Mr. Arafat, a career terrorist and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, has taken ill (Hat tip: Carine):

Palestinian officials tried to play down Arafat's health problems earlier Thursday, saying he performed Muslim prayers before dawn and ate a light breakfast of cornflakes and milk.

But the seriousness of his condition was underscored by the rushed arrival of Arafat's 41-year-old [high-maintenance] wife [and co-defalcator], Suha, who lives in Paris [slumming it at the exclusive four-star Hotel Bristol on rue Faubourg St Honore ] with their young daughter and has not seen her husband since 2001.

Arafat has been unable to hold down food, and also suffers from diarrhea, the associate said. At times, Arafat appeared confused, not recognizing some of his visitors, he added.

Palestinians across the Middle East anxiously, but quietly, monitored Arafat's health Thursday, but there was no mass vigil around his compound or any other public displays of support.

His doctors recommended he be moved to Paris, where he can receive better medical care. French President Jacques Chirac's office said France will send a plane to take him there.

Foreign Minister Michel Barnier gushed France's concern and undying partiality for the little chairman (Hat tip: Opinionated Blowhard):

"France, as I told you (Arafat) in Ramallah on June 30, will be always on your side to back your effort in favor of a just and negotiated peace," Barnier said.

"It is with concern and sympathy that I keep informed of the development of your health," said Barnier.

"I wish to express my most sincere wishes for your recovery, hoping that you can return rapidly to your place to lead the Palestinian Authority," he said.

For those, like M. Barnier, who are fighting back anxious tears, pace. The little chairman is safe in France's bosom at this moment, all personally arranged by Jack:

A French military jet that the government confirmed was carrying the 75-year-old Arafat landed at a military airfield outside Paris, and witnesses said he was quickly put on a helicopter and flown to the Hopital d'Instruction des Armees de Percy, southwest of the capital.

He looked pale and jaundiced, but tried to smile as loyalists whistled and chanted, "With our spirit and our blood, we will redeem you, Abu Ammar," using his nom de guerre. He was accompanied by his wife, Suha, 42, who had rushed to his side from exile in Paris.

The touching reunion of the sickly terrorist and the absentee wife prompted Jack to comment on the rightness of it all:

"It was natural that France, land of refuge, would not question the right of the president of the Palestinian Authority to come for medical treatment in our country," he told reporters after the signing of the EU constitution by EU leaders here.

Who knew France had dispersed such a "right" to the world? Probably not many French.

[All emphases added.]

Feel the love.

UPDATE 10.30.04: Another excellent opportunity to shut up. How will the claims of French citizens on French soil against a celebrity terrorist recently arrived on French soil play out in French law?

Geezus, with all these gushing sentiments and red carpet treatment the French are showering on a blood soaked child killer like Arafat, it makes you wonder if there is anyone the French scumbags will not welcome with open arms into their country?

Yes, but of course!

opinionated douchebag,

I remember when Ferdinand Marcos, the quintessential corrupted Asian dictator )like so many the US coveted in the 70s and 80's) was flown by the US to get treatment AND buried there temporarely.

Again, it's perfectly OK when Merkins do it.

Geezus, with all these gushing sentiments and red carpet treatment the French are showering on a blood soaked child killer like Arafat, it makes you wonder if there is anyone the French scumbags will not welcome with open arms into their country?

Wasn't Arafat on US soil?

Clinton shook hands with Arafat therefore America must have endorsed Israeli deaths? The simplistic mentality you're displaying is amazing. Black and white world, eh? And I suppose Israeli diplomats do not visit France? There are millions in this worls who wants a Palestinian state, even in the US. Arafat, who I'll conceide completely lost control, happens to be their representative, wether you like it or not.

What a simplistic moron you are, douchebag.

What a simplistic moron you are, douchebag.

What!? You mean to say my post didn't meet with your superior approval?

