I presume your remarks are directed at me. If not sorry but I have to respond. Can you point to anything that I said which bashed the French?
Let me see, does pointing out well know facts reported in the media for years that the French helped Saddam build nuclear reactors qualify as “french bashing”. When did the truth become “bashing”?
What is this about France being Iraqs’ main supplier? The US bought half of the Iraq oil, Italy was next and France was tied for third. Armmaments were old Soviet and East European as almost all French made aircraft was still grounded in Iran from the first Gulf War. Iraq had more US weapondry than French! Check out Janes from 2000.
Jane, I truely see and appreciate your point. I never want to US bash or bash any Ally (sometimes I am tempted by the Brits), but, how do you get unreasonable people to listen to discussion if they are denied the privledge of empathy through recognition of what hateful language brings. All in all, though, I’m with you and would rather take the ethical route.
@ Poilu
Actuall you may want to brush up on who supplied Saddam with the most chemical weapons ( see below from Wiki : Germany 52%, France 21%).
Over 73% of Iraq’s chemical weapons program was from France & Germany. The remaing 27 % of Saddam’s chemical weapons contributed by mainly 4 countries – UK, Italy, Brazil and USA sold some dual use capacity to Saddam’s Iraq which breaks up to single digit percentage figure for each of these countries.
So please pare us the hypocritical moralizing sermons on Bush’s Iraq war when France and German have the biggest dirty fingerprints on Saddam’s Iraq, a fact well know by Saddam’s victims such as that article written by the Kurd clearly shows.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
In the early 1970s, Saddam Hussein ordered the creation of a clandestine nuclear weapons program.[15] Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs were assisted by a wide variety of firms and governments in the 1970s and 1980s.[16][17][18][19][20] As part of Project 922, German firms such as Karl Kobe helped build Iraqi chemical weapons facilities such as laboratories, bunkers, an administrative building, and first production buildings in the early 1980s under the cover of a pesticide plant. Other German firms sent 1,027 tons of precursors of mustard gas, sarin, tabun, and tear gasses in all. This work allowed Iraq to produce 150 tons of mustard agent and 60 tons of Tabun in 1983 and 1984 respectively, continuing throughout the decade. Five other German firms supplied equipment to manufacture botulin toxin and mycotoxin for germ warfare. In 1988, German engineers presented centrifuge data that helped Iraq expand its nuclear weapons program. Laboratory equipment and other information was provided, involving many German engineers.
ALL TOLD 52% OF IRAQ’S INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL WEAPON EQUIPMENT WAS OF GERMAN ORIGIN.
State Establishment for Pesticide Production (SEPP) ordered culture media and incubators from Germany’s Water Engineering Trading.[21]
France built Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in the late 1970s. Israel claimed that Iraq was getting close to building nuclear weapons, and successfully destroyed the reactors in 1981. Later, a French company built a turnkey factory which helped make nuclear fuel. France also provided glass-lined reactors, tanks, vessels, and columns used for the production of chemical weapons.
AROUND 21% OF IRAQ’S INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL WEAPON EQUIPMENT WAS OF FRENCH.
Strains of dual-use biological material also helped advance Iraq’s biological warfare program.
@ Poilu
Actuall you may want to brush up on who supplied Saddam with the most chemical weapons ( see below from Wiki : Germany 52%, France 21%).
Over 73% of Iraq’s chemical weapons program was from France & Germany. The remaing 27 % of Saddam’s chemical weapons contributed by mainly 4 countries – UK, Italy, Brazil and USA sold some dual use capacity to Saddam’s Iraq which breaks up to single digit percentage figure for each of these countries.
