Christian Lheureux <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>OK I tend to see the current US Administration's deeds from a little
far away ... Old Europe, that is .... but let me please sum up things
according to a common perception here :
>
>1) The current US Administration asserted Irak and Saddam Hussein had
WMDs by the shipload, and were maintaining an extensive WMD program. So
far, not a single trace of a single WMD has been found.

You are incorrect. Several shells containing the nerve gas Serin have
been located in Iraq and the Serin has been verified as an active agent
(in other words NOT inert). Last time I checked nerve gas is in the
column of WMD (see related New York Times stories). As it has been
stated in this forum before, the WMD were in Iraq prior to the war and
there is evidence it was shipped to Syria and other Arab nations. Two
missles with UN inspection tags intact were discovered in the
Netherlands about a week ago - said missles were banned under UN sanctions.

>2) The current US Administration maintained (and still maintains) there
is (was) a link between Al-Qaida (sp?) and Saddam Hussein's regime in
Iraq. So far, not a single piece of evidence has been found of such a link.

Again, you are incorrect. Please see related New York Times articles
detailing documents found in the Iraq Foreign Intelligence Services
offices wherein it is shown that the Iraq Secret Police initiated
contact with bin Laden's organization in the 1990's. This must have been
a very difficult story for the NY Times to report - that the Bush
administration is correct, but it's one of the few truthful stories
they've published in recent years.

>3) While the current US Administration, to the best of my knowledge,
and as Denys correctly said, never asserted that there was a direct link
between 9/11 and Saddam's infamous regime, they attacked Iraq
unilaterally, without a UN mandate (1441 is precisely NOT a clear UN
mandate). This attitude is disgraceful. If it only damaged the current
US Administration's prestige abroad, the account would most likely be
easily settled some time in early November. The thing is, it damages the
remaining superpower's prestige. This, too, is a disgrace, and not a
service to the American population.

Again, you are incorrect. Attacking Iraq unilaterally means the U.S.
would have had to attack Iraq ALONE. More than thirty (30) countries
participated in the war, including England, Australia, Poland, Italy and
many others. France, your home country, of course did not. Do you mean
to say that unless France participates, no other country counts?
Personally I don't give a moments consideration of U.S. prestige abroad
with countries like France and Germany - about the only news you get
relating to the U.S. is from (regretably) CNN (sometimes referred to in
the U.S. as the Communist News Network) the BBC (decidely anti-American)
and AFP (certainly not pro-American). I have personal knowledge having
travelled in Europe that Fox News is not available in hotels except an
extreme minority. With the Internet and the press wires freely available
to you through drudgereport.com, why not expand the horizon of your
information gathering before making such pronouncements as above?

>4) Now, if the US Vice President uses one of the unprintable words and
makes it without even a slap on the wrist, how do I explain my kids that
they have to choose their words carefully ? Is that an example to use
unprintable words ? I remember a former US President being blasted (and
almost impeached) for clearly inappropriate deeds within the White
House. Should you Americans consider impeaching Vice President Cheney
for using inappropriate language ?

Simple. Tell your kids that some language is inappropriate and shouldn't
have been used, and that the Vice President made a mistake in your
opinion. You are incorrect on why Bill Clinton was impeached - he wasn't
impeached for his behavior in the White House, he was impeached because
he lied under oath in testimony before a Federal judge and tried to
suborn (modify the content thereof) testimony of other witnesses
(witness tampering). He should have been convicted in the Senate and
removed from office, but the Democrats and a few Republicans didn't have
the strength of character to perform the duties of their office and took
a political route out of the situation.

>5) As a European, I do not vote in the US Elections. So I tend to hold
no real political interest in the coming US Election. As such, I am not
 involved in Cheney-blasting contests.

Thank God for some small mercies.

>Still, I do not like the idea of an official using foul language. This
is a disgrace.

Then you should read the book "A Texan Looks at Lyndon" about
(thankfully) now dead Lyndon Baines Johnson - you remember, Kennedy's
vice-president who assumed office on Air Force One flying back to DC? He
is renowned for his "colorful" language, especially his many terms for
women. There's an old saying about the Johnson family - they left the
barn door open and all the cows went home. His father was a well known
cattle-rustler around Blanco County (in other words, he would steel
other peoples cattle).

>Thanks for listening,
> Christian

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *