam-like dictator are the people cawcawing that he was a rilly rilly nice guy to begin with and he should have been left alone.

i've never said so, what's I'm saying is that it wasn't the worst regime if you consider the region as a whole and Saddam's rule of Iraq was better than the situation created right now.

They tell you of the coming dark day of a Shiite dominated mullahocracy in Iraq and then tell you that [in their vast personal experience of course] that Shiite Iran is a paradise.

iran certainly isn't a paradise and Saddam's regime was preferable over a fundamentalist state (which Iran still IS, altough not nearly as fundamentalist as neighbouring Saoudi arabia)

Basically they are lying to you. Every last word out of their lips is lie

you are a master in lying and manipulation

MGB8

07-19-2004, 01:56 PM

Who is lying... hmmm...

French secret service 'kept CIA in the dark over Iraq and uranium'
By Michael Smith, Defence Correspondent
(Filed: 14/07/2003)

The French secret service is believed to have refused to allow MI6 to give the Americans "credible" intelligence showing that Iraq was trying to buy uranium ore from Niger, US intelligence sources said yesterday.

MI6 had more than one "different and credible" piece of intelligence to show that Iraq was attempting to buy the ore, known as yellowcake, British officials insisted. But it was given to them by at least one and possibly two intelligence services and, under the rules governing cooperation, it could not be shared with anyone else without the originator's permission.

US intelligence sources believe that the most likely source of the MI6 intelligence was the French secret service, the DGSE. Niger is a former French colony and its uranium mines are run by a French company that comes under the control of the French Atomic Energy Commission.

A further factor in the refusal to hand over the information might have been concern that the US administration's willingness to publicise intelligence might lead to sources being inadvertently disclosed.

US sources also point out that the French government was vehemently opposed to the war with Iraq and so suggest that it would have been instinctively against the idea of passing on the intelligence.

British sources yesterday dismissed suggestions of a row between MI6 and the CIA on the issue. However, they admitted being surprised that George Tenet, the CIA director, had apologised to President George W Bush for allowing him to cite the British government and its claim that Saddam had sought to acquire uranium from Africa in his State of the Union speech last October.

The apology follows the International Atomic Energy Authority's dismissal of documents given to it by the CIA, which purported to prove the link, as fakes.

Those documents have been widely identified with last September's British dossier on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, which said Saddam Hussein was trying to buy uranium ore from an unnamed country in Africa.

British officials admitted that the country was Niger but insisted that the intelligence behind it was genuine and had nothing to do with the fake documents. It was convincing and they were sticking with it, the officials said.

They dismissed a report from a former US diplomat who was sent to Niger to investigate the claims and rejected them. "He seems to have asked a few people if it was true and when they said 'no' he accepted it all," one official said. "We see no reason at all to change our assessment."

The fake documents were not behind that assessment and were not seen by MI6 until after they were denounced by the IAEA. If MI6 had seen them earlier, it would have immediately advised the Americans that they were fakes.

There had been a number of reports in America in particular suggesting that the fake documents - which came from another intelligence source - were passed on via MI6, the officials said. But this was not true.

"What they can't accuse MI6 of doing is passing anything on this to the CIA because it didn't have the fake documents and it was not allowed to pass on the intelligence it did have to anyone else."

Michael Smith's new book The Spying Game, which examines the intelligence behind the September dossier, is published by Politico's.

MGB8

07-19-2004, 01:57 PM

French link to UK's Iraq intelligence
From correspondents in London
14jul03
TWO foreign intelligence services, thought to be those of France and Italy, supplied Britain with the information for its controversial claim that Saddam Hussein's Iraq had sought uranium from Africa, the Financial Times newspaper reported Monday.

Britain made the uranium claim in a dossier last September despite being told the US Central Intelligence Agency had "reservations" about its inclusion.

The paper said its information came from senior Whitehall sources.

US administration officials have criticised the inclusion of a reference to the nuclear claim and the nation in President George W. Bush's January 28 State of the Union Address, and pointed out that it had not been corroborated by Washington's intelligence network.

CIA chief George Tenet, who took the blame for Bush's discredited prewar claim, came under fire again Sunday with a leading Republican senator suggesting he resign.

The Financial Times said it had learnt the original information on the nuclear claim came from two west European countries, and not from now discredited documents that proved to be forgeries.

The financial daily reported an official saying the information from foreign intelligence services was not shared with the US because it "was not ours to share".

The Italian government on Sunday denied reports that its intelligence services handed the United States and Britain documents indicating that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger for a nuclear weapons programme.

The denial followed a report by Italy's Corriere della Sera newspaper that Rome's SISMI intelligence services had given Washington and London documents in late 2001, showing the regime of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had sought uranium from the African state.

There is considerable doubt in London and Washington over the strength of the US and British case for ending UN arms inspections and launching the March 20 invasion to topple the Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

Hans Blix, who was the UN weapons chief inspector in Iraq in the run-up to war, added to the criticism, telling The Independent on Sunday that Britain had "over-interpreted the intelligence they had."

The Daily Telegraph reported that "US intelligence sources believe that the most likely source of the MI6 intelligence was the French secret service, the DGSE. Niger is a former French colony and its uranium mines are run by a french company that comes under the control of the French atomic energy commission."

The French secret service is believed to have refused to allow MI6 to give the Americans "credible" information showing that Iraq was trying to buy uranium ore from Niger, the Telegraph reported.

A third British newspaper, The Guardian, cited government officials saying the nuclear claim came from a "close ally" but one which didn't want Britain to give it to the US as a further pretext for war.

"It has become an enormously overblown issue," White House national security adviser Condoleezza Rice told CNN.

"The president of the United States did not go to war because of the question of whether or not Saddam Hussein sought the uranium in Africa," she said.

MGB8

07-19-2004, 01:59 PM

Senate Report Offers Backing for Claim Iraq Sought Uranium in Africa
Matt Kelley | Washington | July 9
AP - A Senate report criticizing false CIA claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction at the same time provides support for an assertion the White House repudiated: that Iraq sought to buy uranium in Africa.

The panel reported that the British and the French separately informed U.S. officials that Iraq attempted to buy uranium from Niger.

Susan Schmidt of the Washington Post reports that the panel also found that former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's report, rather than debunking intelligence about purported uranium sales to Iraq, as he has said, bolstered the case for most intelligence analysts. And contrary to Wilson's assertions and even the government's previous statements, the CIA did not tell the White House that it had qualms about the reliability of the Africa intelligence that made its way into President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address.

In addition, Wilson was specifically recommended for the mission by his wife, a CIA employee, contrary to what he has said publicly.

Olivier

07-24-2004, 11:39 AM

the agression was a fake, and this thread is a fake, the thread title is fake

a all these are just a pretense for another round of anti-french racism and hatred.

It is funny how everybody here including the moderates like ahava and sharonbn react to any problem by blaming 'genes'.

'Genetics' here is just a way to be a racist, but look more scientific. But in the end you're just following the same theories as KKK and the nazis.