So please pare us the hypocritical moralizing sermons on Bush’s Iraq war when France and German have the biggest dirty fingerprints on Saddam’s Iraq, a fact well know by Saddam’s victims such as that article written by the Kurd clearly shows.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
In the early 1970s, Saddam Hussein ordered the creation of a clandestine nuclear weapons program.[15] Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs were assisted by a wide variety of firms and governments in the 1970s and 1980s.[16][17][18][19][20] As part of Project 922, German firms such as Karl Kobe helped build Iraqi chemical weapons facilities such as laboratories, bunkers, an administrative building, and first production buildings in the early 1980s under the cover of a pesticide plant. Other German firms sent 1,027 tons of precursors of mustard gas, sarin, tabun, and tear gasses in all. This work allowed Iraq to produce 150 tons of mustard agent and 60 tons of Tabun in 1983 and 1984 respectively, continuing throughout the decade. Five other German firms supplied equipment to manufacture botulin toxin and mycotoxin for germ warfare. In 1988, German engineers presented centrifuge data that helped Iraq expand its nuclear weapons program. Laboratory equipment and other information was provided, involving many German engineers.
ALL TOLD 52% OF IRAQ’S INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL WEAPON EQUIPMENT WAS OF GERMAN ORIGIN.
State Establishment for Pesticide Production (SEPP) ordered culture media and incubators from Germany’s Water Engineering Trading.[21]
France built Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in the late 1970s. Israel claimed that Iraq was getting close to building nuclear weapons, and successfully destroyed the reactors in 1981. Later, a French company built a turnkey factory which helped make nuclear fuel. France also provided glass-lined reactors, tanks, vessels, and columns used for the production of chemical weapons.
AROUND 21% OF IRAQ’S INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL WEAPON EQUIPMENT WAS OF FRENCH.
Strains of dual-use biological material also helped advance Iraq’s biological warfare program.
Nick, You refer to German supplies delivered in the early ’80s when the US was buying the oil AND paying for Iraq to be aggressive towards Iran. The French sales could have just as easily been used to process milk or legitimate chemicals. I have no argument that the French knew where material was going, but nobody thought, back then, that Iraq would use weapons on their own people. Nobody includes the US, Soviets, France, Germany, Italy, or the UK. It’s the old “unintended consequences” routine that we have all seen, many times, including reciently in Iraq. I would prefer that governments did not make mistakes but, unfortunately, all do and they have throughout history.
@ Fred
You may need to believe for emotional reasons that French sales were used for milk and other legitmate needs even though there is no proof. Prehaps you also need to believe that French built nuclear reactor at Osirak was for harmless purposes, and also the French built turnkey factory which helped make nuclear fuel was also for harmless purposes.
It takes an amazing capacity for denial to believe what you have written considering Saddam’s well know reputation as brutal strongman with stragetic ambitions way back in the 1980’s. Fortunately the Israelis were not so naive and destroyed the nuclear reactor in1981.
Regarding US being Iraq’s oil importer. True but what you failed to note was that this was under the UN oil for food program. The money was used to buy food for Iraqi’s under an UN program.
“The United States remains the largest importer of Iraqi oil under the UN Oil-for-Food program. However, U.S. companies can no longer deal directly with Iraq for its oil imports. U.S. companies are forced to deal with third party vendors as a result of a ban on all American companies imposed by Iraq. In 2002, the U.S. imported $3.5 billion worth of Iraqi oil. In addition American oil companies have not signed a contract with Baghad since 1972.”
France & Germany had much deeper extensive business ties with Saddam’s Iraq.
“France’s largest oil company, Total Fina Elf, has negotiated extensive oil contracts to develop the Majnoon and Nahr Umar oil fields in southern Iraq. Both the Majnoon and Nahr Umar fields are estimated to contain as much as 25 percent of the country’s oil reserves. The two fields purportedly contain an estimated 26 billion barrels of oil.In 2002, the non-war price per barrel of oil was $25. Based on that average these two fields have the potential to provide a gross return near $650 billion. ”
“More objections have been lodged against French export contracts with Iraq than any other exporting country under the oil-for-food program, according to a report published by the London Times. In addition French companies have signed contracts with Iraq worth more than $150 million that are suspected of being linked to its military operations. Some of the goods offered by French companies to Iraq, detailed by UN documents, include refrigerated trucks that can be used as storage facilities and mobile laboratories for biological weapons. ”
“From 1981 to 2001, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), France was responsible for over 13 percent of Iraq’s arms imports”
This is pure arms import, does not include chemical & nuclear capabilities.