Look, everybody and their brother knows that France is regularly on her knees shlobbing the knobs of every uncircumcised middle eastern tyrant and African dictator, just like your grandma did for the SS. Don't believe it? Just google to find the numerous African and Middle Eastern 'summits' hosted by the French, in which the world's bloodiest murderers, many of whom propped up by the French govt, are wined and dined and embraced by the French.. all for crass financial gain. And also so the French can find an audience who will listen to their tales of long forgotten French glory. No surprise the overflowing praise now heaped upon the murderous Arafat by the French

Quite different from us allowing Arafat on our soil, with cooperation from Barak/Israel, for a peace summit in Camp David. You never heard pledges from America that we would "forever be at your side, my darling Yasser"

Ok zoomer, so now you've learned something about the world. It's time to take a bath now you filthy animal!

Look, everybody and their brother knows that France is regularly on her knees shlobbing the knobs of every uncircumcised middle eastern tyrant and African dictator, just like your grandma did for the SS.

Do you want a list of every tyrants or "freedom fighter" groups (murderers, as it turned out) the US has supported in the past decades, or are you so far out of touch with reality? As far as my grandma, her son never came back from a German internment camp, so keep your stupid comments for yourself.

all for crass financial gain

Oh I love that one. All governments are out for themselves, my naive friend. At least I admit it. As a Guardian reader commented the other day, "Americans can't admit any wrong doing or they implode". Would you care to know that France is on par with the US in foreign aid, and actually contributes more per capita?

You never heard pledges from America that we would "forever be at your side, my darling Yasser"

France has pledged that? Link? Again, would you care to know that the EU, as well as the US gives millions to Palestine, despite Arafat in power? Do you consider that blood-money? You really live in a black and white world, opinionated , with the US in some kind of untouchable state of grace while God winks at Dubya about the tens of thousands innocents you've killed in Irak (and Cambodia), to the greatest satisfaction of Mr. Bin Laden.

It's time to take a bath now you filthy animal!

And have another "supersized" cheese burger on me, you slob!

Do you want a list of every tyrants or "freedom fighter" groups (murderers, as it turned out) the US has supported in the past decades, or are you so far out of touch with reality?

The difference being of course, that any US 'support' of tyrants has been, almost without exception, part of our fight against Nazism, communism, and other enemies of freedom. For example, we allied ourselves with Stalin in order to defeat the Nazis, and after doing so, we rebuilt our defeated enemies. We toppled Saddam and are helping the Iraqis to rebuild their country.. at great cost in blood and money with no prospects of financial return.. 80% of the French people were so moronic and ignorant as to believe we went into Iraq to take their oil. The French believe this lie, of course, because they themselves are so thoroughly corrupt, they project their own vile motivations onto others.

Can anyone seriously imagine the self-centered French ever doing anything as magnanimous as the Marshall Plan? And buy a f*cking clue regarding your bogus comparison of charitable contributions, a comparison which is no doubt parrotted in your media to French sheep who believe it. Those comparisons are based solely on OECD contributions, a measurement which ignores the bulk of our aid which is outside of the UN's OECD..for example, the US gives more food aid than the rest of the world combined, but this doesn't "count" as foreign aid because it's not through the OECD.

France in contrast, to this very day continues to support the world's most murderous tyrants, not as part of any noble fight against communism or to promote freedom..Nope, France does it to rape and exploit those countries, just as she has been doing for hundreds of years through her brutal record of colonial oppression.

France in typical selfish fashion, tried to colonize Vietnam to rape that country of its resources. The US, on the other hand, fought to save it from Communism. Just this year, the French navy performed joint exercises with the communist Chinese for the purpose of intimidating Taiwanese free elections. Despicable, yes. But anything to sell more military hardware, right Frenchies?

"tens of thousands innocents you've killed in Irak (and Cambodia)" Yes, the same way we "killed" innocents in France when we liberated you ungrateful scum from the Nazis.

There is a HUGE difference in character between the US and France no matter how much you try to pretend otherwise. Your comment excusing French corruption "All governments are out for themselves" reveals what lowlifes you French truly are. "Everybody's corrupt, everybody's doing it" I can't hear you na-na-na-na-na. God you people are pathetic

Have you taken that bath yet, you filthy animal?

