Make Whine, Not War!
Eager to show just how loyal NATO allies they can be, France, Germany and Belgium Monday blocked NATO preparations to defend Turkey from Iraq attacks in the lead-up to possible military action to remove Saddam.
In Washington, Defense Sec. Donald Rumsfeld announced that preparations will move ahead as planned, despite vociferous objections from unquestioningly loyal and trustworthy allies France, Germany and Belgium.
Turkey, fellow NATO member which borders Iraq, has requested anti-missile defenses, aerial surveillance and chem-bio dectection gear in the silly and preposterous belief that the Butcher-of-Baghdad, an uncompromising voice for human rights who's won outspoken praise for his life-long work from Cuba, Libya, France, Germany and North Korea, would jeopardize his status as the world's undisputed champion of humanity by raining down chemical and biological horrors on his neighbor to the north. In any event, Baghdad and U.S. Democrats maintain president Saddam has no such weapons, and even if he did, he'd never ever use them, even though he has, but he really didn't mean it, and Reagan made him do it -- anyway, *mistakes were made* and he's already apologized and promised never ever to do again . . . until he does. That is, unless provoked by bully Bush!
"Nothing today justifies a war," declared brave French president Jacques Chirac in Paris Monday, visiting Russian president Vladimir Putin at his side. "Make whine not war!" he pleaded, whining.
Chirac, staunch U.S. ally who speaks for all of Europe (Helen Thomas and Hollywood actress Susan Sarandon say the 18 European countries pledging full support for Bush on Iraq aren't European enough) denounced U.S. aggression, again branding as ridiculous the notion that U.N. resolutions calling on Saddam to disarm mean Saddam should disarm and other some such nonsense.
Chirac defended his decision to block military aid to Turkey, asserting that Turkey, a Muslim country, isn't Muslim enough. "Iraq -- that's is an Arab country, therefore Iraq is more Muslim than Turkey, which is in Europe," he explained. Tempers flared after a reporter asked how he'd rate Iran, which is neither European nor Arab, but very Muslim. "That question, like cowboy Bush, is beneath me!" he belched, hissy fitting.
Chirac's biggest problem with Bush, of course, is that Bush doesn't sport a square mustache, doesn't raise his arm in salute and doesn't wear swastika arm bands.
To the French and the Democrats, war is the "worst possible outcome" because both know what that *outcome* would be: U.S. victory. In other words, the wrong side would prevail. To our very, very, very loyal "ally" France, U.S. victory in Baghdad is an unacceptable outcome; for very, very, very "patriotic" Dems trying to unseat Bush come '04, war without the hope of massive U.S. casualties is no hope at all, period.
Meanwhile, chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix emerged upbeat after a weekend of negotiations he insists were not negotiations with cronies of Saddam. Hans Blix called the negotiations "very substantial," while sidekick Mohamed ElBaradei, head of I.A.E.A, said he sensed a "change of heart" in Saddam as Iraqi officials forked over reams of documents with "VX nerve gas" and "Anthrax" scrawled on the covers. A closer examination, however, showed the documents to be mostly angry New York Times editorials opposing the removal of Saddam. The rest were copies of a recent National Press Club speech by Tommy Daschle and Nancy Pelosi, Saddam's patriotic image makers, who challenged bully Bush to show proof that president Saddam and Tariq Aziz are lying.
Despite Blix and ElBaradei's upbeat assessment, Saddam refused to relent on one point, namely, allow the use of American U-2 surveillance flights to aid inspections, a key U.S. demand. Late Monday, Saddam reversed course, acceding to U-2 overflights without conditions though on one condition: No 'no-fly-zone' air raids during U-2 surveillance flights.
Iraq, in a letter Monday to U.N. inspectors, promised even further cooperation, pledging legislation, as early as next week, making possession of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq illegal! Sara Brady, Chair of the Center To Prevent The Spread Of Weapons of Mass Destruction By Helping Rogue Genocidal Dictators Draft Legislation That We Know They'll Obey When Passed And Even If They Don't At Least We Stopped Bush's Blood-For-Oil War! (C.T.P.T.S.O.W.O.M.D.B.H.R.G.D.D.L.T.W.K.T.O.W.P.A.E.I.T.D.A.L.W.S.B.B.F.O.W.) has offered help in drafting the landmark legislation.
"We will spare no effort in this war on Weapons of Mass Destruction," Saddam declared in a live televised address, reiterating, however, that Iraq possesses no such weapons. In a further blow to warmongers in Washington, senior Iraqi officials indicated the government will run full public service announcements (PSAs) as part of its campaign to rid Iraq of Weapons of Mass Destruction which it doesn't have. "Keep your brain healthy. Don't use Anthrax," warns one ad. "Botulism can close the door on your future," declares another. And in yet another ad, eggs are frying in a pan, as the announcer says, "This is your brain. This is your brain on VX nerve gas. Any questions?"