,Nick, I won’t go over the nuclear issue. I agree with you that Iraq was too volitile to aid in building a nuclear plant, but, I will tell you that France barely outbid Italy and if France had not built the plant, Italy or the Sovietw would have. The French also built the Israeli nuclear arm and I’m not sure that was such a good idea either.
As to the “oil deals”, please read them (Don’t know if they’re on line), I think that you will discover that France had put in so many restrictions that the work couldn’t begin until and unless the UN Security Councel (With US veto possible) authorized Iraq to be released from its’ international repreations and obligations. Besides, the participants to be utilized in the development of these prospective fields were US, UK, Dutch, French and Itallian. French interests in this joint venture was as a minor partner. I confess to you that the only reason that I know anything about this is that I live in the heartland of petroleum lawyers and some of them were involved from the American oil company position. Sorry, again, but I doubt that any of these are on line.
I agree with you somewhat. All western countries naively did business with Saddam’s Iraq. Oil being such a valued commodity it was only natural.
But some countries had very deep commercial ties with Saddam’s Iraq. while other countries had minimal business ties with Saddam. Germany by far had the most extensive ties with Saddam and German businessmen continued to have a lucrative relationship with Saddam’s Iraq even after he gasssed the kurds, and invasion of Kuwait & Iran.
“German officials are investigating a German corporation accused of illegally channeling weapons to Iraq via Jordan. The equipment in question is used for boring the barrels of large cannons and is allegedly intended for Saddam Hussein’s Al Fao Supercannon project.An article in the German daily Tageszeitung reported that of the more than 80 German companies that have done business with Baghdad since around 1975 and have continued to do so up until 2001, many have supplied whole systems or components for weapons of mass destruction.”
Germany’s hand are the dirtiest out of all the countries. 52% of Iraq’s chemical weapons came from Germany (which the Kurds haven’t forgotten even if Germans have conveniently done so).
Today Germany has the same deep extensive commerical ties with Iran, In fact out of all the European countries, German firms have the largest business relationship with Iran. What is it with German firms and Arab dictatorships? They seem to get along very well.
Nick- our choice of source – Heritage – is really quite telling. A Neo-Con organization if there ever was one, they’re only slightly less ridiculous than Fox in their anti-French obsessions, even though many of their culomnists (if one can call them that) also contribute to Fox. It basically fits the pattern of all American Conservative spittle: US interests GOOD, French interests BAD – essentially playground logic.
To be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Another ORIGINAL and UNRECYCLED joke from poilu:
Q – When jetliners crash into tall buildings, what sounds do they make? A – BOING!! (B-O-E-I-N-G)
Nick, investigation, with consequences and corrections are paramount! We all see mistakes and greed makes fools of us all. The whole point of looking into these past actions is to work, together, to do and be better in the future. Although noone wants misdeads to go unnoticed nor unconfronted, I really do not feel that entire Nations are guilty for what a few do nor what a government unwittingly allows – wether American, French or German. The only governments with absolute control are NOT democracies. I would rather live in a democracy any day.
@ Poilu,
Prehaps you may want to point out if there was anything infactual in the link from Heritage before bashing it. This article in Heritage used sources such as the German daily Tageszeitung, the London Times , Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). These are hardly rightwing neo con institutions.
Prehaps you may want to be careful about throwing around that neo con label every time you come across unpleasant facts. Let me see, anybody who mentions the fact that France built Saddam’s nuclear reactor is a “neocon” ? I think you have displayed your mindset very clearly.
PS: Your jokes are getting a bit original but still no zing. Need to be more witty.
Again I agree with you. One has to learn from the past so that we can avoid it going forward. There are lessons for all but some countries who were the biggest suppliers to Saddam have to learn from their mistakes. There are always going to be crooked businessmen and countries such as Germany have to have more laws on the books to prevent their firms from getting around loopholes to do business with dictators despite UN sanctions. The German parliament needs to have more oversight over German firm’s business ties with dictatorships such as Iran etc. Germany having an export driven economy is quite behind in this matter as exports are given top prority , damn the consequences.
