[Brad C.]

All too true, but it does leave saddam an out. The mosques are not government locations (he can say) so they do not have to allow inspections if the inmans choose to keep the UN out. It would be the same in our country, I don't think the government could legally force a property owner to open it's doors to a foreign power. Especially if it was in the best interest of the government not to that property inspected, so to speak.

[Dog Gone]

Saddam would use respect for his citizens' private property as an excuse? Like we are supposed to believe that?

This is a man who lets his sons torture Iraqi citizens for fun.

[Procyon]

The mosques are not government locations (he can say) so they do not have to allow inspections if the inmans choose to keep the UN out. It would be the same in our country, I don't think the government could legally force a property owner to open it's doors to a foreign power.

What's the law have to do with it? Back in 1991, in exchange for a cease fire, Saddam agreed to the inspections. No restrictions. You want to pull some legalism B.S.? Fine, we're back at war! It would be the same in our country if the U.N. were really more than a debating society and ever got the better of us. Not to say that will ever happen!

[maro]

Our government forces private persons to open their doors to cops all the time--all you need is a subpoena, which a judge will issue on a showing of probable cause. I think Iraqis have no more civil rights than we do, so it would be preposterous for Saddam to say the search of mosques is outside his legal authority.

[FreedomPoster]

>>It would be the same in our country, I don't think the government could legally force a property owner to open it's doors to a foreign power.

BZZZT, sorry, wrong answer, thanks for playing.

Unlike the USA, In Saddam-controlled Iraq, there is no "law", other than Saddam's decree. And we aren't a country that viciously invaded a neighbor for no reason other than plunder, was militarily beaten, and agreed to this inspection regime as a condition for cessation of hostilities.

[Steve Eisenberg]

I don't think the government could legally force a property owner to open it's doors to a foreign power.

Pan-Arab nationalism + socialism = Baathism, the ruling ideology of Iraq and Syria. The government of Iraq owns the means of production. As for private homes, like in almost every other third world country, people do not have clear title to their land and homes, so there is no "property owner" whose rights Hans Blix would be violating. As for religion, although Saddam does tolerate Islam and Christianity in a formal sense, the government vets the leadership of and fully controls mosques and churches.

For more on the crucial fact and disasterous results of lack of clarity in the third world as to who owns what real estate, see:

Institute for Liberty and Democracy

[A_perfect_lady]

Can't the UN inspectors demand proof that the mosque is really a mosque? (By, say, inspecting it?) No, but really, are mosques privately owned? Under the socialist Ba'ath party, I doubt it.