"How's that for an 'air campaign?'," mocked one senior Iraqi official.
Meanwhile, France and Germany continued work on their proposal for more weapons inspectors in Iraq -- the Franco-German plan, first reported by Germany's Der Spiegel magazine over the weekend.
Saddam is more than eager to cooperate, say the Germans and the French. But to do that, the dictator needs more weapons inspectors, you see. Saddam is dying, dying to cooperate, if only evil Bush would let him!
"Bush should read Laura Doyle's latest book, 'The Surrendered Nation: A practical Guide to Finding intimacy, passion and peace with dictators,'" remarked one senior French official. The book, published by Vichy University press, tops the best-seller list in France. It's received a flurry of rave reviews.
"As a practical guide to improving your appeasement, Doyle wrote the book!" gushed the respected Le Monde.
"All the helpful tips you'll ever need to sweeten your life of appeasement -- in one cover!" declared Le Figaro.
On the homefront, Democrats, who have sharply criticized Bush policy in Afghanistan, alleging the central government in Kabul is too weak, that the north and south are basically ungovernable, insisted this week that Saddam must be kept in power because the central government in Baghdad is too weak, that the north and south are basically ungovernable, therefore, nothing to fear.
For Democrats, the only break this week was the apparent re-emergence of Osama Tuesday.
But even that was short-lived.
While Democrats heaved a sigh of relief that old binny was safe and sound, the succor dissolved after learning what the voice on that new audiotape, aired by Al-Jazeera, would be saying: Hey, I'm against this war, too!
If "anti-war" activists needed a leading spokesman, they had one now.
For Democrats, it was their worst nightmare come true.
On the tape, bin Laden pledged common cause with Saddam Hussein, exhorting the Iraqi people to battle the infidel invaders through homicide bombings and other means. Osama, striking a favorite Democrat theme, called war on Iraq a war on Islam itself.
In just 16 minutes, Osama exploded a myth the media and the Democrats nourished diligently for 16 painstaking months: The oil and water theory -- Osama and Saddam don't mixed.
Predictably, almost immediately after the airing, CNN scrambled to 'splain that what you heard wasn't really what you heard, that Osama really didn't mean it, that just because Osama and Saddam are in cahoots doesn't mean Osama and Saddam are in cahoots.
Look, Saddam may not be thrilled with America, but it's not like he hates us or anything, nor would he mean us any harm, explains non-biased and completely objective CNN.
The only question remaining is this: Will the Baghdad/al-Qaeda link, now proven, force Democrats to back the U.S. and move away from the Franco-German alliance?
Don't bet the farm.
Undeterred, a group of 65 "anti-war" protesters traveled to Baghdad Tuesday, arriving in a double-decker bus caravan, ready to form a "human shield" around Saddam and the al-Qaeda network if war breaks out. Scrawled across the front the busses: "Not In Our Name," a coalition of anti-U.S. liberals whose petition appeared recently in 45 newspapers across America. Thus far, more than 50,000 Hollywood Democrats, Leftist "artists" and Democrat "intellectuals" have signed the petition.
Meanwhile, Sen. Tommy Daschle, who in the past has blasted the White House for raising the threat level without specific instructions on what steps the public should take in response, Tuesday blasted the White House for providing specific instructions on what steps the public should take after raising the threat level Friday.
The public was urged to stock up on food, batteries, water, radios, duct tape, etc.
Democrats even hinted the White House probably fabricated the latest Osama tape to whip up war ferver by making it look like Osama and Saddam are in cahoots.
"No one could explain," writes liberal Marc Sandalow in this morning's San Francisco Chronicle, "how Powell was able to tell the Senate Budget Committee about the contents of the bin Laden tape -- and Al-Jazeera's intention to play it -- hours before the Qatar network broadcast it. In fact, just after Powell finished speaking at about 8 a.m. PST, the network denied being aware of the tape's existence. It played about four hours later."
But the plot thickens: "[CIA Director George] Tenet said he had become aware of the tape Monday night but was not aware of its contents Tuesday morning, adding to the mystery over its origin."
(Psst! See? The tape was made in the White House, I tell ya! The voice was that of Karl Rove! Shhhhhhhh!)
More Sandalow paranoia: "Peppered with questions, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said Powell's information was solid, but he would not divulge how the administration was aware of the tape's contents. Fleischer defended Powell's mention of the tape, saying: 'I think you could easily make the case if we are aware of something like this, and we didn't say anything about it, your questions would be: 'Why aren't you saying something? Are you trying to hide something?''"
Think Democrats are wacky now? Ha! If past is prologue, you ain't seen nothing yet, folks.
Anyway, that's...
My two cents..
"JohnHuang2"