TDidier

07-24-2004, 12:12 PM

[QUOTE=MGB8]Senate Report Offers Backing for Claim Iraq Sought Uranium in Africa
Matt Kelley | Washington | July 9
AP - A Senate report criticizing false CIA claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction a...
[QUOTE]

:D
Ridiculous how you try to justify the unjustifiable!!!
Your story is probably a lie as the rest of the reasons to war, but just remind you that it was prooved that US intelligence office ( by their former ambassador in Niger) that this stuff was garbage and no Niger uranium went to SHussein. Just remeber you how criminal was the little revenge of those little men from GBush staff who gove the name publcly of a CIA agent.

Ridiculous and pitty :mad:

Gilgamesh

07-24-2004, 12:25 PM

the agression was a fake, and this thread is a fake, the thread title is fake This time, you are right. But try to look at it as a thread about past and future real incidents, I know happen a planty in French cities, and rearly produce a head line.

a all these are just a pretense for another round of anti-french racism and hatred. You earned all that thrown your way. French Jews are not escaping France for nothing, for the last few years. Anti French feelings itencified following the curroption of your goverment, and your goverment and the French people behind them, to show solidarity with terror warring nations.

It is funny how everybody here including the moderates like ahava and sharonbn react to any problem by blaming 'genes'. genes? I always talk about culture! No genes. The question about the reasons of human behaviour, where it genes of culture, is still an open question, this forum will not resolve.

'Genetics' here is just a way to be a racist, but look more scientific. But in the end you're just following the same theories as KKK and the nazis. Genetics is out of the question. But often they are used in metaphoric sense. The Nazis are not metaphoric in any sense.

takeo

07-24-2004, 01:31 PM

tell me mill, did you experience anti-semitism yourself in france?

In my upcoming wedding in October from my wife's side there will be almost no relatives. There aren't any. I still feel it. Even sixty years since I am still a VICTIM. Or may be you should ask my grandfather who still has shrapnel in his body.

I think most Jewish European families suffered this kind of terrible losses, but does it make sence to condamn the entire Europe, even countries who fought Hitler and liberated many Jews? I think in Ukrain and Belarus every family, even the non-Jews, suffered similar losses.

Sure. So where are the mass demonstration against anti-semitism in the humanitarian capital of the world - PARIS? Don't warry being against anti-semitism is not a political statement of Israeli/Pal conflict but a statement against xenophobia and racism. Any coming? Any you personally are planning to organize. And please don't tell me anti-semitism in France is overblown - if people are talking about it; somehow something is happening.

Anti-semitic attacks are for 100% caused by gangs of Northafrican gangsters, who also attack and rape French people and even other north-Africans. Those are a small minority even among North-Africans and are hated and despised by the overwelming majority of the French people, they singlehandedly are responsible for the popularity of extremists such as Le Pen. So it's not the French society that is anti-semitic. And there have been large campaigns against anti-semitism as well as mass-demonstrations. France has the most stringeant laws concerning racism and anti-semitism, any anti-semitic remark in any media can put you in prison.

You call us ignorant. That's a direct insult.... Personally I and most of the people I know are not ignorant. Certainly all posters on this forum are not ignorant given that they have an opion which counts more then enough for me. Generalizing on popular stereotypes is sort of stupid - don't you agree?

I said most Americans, you're not an average American. In france at least almost everyone knows the basic geography, and at least something about the world, US ignorance about the outside world is widespread. I'm not saying all French are bright or interested, certainly not, but in the us most people don't know anything, because in the mainstream popular media there's no attention for what happens outside the us.

I know who I am. The impact that Europe had on my family is tramendous - what can I say. I know the history of WWII and the events that lead to that war very well and believe me Europe has nothing to be proud of. The amount of political mistakes made was enourmous and I am very saddenned that Europe is making the same again.

You can't blame all of Europe for the decisions of a few politicians. Many Europeans in occupied countries joined the resistence. OK, you can blame the germans, who did little to depose and stop Hitler, but it's insane to blame all of Europe.
the Iraq-position shows Europe has learned since WWII, we do no longer follow warmongerers and we do no longer engage in colonial wars.

I know of the sacrafices that the Soviet Union gave to liberate the world of Hitler. I know how ignorant the Western world was to the fit of the Red Army - mostly due to the Cold War.

that's right

Sasha, abolishing the embargo would do exactly what? The entire idea behind the embargo was to remove Saddam Hussein from power in the only non-military way a world community has at its disposal.

no, the whole idea was to end Iraq's WMD, read the resolutions please. YoU made it a personal vendetta against Saddam.

Sanctions is the only power the Security Council has to put its will across. Post 9/11 Saddam Hussein became a liability to American security and to regional stability. We don't know what would happen if we would not invade and remove Saddam... In any case there were many reasons why Saddam was removed and those have nothing to do with any kind of a conspiracy.

Saddam cooperated with inspectors, was willing to sign treaties of peace with all his neighbours, in other words Saddam was no longer a threat.
we could have easily abolished the sanctions as we did in the case of Lybia.
The reasons to remove Saddam are not so clear, and we have extensivle debated them in other threads, but the sure weren't the official reasons stated.

I personnally have nothing against americans, israelis, palestinians, whomever... I have no hatred for the germans although they killed members of my family

I have hatred against some Germans, the ones who cooperated with hitler,
but not against the younger generation who can't be blamed for the crimes of their grandparents.

but I see you hate now and you will 'hate on' probably until the end of your life. And your are just a 'moderate', incomparable to the 'hate club' filling my ignore list.

there is really tremendous hate on this forum, hate is filling the air. Hate of course is one necessary conditions for fascists such as Bush to sell their belligerent policy.

You're in the middle of a new heat wave and you'd rather ignore the plight of the old?

come on, the isolation and lonelyness of the elderly is even worse in the us where families often live 1000's of km. separated from eachother, only difference is that you have airconditioning...

You're in the middle of yet another worker's strike and you have nothing better to do?

fortunately we have labour unions protecting our rights, unlike the us.

takeo

07-24-2004, 01:44 PM

I see no bad in finishing off millions of Nazis and their supporters. It is alarming, on the other hand, that you don't feel the same. Alarming, but not scaring, because it is expected of you. I know that as a proven anti semite you are, you have a a big warm place in your heart for the Nazis, the same as you have for the murderus Arabs. Anti Zionist racist creatures always stick togather for one another.

you are just a dump who doesn't know what he's talking about, I won't waste my time any more debating with nuts who should be treated in psychiatric institutions.
We are French so we are anti-semitic, we are against Bush so we are anti-semitic, all Arabs are murderers, all Europeans are nazi's, I am sick and tired of this meaningless garbage you're (and some others) spitting out constantly on this forum. I won't take it any more, you'll have the privilige to be the first person on my ignore list.

There is a quite legitimate point of view that argues that without the complete removal of the Arab presence in the WB, murder of Jews by Arabs due to the Dar Al-Islam/Dar Al-Harb ideology - Jihadism -without this removal and DISTANCE, another war between Israel and the Arab nations is inevitable.

this is really insane, because of some ideologic construction you THINK arabs and Israel will never live in peace so all Arabs should be removed from the occupied territories. can't you see this is pure nazism?????????