For example, we allied ourselves with Stalin in order to defeat the Nazis, and after doing so, we rebuilt our defeated enemies.

I'll grant you that one (Russia sacrified 25 million people in WW2), but you will have to come up with more examples, if you know any. I'm talking about "murderers", not legitimate troops against a common enemy in a just war.

France in contrast, to this very day continues to support the world's most murderous tyrants, not as part of any noble fight against communism or to promote freedom..

Give me a list and I'll do the same. btw, is Saudi Arabia an example of "Freedom"? Is China still communist? Funny how this becomes less relevant when huge US and Euro contracts are at stake.

Welcome to the real world. Yep, you're hopelessly naive, blowhard.

And buy a f*cking clue regarding your bogus comparison of charitable contributions, a comparison which is no doubt parrotted in your media to French sheep who believe it.

Actually, "The Economist", a US periodical, published a few months ago. It's no secret that the US is the largest donor in foreign aid, but donates a relatively small ammount as a percentage of its GDP compared to other industrialized nations. But my point, blowhard, is that even the French scum evil-doers contribute their share of aid as well as recently treating and adopting orphans of the Balkans war, for instance.

France in typical selfish fashion, tried to colonize Vietnam to rape that country of its resources.

"Tried to"? It did for 100 years. (it also brought education, infrastructure etc.... the only Western street names still allowed by the Communist party in Vietnam are those of Pasteur and the catholic missionary De Rhodes, not Johnson or McNamara). That's what nations did in those days, I plead guilty.

p.s. Not a whole lot different to wiping out indigenous people or enslaving people and segregating them until a few decades ago, eh blowhard?

The US, on the other hand, fought to save it from Communism.

Yes, great job you did, except you did not have a clue that it was a nationalist cause, despite France's warning.

Just this year, the French navy performed joint exercises with the communist Chinese for the purpose of intimidating Taiwanese free elections. Despicable, yes. But anything to sell more military hardware, right Frenchies?

Fair point, although I'm not sure about "intimidating Taiwan", they're still good clients (weapons, Airbus etc...);-)

Still, not a great marketing idea.

As far as weapon sales, the US ranks far ahead of France, the UK and Russia. But I'm sure these sales are strictly for "pacific" purposes...

There is a HUGE difference in character between the US and France no matter how much you try to pretend otherwise.

True to some degree if you want, but you're just as good at double-standards and self-interest, don't kid yourself.

God you people are pathetic

Just a little more cynical and realistic than our young cousins. God doesn't speak through us, unfortunately.

"but you will have to come up with more examples, if you know any. I'm talking about "murderers", not legitimate troops against a common enemy in a just war"

You're the one saying that the US supported murderers. When I responded that in cases in which that was true, it was in the context of fighting Nazism or communism, our alliance with Stalin to defeat the Nazis being a prime example. The Soviets, Cubans, and East Germans were quite actively trying to spread their communist oppression worldwide, and we had to get in bed with some lesser-evil scumbags in order to oppose the communist threat. What's France's excuse?

Since you made the BS claim, I'm calling you to name names. France will stoop to anything, supporting murders and tyrants only for euros for themselves. I'll name names..French support of Libya, Burma, Saddam, the Hutus in Rwanda, in Sudan the French provided to military intelligence to the terrorist supporting Sudanese govt to be used in ethnic cleansing of non-muslims in order to protect Total oil interests. France actively dealt with those butchers and supported them for money. Scumbags. The US, on the other hand, refuses profitable trade with Cuba because of the enormous scope of their human rights abuses and mass murders. I look forward to your equivalent list of US support of butchers simply for financial gain.

Even in Afghanistan, where the French have something like only 500 troops (compared to 5,000 troops in 'former' colonies), the French insisted on a large Alcatel contract (and other concessions?), because with France, it's only about the $$

That is precisely why France cannot believe the US would take on the task of removing Saddam and helping Iraqis to rebuild their country without a financial return. France's corrupt and self centered culture would never permit it

"(it also brought education, infrastructure etc.... the only Western street names still allowed by the Communist party in Vietnam are those of Pasteur and the catholic missionary De Rhodes, not Johnson or McNamara). That's what nations did in those days, I plead guilty." And you call ME naive? Don't you just love how the French romanticize their brutal colonializations, no mention of their mass murders (French killing over 1 million Algerians, 300,000+ killed by French in Cameroun, among other French atrocities), torture chambers, etc., much of it done within the past 40 - 50 years. Frenchmen only see themselves as having brought "education, culture" etc to the natives. And at this very moment, there are still 1,000's French troops actively stationed in African countries, the purpose of which is to control and oppress them. Equivalent examples from the US? I won't hold my breath

Here's a typical example of culturally enlightened Frenchmen bringing ‘civilization’ to colonial subjects

Actually, "The Economist", a US periodical,

Actually zoomer, "The Economist" is a UK periodical, not a US one..and I am quite familiar with their article. It has been thoroughly debunked as it only counted foreign aid channelled through the UN OECD, and that's not an honest measure. No surprise that the French, living in a media information cocoon, are unaware of this debunking. The US is the runaway leader by far on foreign aid and charitable giving, both on a total basis AND per capita basis. The self centered French aren't even close

What's this crap you threw out earlier "tens of thousands innocents you've killed in Irak (and Cambodia)" What in the hell are you saying?

You're the one saying that the US supported murderers. When I responded that in cases in which that was true, it was in the context of fighting Nazism or communism, our alliance with Stalin to defeat the Nazis being a prime example. The Soviets, Cubans, and East Germans were quite actively trying to spread their communist oppression worldwide, and we had to get in bed with some lesser-evil scumbags in order to oppose the communist threat.

Ah yes, "Communist threat". Better supporting friends like Marcos, Duvallier, Noriega, Pinochet, Somoza, Pol Pot (a direct consequence of the Cambodian war, see my last post), Diem, Bautista, Doe, Suharto, Botha, or the wonderful Idi Amin of Uganda, fiercly "anti-communist", responsible for 300 000 brutal deaths, supported by the UK and by the CIA through weapons, helicopters and "police training", in supressing civil unrest ("communists", no doubt). Amin was responsible for downing a French airliner over Lybia. He later retired in Saudi Arabia (what are friends for?) and died peacefully in his sleep.

Come on blowhard, the US has a history of supporting bloody tyrants before realizing it wasn't a good idea after all. For some reason, double-standards don't seem to apply to you.

The US, on the other hand, refuses profitable trade with Cuba

Ooooh, how considerate of you. Why would you give a shit about Cuba when communist China is so much more profitable? Did I mention double-standard?

I look forward to your equivalent list of US support of butchers simply for financial gain.

Everything comes down to financial gain, blowhard, or rather regional stabilization out of self-interest, i.e., Rumsfeld's little visit with our favorite tyran. Why does the US support Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, knowing full well these regimes are the hotbeds for fundamentalism? Regional stability in the end means self-interest.

Don't you just love how the French romanticize their brutal colonializations, no mention of their mass murders (French killing over 1 million Algerians, 300,000+ killed by French in Cameroun, among other French atrocities), torture chambers, etc., much of it done within the past 40 - 50 years. Frenchmen only see themselves as having brought "education, culture" etc to the natives.

Didn't I "plead guilty" for that? Different times, different attitudes. Today France is one of Vietnam's biggest benefactors, especially in hospitals funding, by the way.

And at this very moment, there are still 1,000's French troops actively stationed in African countries, the purpose of which is to control and oppress them.

Of course it helps when French troops evacuate your stranded citizens in Liberia and Ivory Coast, less than a year ago. What are US businessmen and their families doing in French ex-colonies, Sherlock, safari-hunting? French troops were asked to intervene, just a little detail. Next time you drink your cup of hot cocoa, don't complain.

torture chambers

I admit the Abu Grahib prison "2004 treatment" was much more compassionate.

Equivalent examples from the US? I won't hold my breath

Slavery? Segragation? Forceful "land grabing" (check your history)? Noooo, of course you are completely innocent of any abuse. Did I mention double-standard?

Here's a typical example of culturally enlightened Frenchmen bringing ‘civilization’ to colonial subjects

And here's the equivalent . Like I've said, different times, different mentality. It's so easy to dig up the past isn't it?

AND per capita basis

Nope. Not per capita.

What's this crap you threw out earlier "tens of thousands innocents you've killed in Irak (and Cambodia)" What in the hell are you saying?

Oh, this and that, totalling about half a million death, but who's counting blowhard?

Oh, and opinionated (forgive me, the list was so long I almost forgot this one):

Remind me who put "anti-communist" Saddam in power again?

Zoomer, it's not just that I disagree w/you here, I am truly astonished at the depth of your dishonesty and ignorance. Your wild claims that we "supported" the likes of Duvalier (retired in France), Pol Pot (!), Noriega (forcibly removed from his dictatorship by US troops) etc., and your incredible claim that the US "put" Saddam in power are worthy of moonbat status. As I have argued before, one of the primary differences between the French and Americans is that the French are fundamentally a more dishonest culture, more willing to lie. Your post is another prime example

Pol Pot - I guess if you call US military incursions into Cambodia trying to kill Viet Cong as 'support" for Pol Pot, then there is not much I can do to help you. God you are a lying idiot

Idi Amin - What the hell are you talking about with US support of Amin? Wait, let me guess, French papers have him linked to Halliburton, right? Amin got in bed early with Libya (a terrorist country France most definitely supported) which put him on our shit-list over 30 years ago. Even before that, I'm not aware of any significant support given to him by the US.

Duvalier - once again, what in the hell are you talking about US support for Papa Doc (or Baby Doc for that matter)? Are you counting humanitarian support as support for their regime? At least one of the Duvaliers retired in France, not welcome here in the US.

Diem - After briefly "supporting" him fighting communists (800,000 boat people can tell you more about that), once it became apparent what a scumbag Diem was, he was overthrown in a US approved coup. Another fine example of unwavering US 'support'. Zoomer what are you reading to come up with these dishonest moral equivalencies?

F. Marcos - democratically elected, after he lost election to Aquino, US pressured him to step down.. wow, such unwavering US support

Suharto - Oh yes of course, Suharto's killing and persecutions of Christians and nationalizing of the oil companies made him immediate best-pal status with the US. The US condemned his human rights abuses, and supported his fight against communism

As I've already freely admitted, bad things did happen as side effects of the Cold War. In war (as opposed to French style colonial rape of nations for selfish greed) you have to make tradeoffs, and you are often forced to choose among evils. As part of a decades-long effort to prevent the global spread of Stalinist communism, in some countries the easiest defense was to give support at some level (never unconditional support) for a local strong man. He might have been a brutal dictator, and much of their brutality and corruption got a pass from the US, as long as they kept their nations from becoming communist

Was that wrong in an absolute sense? Yes. Was it the wrong thing to do at the time? Probably not. If we hadn't taken such actions, what would have happened? French morons like you never consider this. In cases where Communist revolutionaries did take over, the result was complete disaster. Marcos and Suharto may have been corrupt and brutal, but they never caused anything like the kind of human disaster which took place in Cambodia after the Khmer Rouge came into power, or produced the kind of hellhole which still exists in North Korea. If one accepted the overall strategy of the Cold War (containment as a way of avoiding a nuclear exchange), some level of support for the local strong man was one of the most effective ways of achieving it, and in many cases was the only way.

