The French Connection: Syria

My dear Pundita, who I suspect could string together threads of consipracy in an over-zealous Iraqi low-lands mosquito attack ... has some very interesting observations on France.

So as you can see, things have moved quickly; it was only last Monday that UN Resolution 1636 passed by unanimous vote in the UN Security Council. The resolution gives the Syrian government virtually no stalling time to produce witnesses in the Mehlis Commission investigation and the witness list could, in theory, extend to Syria's President Bashar Assad.

Comments

[Pundita]

Bah. If you think that's stringing together conspiracy threads, wait'll you see what I have up next.

[cindi in pa]

Pundit, you already have my head spinning!!! Got bail money?

[*flo*]

Pundita...this maybe coincidence,
(paraphrase msnbc)
Much of the youths’ anger has focused on law-and-order Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, who inflamed passions by referring to troublemakers as “scum.”

tear gas bomb exploded in a mosque in Clichy-sous-Bois — the northern suburb where (2) youths African descent, were accidentally electrocuted as they hid in a power substation, died

Government officials have held a series of meetings with Muslim religious leaders, local officials and youths from poor suburbs to try to calm the violence.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Considering there is a unemployment rise...this has not helped matters...yes, we are looking @ a community of the poor, living in French housing projects, many participants in the riots where french born children of Arab and black Africans angered by years of unequal opportunities.

If you can come up with information regarding the UN Resolution 1636 & Mehlis Commission investigation associated with the riots in France, would like to read it....

[GrannyToad]

Once again a French connection. Nothing new there, other than details. French has long been Arabs' 2nd language. TANSTAAFL

[TheAlamo]

Considering there is a unemployment rise...this has not helped matters...yes, we are looking @ a community of the poor, living in French housing projects, many participants in the riots where french born children of Arab and black Africans angered by years of unequal opportunities.

If you can come up with information regarding the UN Resolution 1636 & Mehlis Commission investigation associated with the riots in France, would like to read it....

Posted by: *flo* | Nov 7, 2005 2:38:00 AM

It is not really race or religious affiliation.
These circumstances will always be the case...worldwide, when government is in the "providing" business. All people have a socio-economic acceptability base, in other words, what they are willing to settle for, with the least amount of work. When welfare suits people they will continue to take, and take, always want more...but never willing to exert themselves above what they are currently doing...which..., is nothing. Makes no difference what country it is...we can easily see that this is common in all socialist countries, and minus any political discrimination, it is not race or religion oriented.

Until governments of the world get out of the theft business....stealing from those who produce, and giving to those who will not....then we will have these circumstances continue...and they will grow until economic implosion occurs. Why? Because the poor can continue to "vote" themselves increases via their ever growing voting block...and politicians, criminals that they are, are only interested in staying in office, so they will appease their voting block.
The governments, of course, will try to hide their causative effect by calling it "racial" or "religious." After all, if they admitted to their complicity, then they would have to give up their monopoly of control over that particular voting block. If the "poor" ever figured out that they could actually have what they want by working, (minus government contrived wage and price controls...and regulations) then this block of votes would automatically go to those who promote liberty, and, as we know there are fewer and fewer of those worldwide. Because... most people don't even have a clue what as to what liberty is any longer.

Check history. As long as people look to governments to solve their problems, the entire nation will continue to slide into the abyss. There has never been one successful socialist country...unless you count those who have stayed in power by force, and even then, they cannot survive economically...as we are seeing right here in the USA, and would have seen in China until the American citizen was hoodwinked into financing our own destruction.

[*flo*]

It is not really race or religious affiliation. Because... most people don't even have a clue what as to what liberty is any longer.

Check history
Posted by: TheAlamo | Nov 7, 2005 2:53:45 PM

"Not Race or religion affiliation" I disagree with on this one, considering history speaks for itself. European cultures are racist, bottom line. We both know, Islam culture leadership would need to be involved to defuse such activities because of the bias opposition.
The liberty the Arab and black Africans in France are looking for...Centuries of unsuccessful attempts to seize their own little peice of France..."Dominated terrority."
These riots remind me of the riots we have experienced right here in the US, (LA, Miami)...the US has not yet slid into the "abyss" or destructed into socialism as of the last time I checked...the reality of this, this would lead to our "own" riots. Smart Leadership would benefit this country and its citizens, reforming many programs...In the future, we should see more changes...a possible chance, leading to impeachment of Bush and his administration.

[TheAlamo]

These riots remind me of the riots we have experienced right here in the US, (LA, Miami)...the US has not yet slid into the "abyss" or destructed into socialism as of the last time I checked..

Posted by: *flo* | Nov 8, 2005 10:56:14 AM

You might be right about European racism. Heve not spent a lot of time in European studies...but...