Nick – I don’t have to throw the “Neo-Con” label around when the Heritage Foundation does it so well themselves. A simple search of words “french” and “france” is proof enough for me that they are no friends of ours. What the Heritage wants, on the world policy front, are “yes” men. Anything less is an obvious threat to American interests. I believe this proves my earlier point on national interests. The Heritage may be a view, but it hardly encompasses anything more than a far right wing opinion self grandeur and execptionalism, both of which are almost dead.
Nick, I have read some good, seemingly accurate, items from the Heritage Foundation and I have read some pretty idiotic statements. Like all of these “think tanks”, Heritage has a spread of journalistic ethics. Rhey are probably the best, in their category, but they are definetly leaning well to the right politically. Being so, Heritage is just as open to suspecion as those Foundations to the left. Poilu is simply stating the obvious – Always question your source and their motives.
But the point is the German & EU courts are not doing anything to resolve it. And it looks suspciously like the same mistakes are being made with German business ties to Iran.
mean time, not allowing the truth about who exactly was Saddam’s biggest WMD suppliers allows people to spew half truths, distortions and misinformation in order to smear the USA as the main culprit. Case in point, Poilus remarks above (#21) : “Nick – you may want to brush up on who supplied Iraq with the chemicals needed to conduct the Al-Anfal program, starting with DOW chemicals.” And he gives a link which only talks about US sales thereby giving the misleading impression that it was the USA which was responsible for Saddam’s WMD. One must give the whole picture, not a tiny portion of the picture to suit one’s biases as what Poilu did by only talkin about US sales. When one looks at the whole picture it appears that Germany & France supplied Saddam with 73% of chemical weapons capability.
Nick, Now your making a point! I am rather supprised that these issues were/are not being addressed. We may hear clarification, but, I would imagine that we need someone familiar with the German Courts to give us insight. I know that their Courts are natoriously slow (as they are in the US) but this does need to be addressed. I know that the French delt with this issue years ago and the American system has identified transgressers but, to date, I know of no action. See, you can make a valid point. Now let us talk about the poor quality water purification and electrical equipment that US contractors sold to the US for use in Iraq.
I always question what I read anywhere whether leftwing or rightwing. Like you I find that it is possible to find idiotic and accurate articles on both sides. In general I find the NewYork times & Economist to be the most accurate, though they sometimes make mistakes too. This particular article from Heritage is well sourced – reputable organisations such as Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), UN documents, the German daily Tageszeitung & the London Times . These are hardly rightwing loony types.
On the other hand there are some articles from Heritage that I would never quote. It all depends on the quality of the journalist writing that particular article.
Also wanted to mention that Poilu’s sources such as “hartford” are also biased and not exactly known to be the top tier of journalistic intergrity.
Nick, OK, we agree. The question remains, is Germany doing nothing? We need to identify where they are, and why. I’m with you in that I certainly do not want Iran to be nuclear. Also, once we know, where do we go from there. This is not a blog designed to address German issues. We need to be listening to good Germans, who care about their country, and let them know your concerns. I’ll even join you, if you want.
Ah, Jay Leno… I still remember the first first French-bashing joke I ever heard from him – making fun of the French military of course – while substantiating his “joke” with a picture of a French Legionnaire, of all soldiers.
@ Fred
How can anything be done when most Germans are not even aware that their country supplied Saddam with 52% of Saddam’s chemical weapons capability?
It wasn’t the German media but foreign media outlets which broke the story on Germany’s deep commercial ties to Saddam. It was the NewYork times that first broke the story during the first Persian gulf war ( kuwait) of how Germany companies were the biggest chemical weapons suppliers to Saddam far outstripping other countries. This issue is not even in the public conscience, hence there will be no public pressure on the Bundestag to act . And besides when other people ( French and some Americans ) keep pointing the finger at the US as being the main culprit thorough selective reporting, it is not going to get better.
And now it appears German companies are doing brisk business with another middle east dictator in Iran.
@Fred
I read enough German media outlets and their comments section to know that most Germans are not aware. The same old tired story of pointing the finger at the USA as the biggest culprit is repeated, the facts be damned. If anyone points out the fact that it was Germany which sold Saddam 52% of chemical weapon capability, cries of “German bashing” will follow. Sound familiar?
I don’t like French-bashing, American-bashing or even German bashing. The point is that you have concerns, which may be very valid, about German control of their trade. If you are saying that the Germans that you have communicated with are indifferent, that is disturbing. Self-criticism is a necessary step in all democracies. I think that maybe you should approach this differently. Germans are very intelligent and are well aware of their troubled past. They respond to diplomatic concern with a touch of appealing to their sense of justice. With patience, I know that you will reach the right people. I do congratulate you for trying.
But thats just it, pointing out facts is not “bashing”.
It is rather unfortunate that sometimes when unplesant facts about a particular country is noted, than cries of “bashing” will follow.
I think we should be aware that it is only half truths, selective reporting and distortions with the clear aim to smear is actually bashing. Giving the whole picture and pointing out facts is not bashing.
I don’t blame the Germans but their media for downplaying & minimizing their country’s deep commercial ties to Saddam’s weapons program. Likewise the same now, the German media rarely talks about German firm’s extensive business ties to Iran .
And besides with the economic downturn, it is doubtful they will do anything , their export driven economy needs exports at all cost, the consequences be damned. Besides Germany paid no price internationally for being Saddam’s biggest chemical weapons suppliers. So, they have nothing to fear.
Nick, you make a good point on bashing. I really do believe that people want to respond to diplomatic concern and immediately reject, violently sometimes, bashing of ones’ Nation. Instead of questioning who or why, maybe it would be a better intro to just state “is it true and what is Germany going to do about it, if it is”.
Nick, Additionally, you might go back and contact those writers whose writing brought this to your attention. You may well find someone who would want to redig into the issue and they may have contacts in Germany that can get you somewhere. Please do have your German-English Dictionary handy.
@Nick
“I don’t blame the Germans but their media for downplaying & minimizing their country’s deep commercial ties to Saddam’s weapons program. Likewise the same now, the German media rarely talks about German firm’s extensive business ties to Iran . ”
I don’ think you read German papers. I do read them, and I can remember quite well that this topic was widely covered by many German newspapers. I still remember cruel cartoons in Die Zeit about the “Deutsches Giftgas AG”. And as far as Iran is concerned, commercial ties between German (and French) companies and Iran have nothing to do with weapons, contrary to what you are suggesting. True: Germany and France sold weapons to Saddam among others because he was at war with Iran and was widely viewed between 79 and 90 as a rempart against islamist Iran, but the US supplied chemical waepons too for the same reason. Donald Rumsfeld paid a visit to Saddam as an envoy from Reagan and told him that he had nothing to fear from the US if he should use chemical weapons (as he did against Kurds and against Iranians).
I did not say the German media did not cover it. I said they minized and downplayed Germany’s immense and and largest contribution to Saddam’s WMD arsenal. Sure they covered it AFTER foreign media outlets such as the NewYork times gave it wide coverage .
The German media tends to by and large make it sound as if Germany’s contribution to Saddam’s WMD was no better or worse than USA sales when the facts show Germany’s immense 52% contribution to Saddam’s WMD arsenal was by far the biggest and far outstripped USA single digit figure. Most Germans are not even aware that Germany contributed 52% – if you can provide links to German media showing this high percentage than I will stand happily corrected.
Germany = 52%
France = 21%
UK, Italy, Brazil, USA = 27%
As the figures above show, some countries had deep extensive commercial ties to Saddam’s Iraq while other countries such as UK, Italy, Brazil & USA had minimal business to ties to Saddam. To put these countries in the same category as Germany is absurd but that is exactly what the German media tends to do in regards to USA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
As for your claim that Germany only sold weapons to Saddam during the Iran war, than you must have missed this in the Tageszeitung . In fact the New York times and other newspapers have written on how German companies continued to sell WMD capability to Saddam AFTER the Iran war.
“German officials are investigating a German corporation accused of illegally channeling weapons to Iraq via Jordan. The equipment in question is used for boring the barrels of large cannons and is allegedly intended for Saddam Hussein’s Al Fao Supercannon project.An article in the German daily Tageszeitung reported that of the more than 80 German companies that have done business with Baghdad since around 1975 and have continued to do so up until 2001, many have supplied whole systems or components for weapons of mass destruction.”
As for your claim about Rumsfeld they are absurd and again an attempt to smear the USA through false allegations. This is what is called “bashing”. But if you have some credible source verifying this story I wll be open but until than I prefer to stick with facts, facts such as Chirac visited Saddam several times in order to sell nuclear technology and other weapons to Saddam. How come Germans know so much about Rumsfeld’s ONE trip to Saddam but not so much about Chirac numerous trips to Saddam?
In French we have a proverb. It says : The worst deaf is the one who doesn’t want to hear. Rumsfeld made TWO trips to Saddam. Check the article in “The Guardian”. Of course you would not find it in the “heritage Foundation”.
There is no German newspaper simply called the “Tageszeitung”, you must have missed the first half of the name.
I don’t dispute Rumsfeld made two trips, what I find objectionable is your false accusations about what Rumsfeld told Saddam. Likewise you wouldn’t find anything about Chirac’s numerous visits s to saddam in the Guardian.
I believe Andre has already answered you about “Tageszeitung”. That is a German newspaper but then again you already knew that .
PS Sorry for missing the accent on your name Andre, don’t have French keyboard : )
I checked the facts. Chirac paid only ONE (two week) visit to Bagdad in november 1974, when he was PM. Saddam Hussein came to France the year after and stayed 2 weeks too, Chirac being still PM. Maybe Chirac made private visits after he quitted, but I don’t think so. When he became PM in 1986-88, he never flied back to Iraq. The “numerous visits” made by Chirac exist only in your imagination. French PM Raymond Barre went three times to Iraq, but no French president ever did. This is a chronology in French http://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/monde/chronologie_496841.html
Jean-Paul (63), Thank you so very much for researching this. I believe that this information is useful in many conversations with bashers that we even have now days.
Here are some interesting news items about Chirac’s relationship with Saddam, such a close relationship between a western leader and a brutal dictator like Saddam was rather strange to say the leaset.
"Judicial Watch, Inc. (hereinafter, “Judicial Watch”) is a non-profit, non-partisan, public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption and abuse.
"Based on our preliminary investigation, as well as recent press reports, there is sufficient evidence to implicate senior French political and governmental officials including, but not limited to, Mr. Jacques Chirac. These unlawful activities involve private persons, corporations and government officials from: France, Iraq, the Peoples’
Mr. Chirac has engaged in a decades-long illicit campaign to violate and subvert international law, European Union (E.U.) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) conventions, as well as U.N. resolutions and sanctions. According to recent press reports, as well as the 1991 book, The Death Lobby; How the West Armed Iraq , by Kenneth R. Timmerman, and the 1992 book, Notre Allie Saddam by French journalists Claude Angeli and Stephanie Mesnier, Mr. Chirac has been engaged in a nearly thirty (30) year conspiratorial relationship with the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein – trafficking in arms, military equipment and nuclear technology. Over the last thirty years Mr. Chirac has facilitated, both in and out of government office, the sale and/or transfer to Iraq of:
In return for supplying Saddam Hussein with arms and nuclear technology, Mr. Chirac and others have personally benefited through financial support for their political party(ies) and campaigns.[2] French corporate and governmental corruption was well documented in mid-March 2003, by New York Times columnist William Safire, whose work (cited at length below) details the unlawful sale and fraudulent trans-shipment of Chinese rocket fuel to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq via Syria. Mr. Safire has published the contents of e-mails from a French firm that knowingly brokered and facilitated the criminal act. Mr. Chirac, when confronted by the media concerning the details of the transaction, lied and claimed it had not occurred."