This time, however, we're talking tens, if not hundreds of thousands killed. We're talking nations with, at minimum, Chemical weapons. We're talking a real threat to the worlds energy supply. And if Israel does go to the brink of being destroyed, we are talking about the Samson option - Nukes taking out MILLIONS.

noone is going to destroy israel, if Israel gives back the occupied territories most arabs will be satisfied, didn't you learn anything from libanon? The withdrawel of the south-lebanonese area was one of the most intelligent moves israel made during its history and almost ended a bloody war. even in the worst of circumstances, even with hesbollah controlling southern libanon and no cease-fire being signed, the war on israel's northern border almost ceased.

Olivier

07-24-2004, 03:27 PM

At best, you are a bore. You are simply stupid anti Zionist European trash. Why should I waste my time posting with you.

Intelctualy speaking you are a zero. History knowladge: Zero. You are ignorant barbarian!

You arise me no intelectual difficulty, no challenge no stimulation. You only cut and paste European and Arab propaganda. Why should I bore myslef with the likes of you, when I am looking for fun?!

I see no bad in finishing off millions of Nazis and their supporters. It is alarming, on the other hand, that you don't feel the same. Alarming, but not scaring, because it is expected of you. I know that as a proven anti semite you are, you have a a big warm place in your heart for the Nazis, the same as you have for the murderus Arabs. Anti Zionist racist creatures always stick togather for one another.

As for "foul words" keep worring about those, if it gives you plessure! Now worry this: a-hole!!!We are French so we are anti-semitic, we are against Bush so we are anti-semitic, all Arabs are murderers, all Europeans are nazi's, I am sick and tired of this meaningless garbage you're (and some others) spitting out constantly on this forum. I won't take it any more, you'll have the privilige to be the first person on my ignore list..Add to this this post full of insults was adressed to me ... it's clear I have to follow suit.

I should have done it earlier, I guess that's because I was on his ignore list that I was not the target of his insults by then.
But the person is as unstable and unable to follow even basic forum courteousness rules as his promises prove reliable. For now, that will be a relief.

Note I also tried to reintegrate people such as OJ and canajew out of my ignore list. It turned out to be impossible given they still use insults.
I'm sorry it is impossible to have a reasonable debate with them.

The good side of this last resort solution is we'll have more time to discuss with posters who are honest.

Gilgamesh

07-24-2004, 03:33 PM

Ahava

07-24-2004, 03:39 PM

It is funny how everybody here including the moderates like ahava and sharonbn react to any problem by blaming 'genes'.

'Genetics' here is just a way to be a racist, but look more scientific. But in the end you're just following the same theories as KKK and the nazis.

Before calling me a nazi, you'd better quote where I said such a thing.
It's culture, not genes.

Just a remark, I just got back from France, wore my Magen David very visibly all week, and got 0 problems. All French were very nice and willing to help etc. Not so much Arabs where I was I guess.

Olivier

07-24-2004, 03:45 PM

there is really tremendous hate on this forum, hate is filling the air.This is really painfull and hard to understand that people claiming the are "force of good" and complaining to be the target of "arab and european hate" turn out to be haters.

This is a major problem:
- you complain abour hatred, yet you are haters yourselves.
- you complain about terrorism, yet your aggresive actions are the opposite of the values you claim to defend. And I'm not even referring to torture.

Building a better society should be a joint effort, you won't obtain this by cultivating hatred.

Olivier

07-24-2004, 03:57 PM

Before calling me a nazi, you'd better quote where I said such a thing.
It's culture, not genes..I'm not calling you a nazi (not directly at least :( ).

well

- First of all, I read sharonb on that on the thread you started together. I was pretty shocked as this is not the image I had of him.
- then I read post #2 by you on this thread where you refer to "French genes"

I do not claim Sharonb and you are straight up racists, but you are indeed using genetics and, for example, liking them with humans behaviors, citizenship and attitudes. It smells bad. I'm afraid this is your common ground with nazis or other racists.

Just a remark, I just got back from France, wore my Magen David very visibly all week, and got 0 problems. All French were very nice and willing to help etc. Not so much Arabs where I was I guessFor honesty's sake, that would be nice to start a thread on your experience. Would you?

You won't find many posters to believe you, I guess. Or like takeo, me and the other french here you'll be called a liar..

takeo

07-24-2004, 04:47 PM

Add to this this post full of insults was adressed to me ... it's clear I have to follow suit.

I should have done it earlier, I guess that's because I was on his ignore list that I was not the target of his insults by then.
But the person is as unstable and unable to follow even basic forum courteousness rules as his promises prove reliable. For now, that will be a relief.

I tought he was already on your ignore-list? This guy is really insane, REALLY, he needs medical attention.

Note I also tried to reintegrate people such as OJ and canajew out of my ignore list. It turned out to be impossible given they still use insults.
I'm sorry it is impossible to have a reasonable debate with them.

Canajew????????? I think you must be mistaken, he's among the most respectfull and intelligent posters on this forum, altough we have a very different viewpoint. if you said mediocrates I would agree, he's not insane but I'm getting tired of his insults.

The good side of this last resort solution is we'll have more time to discuss with posters who are honest.

perhaps they're not honest but at least it's possible to debate in a decent and constructive environment.

Just a remark, I just got back from France, wore my Magen David very visibly all week, and got 0 problems. All French were very nice and willing to help etc. Not so much Arabs where I was I guess.

thank you for being honest, I wish some of the France-bashers here would follow your example. (but it also depends on your attitude , if you threat people like dirt they're going to threat you as dirt as well)

This is really painfull and hard to understand that people claiming the are "force of good" and complaining to be the target of "arab and european hate" turn out to be haters.

I don't think anyone in France is hating Americans with the same intensity as people here on this forum hate France (with no particular reason)

This is a major problem:
- you complain abour hatred, yet you are haters yourselves.
- you complain about terrorism, yet your aggresive actions are the opposite of the values you claim to defend. And I'm not even referring to torture.

exactly, what's the most striking is the lack of rationality, people continue to claim their sacred truth even if all evidence points in the other direction.

Building a better society should be a joint effort, you won't obtain this by cultivating hatred.

well, we can all see the results of the American approach in Iraq...

You won't find many posters to believe you, I guess. Or like takeo, me and the other french here you'll be called a liar..

it's that damn European influence... the only real Jews who are not self-denying live in israel (and in the us of course!), and that doesn't include the lefties who are equally self-denying traitors that should be ashamed of themselves etc. etc. blablablabla

Semsem

07-24-2004, 06:23 PM

This is an interview with a famous French Jew who says that to be a Jew today in France is to be "a suspect." He says that Jews in France are being blackmailed to turn against Israel. If they don't the French Government will not ptotect them.

http://www.lefigaro.fr/magazine/20040723.MAG0011.html

Alain Finkielkraut : «Être juif aujourd'hui c'est être soupçonné»

Les déclarations outrancières d'Ariel Sharon et la fausse agression du RER D sont les conséquences folles d'un antisémitisme, bien réel, qui sévit dans une fraction minoritaire des Français issus de l'immigration.
Propos recueillis par Elisabeth Lévy
[24 juillet 2004]

La multiplication des violences antijuives - de la profanation des cimetières à l'agression physique - donne la nausée. Si la France n'est pas antisémite, les Juifs ont, selon le philosophe Alain Finkielkraut, auteur de Au nom de l'Autre, réflexions sur l'antisémitisme qui vient (Gallimard), quelques bonnes raisons de s'inquiéter.