We're not socialist? Where do you get that one? Who pays for welfare? Who pays for corporate subsidies? Who pays farmers NOT to plant? Why are "credentials" more important than results produced? How many things can you do without a "license?" How much money do you pay each year for tax on property that you OWN? How are government schools funded? Who pays for child protective services? Who can open a bank account where they hold YOUR money without disclosing your social security number?(they ought to have to give you theirs since they are holding YOUR money) Same with investing money. Why do you need a license to fish? How many times are you re-tested for driving skills?--Never, but you get to pay every two years for a new "license." Do you have a license to spray YOUR crops? If not--you are in trouble. Can you open a store without the correct "license." Try entering college without being "tested." Makes no difference whether you can dothe work...only if you can pass an irrelevant test. Try building a shed on YOUR property without a "permit" from your masters. Try having a little garden on YOUR property without "approval." Try building a little road on your own land from front to back without "approval." Try having a well dug without a "permit" on YOUR own property.
The founders of this nation are throwing up in their graves.

You are right, it is not really socialism, it is, in fact, communistic, but most people aren't ready to admit that one yet. An old communist teaching: "We do not have to hold legal title to property as long as we can control that property," (Why? he who has control, has defacto ownership)

1962....Russian premier Nikita Kruschev quote: "We will bury you. We will not have to conquer you by military means because you will vote it (communism) into office."
Looks like the boy was a profit.

[*flo*]

1962....Russian premier Nikita Kruschev quote: "We will bury you. We will not have to conquer you by military means because you will vote it (communism) into office."
Looks like the boy was a profit.

Posted by: TheAlamo | Nov 8, 2005 11:33:07 AM

Yeah...same guy took his shoe off, beating the podium with it...

Gov't provides many services which requires funding...mostly everything is regulated anymore...because people have discovered its either not healthy or its need for control for capital gain...America, the society we americans have taken for granted...and still operates with many freedoms...freedoms to choose...to visit or live about any place in the world.

[TheAlamo]

Yeah...same guy took his shoe off, beating the podium with it...

Gov't provides many services which requires funding...mostly everything is regulated anymore...because people have discovered its either not healthy or its need for control for capital gain...America, the society we americans have taken for granted...and still operates with many freedoms...freedoms to choose...to visit or live about any place in the world.

Posted by: *flo* | Nov 8, 2005 12:48:01 PM

So basically you are saying that you do not trust yourself to do the right thing for yourself and your family without government supervision? Flo, that is communistic. Not only that, where does anyone else get the right to make that decision for me? We live in a republic, not a democracy, and if you study the founders you will find taht this is the exact reason they steered us away from democracy--that fact that you now have power over my life and my decisions via "majority."
That is flat wrong, and is in fact communistic. This the express reason why we were made a republic, so that in the event 99.9999% of the people wanted to take away my right to choose my own destiny--they cound not. Now YOUR rights are subject to change at the whim of a "majority." Very dangerous way to live.

We still operate with "many freedoms." What happened to the rest of them? Why should we give them up? Who are "they" to take away my right as an individual?
Rights (specifically those enumerated in the Bill of Rights) are NOT GRANTED by governments. They are natural God-given rights that belong to all men/women. The only legal thing any overnment can do is uphold those rights. Otherwise, the government itself is criminal, since it has to devise means to "grant" those very same rights to a special "priviledged few" while discarding the rest of us.
Anytime any government infringes on those rights, short of you committing a crime against another person or their property, then it is government that is out of line--and acting illegally.
Sorry Flo, you are a victim of the public school system--owned and controlled by the government for THEIR own welfare--not yours.

[TheAlamo]

Yeah...same guy took his shoe off, beating the podium with it...

Gov't provides many services which requires funding...mostly everything is regulated anymore...because people have discovered its either not healthy or its need for control for capital gain...America, the society we americans have taken for granted...and still operates with many freedoms...freedoms to choose...to visit or live about any place in the world.

Posted by: *flo* | Nov 8, 2005 12:48:01 PM

So basically you are saying that you do not trust yourself to do the right thing for yourself and your family without government supervision? Flo, that is communistic. Not only that, where does anyone else get the right to make that decision for me? We live in a republic, not a democracy, and if you study the founders you will find taht this is the exact reason they steered us away from democracy--that fact that you now have power over my life and my decisions via "majority."
That is flat wrong, and is in fact communistic. This the express reason why we were made a republic, so that in the event 99.9999% of the people wanted to take away my right to choose my own destiny--they cound not. Now YOUR rights are subject to change at the whim of a "majority." Very dangerous way to live.

We still operate with "many freedoms." What happened to the rest of them? Why should we give them up? Who are "they" to take away my right as an individual?
Rights (specifically those enumerated in the Bill of Rights) are NOT GRANTED by governments. They are natural God-given rights that belong to all men/women. The only legal thing any overnment can do is uphold those rights. Otherwise, the government itself is criminal, since it has to devise means to "grant" those very same rights to a special "priviledged few" while discarding the rest of us.
Anytime any government infringes on those rights, short of you committing a crime against another person or their property, then it is government that is out of line--and acting illegally.
Sorry Flo, you are a victim of the public school system--owned and controlled by the government for THEIR own welfare--not yours.

[*flo*]

So basically you are saying that you do not trust yourself to do the right thing for yourself and your family without government supervision? Flo, that is communistic.

Anytime any government infringes on those rights, short of you committing a crime against another person or their property, then it is government that is out of line--and acting illegally.

Sorry Flo, you are a victim of the public school system--owned and controlled by the government for THEIR own welfare--not yours.

Posted by: TheAlamo | Nov 8, 2005 1:27:07 PM

The US is better operated then other nations, too bad there are no perfect nations. It better to think realistic and accept the many cases when decisions cannot be finalized without some sort of approval ...Like to see the many land owner win their law suits...
Don't consider myself any victim of such, shallow thinking to think otherwise...whichever works best for a person, public/private schools, home school or even thesis research ...affordable, quality education is not so difficult to find...the importance, the student is educated socially giving them the advantage to choose among other options.

Dan, sorry off topic....

[TheAlamo]

The US is better operated then other nations, too bad there are no perfect nations. It better to think realistic and accept the many cases when decisions cannot be finalized without some sort of approval ...Like to see the many land owner win their law suits...
Don't consider myself any victim of such, shallow thinking to think otherwise...whichever works best for a person, public/private schools, home school or even thesis research ...affordable, quality education is not so difficult to find...the importance, the student is educated socially giving them the advantage to choose among other options.

Dan, sorry off topic....

Posted by: *flo* | Nov 8, 2005 6:04:59 PM

Any diligent study in history will show that the US WAS better operated than other nations--because the government stayed out of the "operations," and stuck to its only viable legal position--that of protecting the persons and property of its citizens from criminals--and against foreign invasion. Now the government TAKES your property for various reasons of THEIR choosing.
We, only see "revolutions" as armed uprisings where the powers that be are taken out and replaced by a different system. The negative side to that type of takeover is that the citizenry has to make automatic changes to lifestyle and laws--in a very short period of time, and therefore, sometimes is subjected to "counter-revolutions" when the citizens realize that things were better 6 months previous to the new "leaders" taking over.

Here, the "revolution" has been a gradual process, in order to acclimate the population into submitting to total control. Hence government controlled schools, and propaganda. To settle for "well, we're still better than....." is no different than accepting defeat.

No way will I ever have the notion that you are not capable of making your own decisions, raising your children the way you see fit, or forcing you to accept me taking a payment for you for living on your own property. No way should a group of us be allowed to "supervise" your chiild rearing--based upon what WE FEEL is right... unless you are doing physical harm to those children...and if so, then that is the venue of the local police--not a "federal" social worker. No way would I support your subsidizing my children via welfare, which costs you the money you could have used to send your children to college. No way would I choose how YOU educated your children. I could go on, but it would take the rest of the night. You are just as valuable to this society as I am, or the president is. I am sorry that you feel differently.

I would hate to think that the guys at the Alamo, or San Jacinto, or Concord and Lexington got to thinking "realistically." If that were the case, you and I would not be having this conversation, and with the attacks on political speech, as you can see, they intend on eliminating these types of discussions. Of course, many will say "that will never happen." If history is correct, and if we continue down the same roads we are headed--it is guaranteed. Truth cannot stand light, and they will not allow the light to be shed on their illegal deeds and manipulations.

IF we are to stay free, then there shall be no infringement upon freedom of speech....for any reason--other than harm to a person or their property. The only reason someone would do something like that is if they don't want to be exposed.

My question to Americans is simple: Are you willing to settle for that? To be told what you can discuss, when you can discuss it, and you must abide by certain rules? Sorry. Not this boy.

You were in the militry. You were willing to risk your life for those very same principals that were handed down from a much smarter generation in 1776. And now you are willing to settle for less?

[*flo*]

Posted by: TheAlamo | Nov 8, 2005 8:17:03 PM

Sorry for what? Being an american?
Most people donot adapt well to changes ...especially when it doesn't accommodate their agenda, when laws have changed to control abuse or suit the 21st century facto...one always has the option to challenge those changes.

I didn't elect Bush in nor do (we the people) have the opportunity to elect his Admin...MO, Bush & Co has been nothing more then embarrassment to this country....

Alamo, San Jacinto, or Concord and Lexington all being part of a revolution to gain "independence" away from adversity...if you want to include this into free speech...ok..Looks like paranoia has set in when Representatives vote to do away with free speech in blogs/internet...(BTW, the free speech thing regarding blogs has to do with financial gain on a Representative's end), personally I would not agree with only advertisments on the net...don't think the general public would either.
Truthfully, shouldn't happen in my lifetime....especially when Intel leaks can't be controlled;)...Too many viligant people out there;

BTW Alamo...out of respect to Dan and his blog, comments off topic...should be directed to his "Open Thread"