"NRO: How close was the relationship between Saddam and Chirac? K enneth Timmerman, a New York Times best-selling author, lived and worked as an investigative reporter in France for 18 years
Timmerman: Like lips and teeth. One of my favorite stories is the bullfight Chirac hosted for Saddam in the southern France resort town les Baux-de-Provence in September 1975, where Saddam bet $600,000 on the bulls. During that first trip Saddam made to France, Chirac stuck to him like glue . He also arranged to sell Saddam a nuclear-research reactor, which Saddam himself called a nuclear-bomb plant."
Why censor what I wrote about Chirac and Rumsfeld?
This information can be easily found in the Wiki and Judical watch which is a liberal organization.
OK, I get it you can’t stand the facts but making false accusations about Rumsfeld and be extension USA, is ok?
I guess the standard for your blog is : Lies about USA = okay.
Truth about France = not okay and must be censored right away
To censor Wiki and Judical watch? That tells us all we need to know about your blog. I think word will get around very fast that you censor Wiki when it is not to your liking.
If you have not already, check out this (new) video game for Wii. I was going buy it, but when I saw that they retained and further ridiculed it’s easiest contender, Glass Joe, (French), I decided against getting this game. It’s really immature that they kept this character and emphasized his “Frenchness” (i.e. weak and easy to beat up).
Terrible!
Nick the article you quote doesn’t content “facts”, but judgements of value. When you write “Mr. Chirac has been engaged in a nearly thirty (30) year conspiratorial relationship with the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein” this is not exactly what i will call a “fact”. By the way there is nothing “unlawful” in trading with Iraq. You may find morally objectionable of course, but it is not illegal. And don’t forget that Iraq had signed the NPT. There is no “conspiracy”, it is only business and (shortseeing) Realpolitik.
Now I found out that Chirac made actually a second private trip to Bagdad, with Raymond Barre (who was then PM) on his way back from India in 1976. But two visits are not “numerous”. And Saddam made also a first official visit in France in 1972, he was received by President Pompidou. He came twice to France. You may see the TV-films of Saddam’s arrival in 72 and 75 at the Elysée Palace on internet.
thanks for drawing our attention to this game. I’ve made some superficial research and found several websites which were delighted with the portrayal of Glass Joe as a “cowardly and effete Frenchman”.
It’s offensive, ridiculous and intolerable that ignorant bashers should wield such tremendous amounts of power and be able to operate with such impunity.
At this rate, they’re worsening the scenario faster than any Miquelons can improve it… It’s depressing.
From poilu on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 3:12 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 3:16 pm
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 3:24 pm
From Irish-Franco-American on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 3:27 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 3:41 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 3:42 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 3:54 pm
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 4:03 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 4:17 pm
From Barney hasn't left the building on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 4:45 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 4:56 pm
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 5:23 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 5:44 pm
From poilu on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 6:05 pm
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 6:09 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 6:17 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 6:29 pm
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 6:35 pm
From poilu on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 6:48 pm
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 7:02 pm
From Barney hasn't left the building on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 7:04 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 7:05 pm
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 7:23 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 7:29 pm
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 8:23 pm
From FrancisK on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 9:49 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 11:02 pm
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 11:08 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 11:25 pm
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/16 at 11:50 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/17 at 12:14 am
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/17 at 12:40 am
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/17 at 1:33 am
From Barney hasn't left the building on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/17 at 8:06 am
From Jean-Paul on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/17 at 11:58 am
From Jean-Paul on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/17 at 12:17 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/17 at 1:46 pm
From Jean-Paul on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/19 at 4:01 am
From André Wernesson on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/19 at 4:54 am
From gwencord on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/19 at 5:08 pm
From gwencord on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/19 at 5:11 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/19 at 11:40 pm
From Jean-Paul on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/21 at 9:49 am
From Fred Orth on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/21 at 11:13 am
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/21 at 7:43 pm
From Nick on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/21 at 8:41 pm
From Miquelon on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/21 at 9:10 pm
From L L on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/22 at 2:14 am
From Jean-Paul on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/22 at 5:00 am
From André Wernesson on Adieu Jay
Go to comment2009/05/22 at 6:12 am