Le Figaro Magazine - L'appel d'Ariel Sharon à l'émigration massive des Juifs de France a suscité une indignation considérable, y compris au sein des institutions communautaires. Partagez-vous cette indignation ?
Alain Finkielkraut - Même si, on l'oublie trop souvent, le sionisme repose sur l'idée qu'il n'y a pas d'avenir pour les Juifs hors de l'Etat juif, Sharon a eu tort de parler comme il l'a fait. Cette diatribe d'Israélien moyen n'est pas digne d'un homme d'Etat. Il reste que l'opinion française qui s'indigne de ses propos s'attache par ailleurs à lui donner raison.

Mais comment une agression antisémite qui n'a pas eu lieu - l'affaire du RER D - peut-elle vous mener à cette conclusion ?
L'agression du RER D était, en effet, imaginaire. Mais ce qui ne relève pas de l'affabulation, c'est la fureur antijuive que ce non-événement a déclenchée. Les langues se sont déliées, les gens se sont lâchés, on a parlé de «Saint-Barthélémy philosémite», on a dit que les Juifs, ces pistonnés, ces éternels privilégiés, font pleurer la société sur leurs malheurs fictifs en attisant de surcroît le racisme antimusulman. A cette malveillance déchaînée, un journal de référence a apporté sa caution officielle et compassionnelle en écrivant qu'aujourd'hui, pour obtenir une notoriété immédiate, il suffit de dire qu'on est victime d'une agression antisémite commise par des Arabes et des Noirs. Au terme d'une semaine folle où les Juifs n'ont rien fait, les voici accusés par les plus excités d'inventer l'antisémitisme de toutes pièces, et par les plus modérés d'exagérer sciemment la dimension du phénomène. Rancoeur sociale des uns «ils ont tout et nous n'avons rien», coeur sur la main des autres «ils posent à la victime pour qu'on ne se soucie pas des vraies victimes : les Palestiniens» : contre cette alliance implacable du sentiment et du ressentiment, il n'y a rien à faire. La bataille est perdue.

Mais pourquoi les Juifs seraient-ils épargnés par la maladie contemporaine de la victimisation ? Ne seraient-ils pas en partie des «Juifs imaginaires» ?
Je ne crois pas. C'est au moment de la profanation du cimetière de Carpentras que les Juifs se sont, si l'on peut dire, «raconté des histoires». Ils étaient prêts à en découdre avec l'hydre antisémite. Prêts, et même, impatients. Surtout ceux qui, nés après la guerre, avaient en tête les images de l'horreur alors même qu'ils menaient une vie confortable. Mais aujourd'hui, les Juifs sont pris au dépourvu. La haine qu'ils subissent déjoue complètement leurs fantasmes. Elle ne vient pas de cette extrême droite avec laquelle ils espéraient rompre des lances. Elle est islamo-progressiste et parle la langue de l'antiracisme.

Pour autant, ne risque-t-on pas de finir par voir en chaque Maghrébin un antisémite ?
Ce serait non seulement dangereux, mais indigne. On ne peut pas, on ne doit pas réagir à l'inculpation collective par des jugements eux-mêmes définitifs et globaux. La droiture exemplaire de Fadela Amara (Ni putes ni soumises) et de Malek Boutih nous l'interdisent formellement.

Vous voyez bien : on se voile un peu moins la face aujourd'hui qu'hier. Au sein des Français issus de l'immigration, des voix dénoncent un antisémitisme essentiellement musulman même s'il ne concerne qu'une minorité. N'est-ce pas encourageant ?
Malheureusement, on commençait de sortir de la dénégation et voici qu'on y retourne tête baissée. Nous sommes à nouveau plongés dans cet univers irréel où l'insécurité relève du fantasme et où les jeunes issus de l'immigration africaine ou maghrébine sont ignoblement accusés d'antisémitisme.

La prise de conscience s'est faite et pas seulement au plus haut niveau de l'Etat. Cependant, plus personne ne sait comment enrayer l'engrenage infernal.
Comment, en effet, contrer la propagande qui se déverse à flots continus par les antennes paraboliques ? La France n'a plus de frontières. Elle a longtemps cru que c'était un progrès. C'est peut-être une épouvantable régression.

Les Juifs de France n'auraient-ils pas tort de rejeter la France, de la désigner comme un pays antisémite ?
Il y a en effet un risque de rupture entre les Juifs et la France, parce que les Juifs, dans leur majorité, sont ulcérés par le lien qui se tisse entre la racaille pogromiste et l'élite progressiste. Qu'il y ait des intellectuels pour faire conspuer le nom d'un certain nombre de personnalités juives lors des meetings d'Euro-Palestine est accablant. Qu'il y en ait d'autres pour réduire le phénomène actuel à des «tensions intercommunautaires» ou pour en faire une retombée du conflit israélo-palestinien est insupportable. Les Juifs ont de plus en plus le sentiment qu'on leur demande de lâcher Israël s'ils veulent être défendus. Il faut refuser ce chantage. Ce n'est pas le conflit israélo-palestinien qui nourrit l'antisémitisme, c'est l'obsessionnelle traduction de ce conflit dans la langue de l'antiracisme. Si les sionistes sont les ennemis du genre humain, alors ils ne peuvent pas s'étonner de la vengeance des peuples. Je dirais, en paraphrasant Yitzhak Rabin, qu'il faut lutter pour des négociations et un compromis territorial entre Israéliens et Palestiniens comme s'il n'y avait pas d'antisémitisme et combattre l'antisémitisme sans se laisser intimider par la situation au Moyen-Orient.

Il n'empêche, les déclarations de Sharon ne font que jeter un peu plus d'huile sur le feu.
Bien que profondément attaché à Israël, je me suis toujours senti chez moi en France. En ce sens, je ne suis pas sioniste. Mais ce n'est pas Sharon qui jette de l'huile sur le feu de l'antisémitisme, ce sont tous ceux qui l'excusent ou le minimisent en traitant les Juifs de menteurs et de complices d'un Etat criminel. Etre juif aujourd'hui, c'est être soupçonné. L'écart se creuse entre le pays que j'ai aimé et celui que j'habite. Je comprends donc que certains aient envie de changer d'air.

Semsem

07-24-2004, 06:25 PM

The person interviewed also says that the French lady that accused Arabs of attacking her resulted in Jews being blamed from trying to be an eternal victim; even though Jews had nothing to do with this.

Mediocrates

07-24-2004, 07:15 PM

a all these are just a pretense for another round of anti-french racism and hatred.

I really don't care how picked on you feel. Bang your worthless head on the floor for a thousand years.

takeo

07-24-2004, 10:45 PM

you made an incorrect translation of the article. It says anti-semitism is an arab phenomenon, but the problem is that many people, mainly leftwing, who sympathise with the palestinian cause, are not critical enough to their allies in the pro-Palestinian defense organisations and shouldn't cooperate with organisations which are anti-semitic. He also says this is entirely different from the traditional rightwing anti-semitism that existed before the world war II which has almost completely disappeared.
He also condamns sharon's call, and while he says Israel is close to his mind he is happy to live in France and continue to live in France.
i think this is a fair comment, and not at all comparable to the anti-French lies which are being spread in certain American and Israeli newspapers.

MGB8

07-24-2004, 11:00 PM

Takeo... I think it might have been you, or another European poster, who said something along the lines of "we are so critical of Israel because we consider her one of our own" high expectations, we've already done colonialism, etc. etc. etc.

Well, the anger at France is similar.

France SHOULD be one of the leaders in the world in terms of fairness and idealism. It SHOULD be one of the leaders in terms of relationships to Jews and Israel, given its history.

Worse, not only SHOULD France be this leader, it actually CLAIMS to be.

But then, it policies are the most self-serving, self-obsessed, real-politik policies in the world. France ALWAYS tries to "play both sides" to its own advantage. It flirted with the USSR while the US was guaranteeing its security. It almost armed Saddam with Nukes, and was knee deep in the corruption of the oil-for-food program/Bribes deal with Saddam, not to mention is massive military industrial ties to all the Arab dictatorships.

A nation of liberty, fraternity & equality, anti-Semitism is rampant, the Hajib is banned, and while heavily critizing Israel, it turns a blind eye to, say, the massacre & expulsion of Pal Arabs from Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Kuwait... It allows Lybia and the Sudan to be leaders in the Human Rights commission. It leads the EU coalition to condemn Israel's 93% fence/7% Wall. It doesn't care about the human rights violations in its military clients and oil suppliers.

France is the most self-serving nation in the world, but the least honest about it, and, considering what other nations have done for France, probably the nation that least merits the right to be so hypocritical.

France is hated because of its hypocrisy, self-absorption and lack of loyalty.

takeo

07-24-2004, 11:29 PM

Well, the anger at France is similar.

France SHOULD be one of the leaders in the world in terms of fairness and idealism. It SHOULD be one of the leaders in terms of relationships to Jews and Israel, given its history.

That's why we have the right and the duty to criticise Israel's policy.

Worse, not only SHOULD France be this leader, it actually CLAIMS to be.

no it didn't claim so, but in general most french think they are among the moral leaders, since we belong to the most prosperous part of the world where also ideas such as freedom, democracy, tolerance, etc. originated together with other Western-European nations.

But then, it policies are the most self-serving, self-obsessed, real-politik policies in the world.

Any country conducts a real-politics, the US is the world-champion of realpolitics, even cooperating with medieval terroristsupporting regimes and bloody dictators.

France ALWAYS tries to "play both sides" to its own advantage. It flirted with the USSR while the US was guaranteeing its security.

Did we have the moral obligation to be a slave of us-wishes and interests? I don't think so. actually France was not included in the military wing of NATO so the us was not garanteeing our security, in France few people saw the USSR as a real threat even during the cold war. They were more afraid of our internal communist movement. france also condamned US-policy in Vietnam and cooperation with Islamist terrorists in Afghanistan based on moral and strategic concerns. We try to combine realpolitics with moral conduct, as opposed to the us or Russia, which conduct pure realpolitics.

It almost armed Saddam with Nukes, and was knee deep in the corruption of the oil-for-food program/Bribes deal with Saddam, not to mention is massive military industrial ties to all the Arab dictatorships.

The US was during the same period also heavily involved with saddam, don't blame us when you're not innocent in this matter yourself.
The US is massively arming Saoudi Arabia, one of the worst dictatorships in the region, and still does so, despite the fact that al-quaida has ties with the kingdom and the overwelming majority of hijackers were saoudi's. Your moral condamnation of France is therefor hypocritical and unacceptable, you accuse France of things you're doing yourself.

A nation of liberty, fraternity & equality, anti-Semitism is rampant

anti-semitism isn't rampant among ordinary French, this is a lie.

, the Hajib is banned

because we really fight fundamentalism, which is oppressive to women's rights and the ideologic origin of terrorism. You just claim to fight terrorism and fundamentalism but doesn't take any real steps, not even to dismantle terrorist organisations in the us or Saoudi banks which are funding terrorists. You prefere to use 11th september as an excuse to attack a totally unrelated country (dixit Clarke, for a decade the us most senior terror-adviser of the White house). All this you defend while referring to basic human rights as freedom, democracy, liberty, security, etc. you did the same during the cold war when you financed and supported the worst dictators and were killing millions of Vietnamese while carpet-bombing their wooden villages. (since most of them were communist-sympathisers they deserved to die, no?)
and YOU claim we're being hypocritical... look in the mirror please!

, and while heavily critizing Israel, it turns a blind eye to, say, the massacre & expulsion of Pal Arabs from Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Kuwait...

in these countries palestinians were immigrants, so those countries have the right to expulse them, of course this doesn't mean we think it was a humanitarian gesture, but according to international law we can't really condamn them.

It allows Lybia and the Sudan to be leaders in the Human Rights commission.

other countries allowed it as well, YOU supported countries such as Guatemala to become leaders in the Human Rights commission, which is hardly any better...

It leads the EU coalition to condemn Israel's 93% fence/7% Wall.

even the white House condamned it.

It doesn't care about the human rights violations in its military clients and oil suppliers.

on the contrary to the us we DO care. There is a European regulation which forbids exporting arms to countries were human rights are being violated. Altough I agree this regulation is sometimes violated itself. However the us sells to the highest bidder, no matter if it is Saoudi Arabia, Guatemala, Colombia, you name it...

France is the most self-serving nation in the world, but the least honest about it

so the us isn't self-serving??????????

, and, considering what other nations have done for France, probably the nation that least merits the right to be so hypocritical.

please don't refere to WWII, without the contribution of the soviet-union Hitler would probably have won the war, are you being gratefull to joseph stalin? We also helped you in your revolution against the brittish, we even offered you the statue of Liberty and gave you large parts of the current territory of the us...
I think France, all things considered, is less hypocritical than the us. Even the fact you accuse us of all kinds of things you're doing yourself without even mentioning it, the fact you invaded Iraq in the name of democracy and human rights, all this is extremely hypocritical, you have no right to accuse others of being hypocritical.

France is hated because of its hypocrisy, self-absorption and lack of loyalty.

why should we be loyal to the us?
hypocrisy, arrogance and self-absorption are basic features why so many people hate the US.

Gilgamesh

07-25-2004, 01:24 AM

Semsem

07-25-2004, 01:44 AM

Semsem

07-25-2004, 01:45 AM

And Takeo the author also says that today to be a Jew in France is to be a SUSPECT. You conveniently leave out all the BAD things he says about France and distort and take out of context the good he says.

Gilgamesh

07-25-2004, 01:48 AM

NO Takeo it is YOU who are DISTORTING what he said. He said that to be protected by the French Government Jews have to be ANTI ISRAEL and are BLACKMAILED by the French Government. As usual you DISTORT the facts and LIE.

What would you have expected of a communist ? Takeo is a communist, if you hadn't realized it before. I suggest you ignore him, let him talk only with Olliver, they are best buddies.

Semsem

07-25-2004, 01:52 AM

>>We are French so we are anti-semitic<<

Takeo says that "we are French so we are antisemitic." If Takeo was really a Jew he would not have said this. I am of the impression that Takeo is a "liar" and not even Jewish. He also lied and distorted the translation of an interview in a French newspaper of a famous French Jewish author who said that all Jews in France are "suspect" and that the French Government is blackmailing Jews in telling them that they will only defend them if they are "against Israel."

Semsem

07-25-2004, 01:55 AM

Well done Semsem! Great job!

Thank you. We want to read what real "respectable" French Jews say. Not what a bunch of screw ball liers tell us. And I don't think Takeo is Jewish. He gave himself away when he exploded saying "because "we" are French we are antisemitic." A Jew would never say that.

Semsem

07-25-2004, 01:59 AM

You answer none of my posts. You're on my ignore list body, again. Talk to yourself, that's what you do best.

Gilgamesh tu es tres sympathique! You are very amusing and do an excellent job defending our people. Thank you.

Semsem

07-25-2004, 02:02 AM

[QUOTE=Olivier]This is really painfull and hard to understand that people claiming the are "force of good" and complaining to be the target of "arab and european hate" turn out to be haters.>>

Yes, I HATE countries that work to STAB us in the BACK and cause us harm while smiling and referring to us as FRIENDS. France is an enemy of both Israel and the USA.

Semsem

07-25-2004, 02:05 AM

>>no it didn't claim so, but in general most french think they are among the moral leaders, since we belong to the most prosperous part of the world where also ideas such as freedom, democracy, tolerance, etc. originated together with other Western-European nations. <<

Oh because France is one of the most prosperous countries in the world they are among the most moral? What utter . And Nazi Germany was the most prosperous country and most advanced. Did that make them moral? So all the poor countries and 3rd world countries have no morals? What a RACISTyou are and obnoxious pretencious.

Gilgamesh

07-25-2004, 03:15 AM

Gilgamesh tu es tres sympathique! You are very amusing and do an excellent job defending our people. Thank you.
My plessure! Keep up the good job! May there be many like you Semsem in out nation.

Gilgamesh

07-25-2004, 03:17 AM

Thank you. We want to read what real "respectable" French Jews say. Not what a bunch of screw ball liers tell us. And I don't think Takeo is Jewish. He gave himself away when he exploded saying "because "we" are French we are antisemitic." A Jew would never say that.
I guess you are right. Now, how we get those banned...

Ahava

07-25-2004, 06:13 AM

I'm not calling you a nazi (not directly at least :( ).

well

- First of all, I read sharonb on that on the thread you started together. I was pretty shocked as this is not the image I had of him.
- then I read post #2 by you on this thread where you refer to "French genes"

Oh, that's funny, cos in post #2 on this thread I wrote that "I don't think it's just in the French genes, this passiveness. It's in human nature."

This post of mine was the OPPOSITE of what you claim it to be. I said it's NOT in French genes, but in all human genes.

I do not claim Sharonb and you are straight up racists, but you are indeed using genetics and, for example, liking them with humans behaviors, citizenship and attitudes. It smells bad. I'm afraid this is your common ground with nazis or other racists.

You'd better take this back now. There are clear differences between e.g. Jews and Arabs, but it's a cultural thing.

For honesty's sake, that would be nice to start a thread on your experience. Would you?

Oh, right, I'll start a thread saying "I was in France for a week and didn't experience antisemitism", that's worth a thread. :rolleyes:
I did see a small affiche saying "Palestine, pas de mur" (no wall) though. If there hadn't been an obstacle (gate because it was working area) before it, I'd have ripped it off.

You won't find many posters to believe you, I guess. Or like takeo, me and the other french here you'll be called a liar..
There's no reason to not believe me. There'd be more reason to not believe takeo and you because you are always on the same side. I don't have an agenda, I'm simply being honest. I will as easily say the bad things about France I hear or notice, as telling my positive experiences. Whereas you and takeo for example, tend to defend France until eternity. Never a bad word about France. It's not my intent to blacken France, nor to whitewash it.

takeo

07-25-2004, 06:47 AM

NO Takeo it is YOU who are DISTORTING what he said. He said that to be protected by the French Government Jews have to be ANTI ISRAEL and are BLACKMAILED by the French Government. As usual you DISTORT the facts and LIE.

ok, semsem, quote me the exact sentences where he said so! Now we're talking based on facts...

Olivier

07-25-2004, 07:00 AM

Oh, that's funny, cos in post #2 on this thread I wrote that "I don't think it's just in the French genesraaaa the fact the you said the "french genes" are not to blame is an acknowledgement of their existence, and of this theory.

There are no such things as french genes, to be french is a citizenship, not a race.

takeo

07-25-2004, 07:05 AM

Takeo says that "we are French so we are antisemitic." If Takeo was really a Jew he would not have said this.

what is this bS? Yes i'm French and Jewish at the same time, is it impossible? of course I can't be an anti-semite but many people here accused me of being anti-semitic, self-denying etc. it doesn't make any sense but very little words spoken by gilgamesh and others make any sense...

Yes, I HATE countries that work to STAB us in the BACK and cause us harm while smiling and referring to us as FRIENDS. France is an enemy of both Israel and the USA.

Fine, ok, well then let us really becomes ennemies, let's sell nukes to North Korea, increase our military cooperation with China and Russia and leave NATO once and for ever. Let's start to finance the iraqi insurgeants as well as the palestinians (on the condition they stop targetting civilians but israeli occupation force instead), let's spy on the uS and Israel and share our secrets with china (as israeli already does, not only with ennemies but with friends as well, recently this damaged the relations between Israel and new zealand), let's block each and every US-initiative in the UN...

Oh because France is one of the most prosperous countries in the world they are among the most moral? What utter . And Nazi Germany was the most prosperous country and most advanced. Did that make them moral? So all the poor countries and 3rd world countries have no morals? What a RACISTyou are and obnoxious pretencious.

Since we have more money we can afford to be more moral as well, countries who don't have money need to care for the economy in the first place. the US has a lot of money but the share of aid to poor countries is much smaller than the European share.

Oh, right, I'll start a thread saying "I was in France for a week and didn't experience antisemitism", that's worth a thread.
I did see a small affiche saying "Palestine, pas de mur" (no wall) though. If there hadn't been an obstacle (gate because it was working area) before it, I'd have ripped it off.

