French treachery emerged

Hi RoadClosed,

Funny you making a comparison with Rush Limbaugh...I remember one article here made the same comparison ( the two extreme points )....and Moore was actually being requested to be sued by the conservative party up here because of his remarks he made here...election violations...but because it was minor...$2000 fine or six mths. in jail or both...they dropped it...or it was dismissed...I don't remember.

People do generally act differently with a camera on them, especially if it's sudden or intrusive, if they're not used to that kind of exposure.

Eg ;)

Hello Egaladeist:

Quote:

---

When it comes to the American Press I follow the simple rule : take everything with a grain of salt unless verified by a second outside source.

---

Just curious - but is it only the American press you need to verify?

Hi KuiXing-2005,

It's the only other source I look at...being Canadian it's unavoidable but to be inundated by the American Media...I'm not saying the Canadian Media doesn't have it's bad side too.

Generally, I don't read the Chinese, Australian, German, etc...etc...etc...Press, so it's not an issue of verification. I don't have to verify it if I don't read it.

Generally speaking, any source of information, whether it's the media or a snitch on the street, can be taken to have more substantial quality if it has been verified by a second independant source rather than taken on it's own or is supported only by inter-dependant sources.

Eg

Regardless of what was found you don't hold up new weapons and internationally embarrass your allies. Just don't sell Iraq anymore Nuke reactors and equipment for the likes. Is that desert equipment?

Hi Imitation,

Obviously, I agree...if there's any truth to the story, and I'm sure there is, you would think that we would learn from past discretions and make sure we don't repeat the same mistakes.

Trading with the enemy...or, a country that can quickly become the enemy, is never a good idea...for obvious reasons...the weapon you sell today may be the weapon that kills your family tomorrow.

Eg

Just remember that Chiraq sold those nuclear plants to Hussein in the 1970's... Hussein was vice president back then, Chiraq was prime minister. Back then, France was one of the only countries that hadn't signed the nuclear non-proliferation agreements so technically it wasn't doing anything wrong. Guess who's doing (or not doing!) the same thing right now...

Hi Neg,

Well the article does make the claim that the arms trade was going on well after that as well...but it, again, is in dispute about the accuracy of the claims...I'm sure there's some truth to it...there usually is...but how much truth we really don't know...France has been the object of criticism ever since their stand on Iraq 2 so there's likely some bias and flaming involved.

And yes I agree...it is a case of the pot calling the kettle black...America and many other countries have a long history of trading with their enemies or unstable regimes...and having those same countries and regimes use those weapons against our own allies.

Again...Trading with the enemy...or, a country that can quickly become the enemy, is never a good idea...for obvious reasons...the weapon you sell today may be the weapon that kills your family tomorrow.

unfortunately...history keeps repeating itself.

Eg :)

It does seem hypocrtical of our country to have the stance of "Do as I say, not as I do." I love weapons, not just sold to our enemies or even allies - what fun is that? I hate the fact that we are trying to tote a shiny image and have a lot of skeletons and current intrinsic issues we need to deal with first, before offering any other country anything - weapons, troops, resource - anything. The current approach for domestic/foreign policy is obviously flawed and it does not appear to be working.