Posted on 11/21/2004 12:05:35 PM PST by Afghanistanmation
By any measure, it has been an extraordinary week of public attacks against the United States by France and her surrogates. Expanding upon his anti-American tirades early last month, French President Jacque Chirac began the barrage this week by stating, "Britain gave its support [for removing Saddam] but I did not see much in return. I am not sure that it is in the nature of our American friends at the moment to return favours systematically." Such a statement does not surprise us for two reasons, although that does not diminish their inappropriateness. The first is that this comment illustrates perfectly the lack of understanding Mr. Chirac has for the priceless benefits a democratic Iraq would reap in the war against Islamofascism, not to mention the low respect he holds for freedom and democracy. The second reason is that France profited greatly from bribes and kickbacks resulting from the U.N. Oil for Food Scandal, in addition to multi-billion dollar oil contracts negotiated with the Saddam Hussein regime. Accordingly, it is inconceivable to Mr. Chirac that Tony Blair would follow President Bush and remove a dictator without receiving instant gratification in the form of an economic windfall. It has become increasingly clear that a French rule of thumb is that an endeavor is not worth undertaking if your pockets are not subsequently filled.
As outlandish as the above comments are, Mr. Chirac's comments on Thursday were even more so. He repeated the hackneyed belief that "terrorism around the world has increased because of the war in Iraq." Perhaps that is the case, but the same could be said about intervention in Afghanistan. However, since that endeavor was less controversial, is now considered a success and France did not have any monetary interests in Afghanistan (that we are aware of), such trivialities are overlooked. Nevertheless, this same line of juvenile logic could be applied to any military mobilization throughout history. No doubt military combat increased around the world after the United States responded to Japan's bombing of Pearl Harbor. And Reagan's decision to reject a nuclear freeze almost certainly resulted in more nuclear weapons being built in the world. We could continue repeating examples debunking this flawed logic, but you get the point. This is the type of reasoning that the likes of Michael Moore routinely use. And by that we mean statements that initially seem sensible are later revealed as severely flawed upon further investigation.
Meanwhile, a French "strategy expert," Pascal Boniface, Director of the Institute for International and Strategic Studies in Paris, addressed a seminar organized by the Arab World Institute on Wednesday and branded the U.S. practices against the Fallujah residents as "state terrorism." Bonifance conveniently ignored the facts now emerging from Fallujah of "slaughter houses," mutilated bodies of Westerners in the street, and the many Fallujah residents delighted at having their city liberated from Taliban-like thugs. Nevertheless, during the course of his lecture, he proceeded to state that the murder of the wounded terrorist in a Fallujah mosque, as well as alleged prisoner abuse at Abu Ghreib and Guantanamo Bay "demonstrate an established policy and doctrine." Bonifance continued pandering to his audience by saying that "despite the absence of democracy and political pressure groups, the Arab public opinion is turning into a mighty force" and "the emerging force of the public opinion, motivated by the Arab satellite channels, is now seen by the west and the Americans as the official spokesman of the Arab world." Based on the information available to us, Bonifance never called for greater political reform in the Arab world, rejection of Islmoafascist tactics or pleaded for support of democracy in Iraq. Instead, he chose to serve as a mouthpiece for the French government and propagate the appeasement of France's domestic Muslim population.
As troubling as the above situations may be, the following two situations are incredibly concerning regarding France's role as an ally in the worldwide War on Terror. The first example comes from the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) which reveals that France has become an outpost for the Iraqi resistance:
The resurrection of the Ba'th Party on French soil was further strengthened by France's proposal that representatives of "la resistance" should participate in any future conference that will be convened to discuss the future of Iraq. This position was clearly stated by Michel Barnier, the French Foreign Minister, in an interview with the French TV station " France Inter."
The second development is that France has approved a Hezbollah-linked TV channel to broadcast within the European Union which is all but guaranteed to increase the already large amount of anti-Semitic propaganda in France and Europe:
On Tuesday representatives of Al-Manar in France were given a license they requested to carry on broadcasting in France and parts of Europe.
In January 2003, over the Muslim festive season of Ramadan, Al-Manar broadcast Al-Shatat, meaning Diaspora, which portrayed the history of Jews and Zionism from 1812 till 1948. Based on the "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," the Syrian-produced program alludes to a Jewish conspiracy for world domination, inspired by the Talmud, and shows, among other incitement-charged scenes, a group of Jews, acting on the orders of a rabbi, killing a Christian toddler to use his blood in baking matzots for Passover.
The fact that a terrorist-linked media network is permitted to broadcast in France might explain the revelation that three Frenchmen were recently killed fighting with insurgents against US-led troops in Iraq. We should also note that the Fox News channel is not allowed to broadcast in France.
Sensing the growing French hostility towards the United States, and especially their Iraq venture, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage stated yesterday that Chriac is "fearful that we'll be successful…since he's made the decision not to be involved in Iraq." We could not agree with Armitage's comments enough, and this is perhaps the best explanation for France's behavior even after their oil contracts were taken away and Saddam was captured in his spider hole. By choosing to side with a dictator, terrorist enabler and all-around despot, France chose their side, while masquerading their decision as support for international law and preference for world stability. So, in order to continue portraying their decision as correct, and keep attention away from their deplorable behavior (oil for food, lying to Colin Powell, oil contracts with Saddam, etc.), they must take all measures to present their stance as correct. Given their position, this naturally requires using illogic and the media to solidify France's view of the Iraq situation. And we will give credit where credit is due because they have succeeded far better than the United States in presenting their viewpoint, no matter how great the distortion.
Oh, and we did not even have time to discuss Chirac's assertion that only the United Nations should decide wars or his reiteration that the Iraq war was illegal. It really has been a busy week.
france will pay for this .... their own civil war is on going.... they will try and make a deal ..... and of course it will work for a short time.... then it wont..... the rest of the EU needs to understand ... spain is gone....
French offensive .... very
Chirac and Villepin are liars not to be trusted.
Bush warned at the beginning that there would be a temporary increase in the danger. Why is it that liberals and French presidents do not listen?
You might also mention the Human rights violations by france in the Ivory Coast....video of frogs shooting into a peaceful crowd. Their utter hypocrisy re:UN and what they did to the Ivory Coast.
"Britain gave its support [for removing Saddam] but I did not see much in return. I am not sure that it is in the nature of our American friends at the moment to return favours systematically."
__________________________________________________________
Funny, isn't it, how Chirac sees Britian defending those weaker than us from the likes of Saddam and his buddies (gee, like Chirac) as somehow doing the U.S. a favor. I bet the ol surrender monkey probably stood aside on the playground when other kids got beat to a pulp by the neighborhood bully, thinking it would protect him from getting his @ss kicked. Maybe charged the bully a finder's fee for bringing in other helpless victims.
IMO, that's precisely what happened in his involvement with Iraq.
"French Offensive."
Water Wet.
Headlines Silly.
It has only been brought to the surface where it can be killed.
Offensive smelling with hairy pits.
And these French rats are the ones John Kerry wanted us to get approval from.
<< French Offensive.
Water Wet.
Headlines Silly. >>
Love you guys -- few words -- jugulars ripped out -- game, set and match.
N'est ce pas?
Blessiings -- B A
redundant
The frogs have become as irrelevant as the UN.
Remember the mediterranean basin 5+5 nations.
Sky blue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.