Hey please make a distinction between sympathising with palestine and being anti-semitic, this is the most important debate on this forum. actually in Israel too there are such posters, distributed by my friends in Gush Shalom (and of course they are "anti-semitic, self-denying, traitors, whatever")
If you met French people who offended you because you wore an obvious sign of being Jewish, you can say "those people were antisemitic", or if you talked to people and they expressed anti-semitic feelings, or even if you felt people distrusted you because you were obviously Jewish. (I have experienced this a few times in Russia but never in france). But as you said yourself there is no reason to believe the French are an anti-semitic people, none at all, people who say so don't know France or are simply liers.

There's no reason to not believe me. There'd be more reason to not believe takeo and you because you are always on the same side. I don't have an agenda, I'm simply being honest. I will as easily say the bad things about France I hear or notice, as telling my positive experiences. Whereas you and takeo for example, tend to defend France until eternity. Never a bad word about France. It's not my intent to blacken France, nor to whitewash it.

I said more than one bad word about france. But indeed since you're clearly on the same side as them on most issues concerning israel, the US and Iraq they will tend more to believe you. Thank you anyway for being honest.

Ahava

07-25-2004, 07:07 AM

raaaa the fact the you said the "french genes" are not to blame is an acknowledgement of their existence, and of this theory.

There are no such things as french genes, to be french is a citizenship, not a race.

If it's just a citizenship and only that, then how come are the French petit in general? And the Dutch and Scandinavian tall and blond?
There is not an exclusive French 'race' and I've never said that. But there are people formed over time.

But apart from this, I did not acknowledge the fact there is such thing as "French genes". If I thought there was, I'd have been more inclined to think those were to blame, and I would have said so.

Olivier

07-25-2004, 07:08 AM

I don't have an agenda, I'm simply being honest.sorry I got to tickle you on that too... is it really honest on your behalf to say the wall is built 'partly' on palestinian territory.

Do you said "partly" when you build a wall that takes up 1000 square kilometers land?

NB : If you don't want to say "palestinian territory", you can say "disputed" in the sense the israeli towns on the WB are "disputed".

Gilgamesh

07-25-2004, 07:12 AM

what is this bS? Yes i'm French and Jewish at the same time, is it impossible? of course I can't be an anti-semite but many people here accused me of being anti-semitic, self-denying etc. it doesn't make any sense but very little words spoken by gilgamesh and others make any sense... Lets take a scientific aproche about "sense making words"
We are both revolutionaries. I am a Zionist, and you are a communist.
Now lets take a long look: Zionist revolution is sucsessful. Communist revolution colapesed flat down on it's face and considered evil by most survivours of that ragime, named as one of the worst in 20th Century.

So, my "non-sense" works, Your "perfect sense" is a joke and a recognized crime against humanity.

What ever your accusations are about me, are not with holding with logic or scientific sense. Which means, you takeo, is absolutly irrational.

The is no sense talking with irrational people. There for, it's the last post I answer you. Please don't mention my name so your nick will not conteminate or spam the "last posts mentioned Gilgamesh" list, I use quite a lot.

As for anti semetism: Anti semetism has clear defenition, in a nut shell: 1. Denying Jews the right of self determination, 2. Denying Jews the right of self defense. Either or a particular actions or as a whole.

As a communist, you resist both defenitions of anti semetism. Which makes you a self hating anti semite. Now I can add irrational.

Don't bather yourself answering this post. You're on ignore.

Ahava

07-25-2004, 07:13 AM

But as you said yourself there is no reason to believe the French are an anti-semitic people, none at all, people who say so don't know France or are simply liers.
I think the overwhelming majority of antisemites in France are (like in Holland) Arabs. There is indeed no reason to believe the French (native) are particularly antisemitic.

I said more than one bad word about france. But indeed since you're clearly on the same side as them on most issues concerning israel, the US and Iraq they will tend more to believe you. Thank you anyway for being honest.

Je vous en prie.
By the way, I have to keep my relations with the French good, since I'm going to live there for a couple of months. ;)

takeo

07-25-2004, 07:14 AM

If it's just a citizenship and only that, then how come are the French petit in general? And the Dutch and Scandinavian tall and blond?
There is not an exclusive French 'race' and I've never said that. But there are people formed over time.

that's right, but French "genes" are difficult to define. So many people have been mixed here. The Celts, the Germans, the Romans, the jews, the Italians, the Spanish, greek, Arabs, Normands, Polish, whatever we have it. I myself am jewish-russian, my girlfriend Cambodian, so me too will soon enough throw my genes in the pool...
we are darker since we have more Roman and mediterranean influence compared to Holland, so? Why are ashkenazi jews generally taller and whiter than sephardim Jews?

sorry I got to tickle you on that too... is it really honest on your behalf to say the wall is built 'partly' on palestinian territory.

Do you said "partly" when you build a wall that takes up 1000 square kilometers land?

NB : If you don't want to say "palestinian territory", you can say "disputed" in the sense the israeli towns on the WB are "disputed".

I wouldn't even oppose the wall if it was build on the official palestinian-Israeli border, not trough palestinian territory which is not right and not productive as well.

I think the overwhelming majority of antisemites in France are (like in Holland) Arabs. There is indeed no reason to believe the French (native) are particularly antisemitic.

that's right, thank you

Je vous en prie.
By the way, I have to keep my relations with the French good, since I'm going to live there for a couple of months.

have fun, and don't trust French guys if they say they don't have a girlfriend!
where are you going to live?

Ahava

07-25-2004, 07:15 AM

Lets take a scientific aproche about "sense making words"
We are both revolutionaries. I am a Zionist, and you are a communist.
Now lets take a long look: Zionist revolution is sucesessful. Communist revolution fell down on it's face and considered evil by most survivours of communism.

So, my "non-sense" works, Your "perfect sense" is a joke and a recognized crime against humanity.

Thanks for this entertaining post. :D

Olivier

07-25-2004, 07:17 AM

Whereas you and takeo for example, tend to defend France until eternity.We are both extremely critical at times. It's just the the ceaseless campaign of gross lies lead us to defend the thruth.

Now you can certainly criticize french foreign policy, as long as you use honest arguments. French leaders are not blameless either.

But you now how propaganda works, the bigger the lie, the bigger the effect.
In the end, as AJL says, it becomes self-evident that we are racists.

Ahava

07-25-2004, 07:19 AM

sorry I got to tickle you on that too... is it really honest on your behalf to say the wall is built 'partly' on palestinian territory.

Do you said "partly" when you build a wall that takes up 1000 square kilometers land?

Is it really honest to call the security fence a "wall" while only a few % of it is real wall? Or is it mere propagandist talk because it reminds people of the Berlin Wall? (a comparison that is often made)
And is it really honest to assume the Green Line is a border Israel should not cross, while it is not?
Is it really honest to call disputed area "Palestinians territory"?
Is it?

takeo

07-25-2004, 07:21 AM

thanks to ahava I could still see your post.
Lets take a scientific aproche about "sense making words"
We are both revolutionaries. I am a Zionist, and you are a communist.
Now lets take a long look: Zionist revolution is sucesessful. Communist revolution fell down on it's face and considered evil by most survivours of communism.

communist revolution isn't considered evil by most survivors, seems you have never been to Eastern Europe, China, Russia, Vietnam ... it was more succesfull than capitalism in Russia and eastern Europe and communist parties have returned to power in many countries. china is the fastestgrowing economy in the world, while it was among the poorest before the communists took power. it's also a peacefull country.

zionist revolution isn't really succesfull since it couldn't establish a peacefull nation where jews live in security, to establish this they have to make peace with the Arabs, something many zionists are not capable of.

And is it really honest to assume the Green Line is a border Israel should not cross, while it is not?

Israel was recognised by the UN in its current pre-1967 borders, look at any map of Israel, even in the US, and you won't find the Westbank and Gaza and eastern Jerusalem on it, which has been held occupied illegally. Even Israel doesn't consider those territories an equal part of Israel and the absolute majority of population doesn't have the Israeli nationality nor are there plans to give them the israeli nationality even on a long term. So whatever you say you can't deny those territories are not parts of Israel in neither way you look at the issue.

Is it really honest to call disputed area "Palestinians territory"?

yes, that's how they are called in different UNSC-resolutions (both holland and Israel are member of this organisation) and the absolute majority of people living there are palestinians and want a palestinian nation. The 1967-occupation was not accepted by a single country not even the US.
Jordan and Egypt have given up those territories, but, very importantly, to the UN, NOT to Israel.

Gilgamesh

07-25-2004, 07:23 AM

Thanks for this entertaining post. :D

You are welcome Ahave! Making you smile is a sheer plessure of mine! ;)

Olivier

07-25-2004, 07:25 AM

If it's just a citizenship and only that, then how come are the French petit in general? And the Dutch and Scandinavian tall and blond?So tell us more, being dutch you're tall and blonde? :D

There is not an exclusive French 'race' OK thanks. There is no french race at all.

Ahava

07-25-2004, 07:25 AM

I wouldn't even oppose the wall if it was build on the official palestinian-Israeli border, not trough palestinian territory which is not right and not productive as well.

Except that there is no official Palestinian-Israeli border.

have fun, and don't trust French guys if they say they don't have a girlfriend!
where are you going to live?

Nantes, la ville la plus civilisée en France!

Olivier

07-25-2004, 07:27 AM

Is it really honest to call the security fence a "wall" while only a few % of it is real wall?hey answer the question first, then you can certainly ask me to do the same.

Ahava

07-25-2004, 07:32 AM

thanks to ahava I could still see your post.

Not even intentional this time!

So tell us more, being dutch you're tall and blonde?

I'm not tall but remember I'm a Jew.

hey answer the question first, then you can certainly ask me to do the same.

I've got a déjà vu, where you never answered any of my questions. Anyway, seen the fact I could immediately throw numerous questions back at you, it seems I'm the more honest one. What was the question again? :rolleyes:

Olivier

07-25-2004, 07:38 AM

I've got a déjà vu, where you never answered any of my questions. Ooooh

Anyway, seen the fact I could immediately throw numerous questions back at you, it seems I'm the more honest one. What was the question again?the question was: do you not exagerate sometimes (like just the 'never' above or the "partly" for example).

Ahava

07-25-2004, 07:44 AM

Ooooh

the question was: do you not exagerate sometimes (like just the 'never' above or the "partly" for example).

1.Exaggerating is not the same as lying (you should know!)
2.I don't remember the post you're referring to exactly, but I believe the word "partly" was just casually mentioned by me there, it wasn't a debate about the number of square m. of the wall that was outside the "Green line" but just a side-point.
3.Green line is not border.
4.I support the FENCE anyway.

Mediocrates

07-25-2004, 08:11 AM

Why are you wasting time with these trolls? Whatever you say whatever you refute they simply veer off to some unrelated point meant to embarass someone else. They never acknowledge what you are saying. They basically are reading from a script. Imagine if you were face to face what kind of odd conversation you would be having

'-How's the weather?'

'Israel is an illegal state'

'-What? we were talking about the weather, and Israel is not an illegal state'

'George Bush is a doodyhead'

'-????'

Olivier

07-25-2004, 08:18 AM

2.I don't remember the post you're referring to exactly, but I believe the word "partly" was just casually mentioned by me there, it wasn't a debate about the number of square m. of the wall that was outside the "Green line" but just a side-point.Ok, let's have a break now. Nice you're back on forum!

For the record we all know you are blonde and not so tall ;)

Ahava

07-25-2004, 08:20 AM

Mediocrates

07-25-2004, 08:20 AM

Viva la Lance.

takeo

07-25-2004, 08:35 AM

ok, a fence or a wall, WHATEVER the result is the same!

I'm not tall but remember I'm a Jew.

aha...
I live near Nantes, at least if you think according to American distances...

Ahava

07-25-2004, 08:36 AM

aha...
I live near Nantes, at least if you think according to American distances...
Does that mean I'm in danger? :eek:

takeo

07-25-2004, 08:41 AM

oh my... you're scared of me!

Ahava

07-25-2004, 08:52 AM

oh my... you're scared of me!

Duh, you're French!
Oh by the way, do you rent apartments? if yes, chances are I called you, we called an estimated 70 people for apartments!! And met countless people who were very willing to help. Helped 2 Dutch filles lately?

MGB8

07-25-2004, 09:28 AM

Takeo,

Your defense of france is laughable. In fact, it PROVES MY POINT about why Americans and Israelis are so angry and distrustful about France

First, your comparison to Stalin and the US is so laughable its pathetic. GERMANY ATTACKED RUSSIA. Let me repeat. GERMANY ATTACKED RUSSIA. Without the German invasion, the non-aggression pact stands, and no help from the Russians. The Russians helped out of self-interest - to save themselves. It had NOTHING to do with France and the US and the UK. The US involvement in the European theater, OTOH, while in partial respone to Japanese aggression, was for a large part due to out "loyalty" to Western Democracies - a loyalty that France has never returned.

But for the presence of hundereds of thousands of American troops in Germany, not only WOULD france have worried about the Soviets as a direct military threat, but also GERMANY would likely have re-armed to counter this threat, and their would have been tensions there, if not another European war. But the US babysat, and like spoiled Children, France, like you, DON'T EVEN RECOGNIZE the help that was given, much less feel that you owe a major debt.

Meanwhile, French sell Arms to EVERY dictator and thug on this planet. Sure, the US sells to many also - but, frankly, US companies are less tied to the government than French companies in the quasi-socialist French political-economic system.

But what's rich, is then you go on, just like France, go on to say "but we ARE a moral light unto nations!"

Vietnam...France. Most of Africa and the problems that are there now.... France. The middle east drawn up nation states and the coddling and ARMING of brutal dictatorships ... FRANCE. Ok, so the US was invloved in some of this also....but, unlike France, the US was FIGHTING the cold war, whereas France was flirting with the USSR.

The US was, in its mind, choosing the lesser of the two evils.

France was just a prostitute.

And France, politically, remains so. And spoiled child and a prostitute, with no loyalty to anyone but itself. France will reap what is soes.

The US-USSR alliance was one of convenience.