With benefit of hindsight, that policy actually was important. Stalinism was ultimately a failure, but it might have spread very widely and caused amazing amounts of hardship and death before it finally collapsed. And despite our best efforts it did spread to a lot of places, and it still limps along in a few of them. Now that the cold war is over, there's no longer any valid reason for that kind of thing, unless of course, you are French, in which case then military interference, murder, and exploitation of native peoples go on to this very day.. not as part of some higher noble goal such as fighting communist oppression, but simply murderous greed. And that, zoomer, is the difference between the US and France no matter how much you pretend otherwise

Please note a common thread in all your examples: As with the case now in Iraq, NONE of those alleged incidents of US 'support' of tyrants were done out of French-style theft and rape of a country for financial gain (while proclaiming during the murdering that "we[France] are only bringing culture and education" to the natives). Hindsight 20-20, mistakes in judgment were made by the US (such as initial support of Diem) in some cases, but then corrected, and always with the goal of fighting greater threats such as communism, which history has shown beyond question to be the most murderous ideology in modern history

The US has spilled its blood and lost money saving the world from communist threats, while rebuilding Germany and Japan at our expense. And what has France done?

1. French support of Saddam. Support so deep that Total was given contingent contracts at enormous bribe margins. French officials knee deep in scandals surrounding the oil-for-food program. And what was France's 'higher goal' in supporting a mass murderer like Saddam?

2. In recent years, Human rights watch and others have documented France providing financial and military intelligence to the Sudanese govt, a govt which supports terrorists and engages in slave trading. That military intelligence was knowingly provided by France for ethnic cleansing in the southern oil fields of Total. Diplomatically, France has recently actively tried to get the Human rights classification changed for Sudan's butcher government As I've said before, France truly is more like a Syria or a Pakistan than a western country

3. France maintained brutal colonial rule on Algeria through the 1960's. While the French sanctimoneously point their fingers at the US over underwear being put on prisoners in an isolated case in Abu Ghraib, they themselves made widespread systematic use of Nazi-like torture chambers, torture chambers which were actively used all the way up to 1960's (and beyond?). This was not something the French did hundreds of years ago, this is recent history. In typical French fashion, France invaded Algeria to steal their oil and murder their people. The scope of the killings by the French were of enormous Khmer Rouge-like proportions: 1 million Algerians killed by the French. Insight into French character: During the genocidal massacre at Setif in 1945, French murdered in cold blood 45,000 innocent civilians following an unarmed protest. NOTHING in US History can compare with this (not-so-long-ago) kind of unprovoked French savagery. The French were not at war with Algerians at that time and the Algerians were unarmed. Algerians who had fought Nazis for the French came home after WWII to find their families slaughtered by their French 'allies'. Another telling insight into French character: The French government did not officially acknowledge the Algerian war of independence until 1999. Like I said, France has a culture of dishonesty and deception

4. French support of Hutu tribe in Rwanda during their genocide of 800,000 Tsustis. What is it with you Frenchies supporing and protecting mass murdering child killers?

5. French military directly involved in the genocide of between 300,000 and 500,000 in Camoroun between 1958 - 1970, violently suppressing the Bamileke and Bassa in their struggle for independence from the French. Between Algeria, Rwanda, and Cameroun, the numbers killed by the French (directly and through their surrogates) are so large, that you really have to go to Hitler to come up with similar numbers slaughtered. Once again, NOTHING even close to this scale in modern American history

In addition to the above, even today thousands of French troops throughout Africa controlling those countries, and French patronage of middle eastern tyrants and African butchers as evidenced by their numerous African and middle-east 'summits', often denouncing western values at these summits.. all just for money and prestige. France now sells sensitive military hardware to China over EU objections. France is unique, in that they have demonstrated that they will not hesitate to sell out western civilization for money.

As for French donated hospitals in Vietnam, the US has also given humanitarian assistance to the Vietnamese, but without the French-like corruption associated with the donations.. As France has proven countless times before, French "charity" almost never comes without corrupt strings attached.. there can be no honest doubt that France is engaged in massive graft and corruption with the Vietnamese communist government as is always the case when "doing business" with the French

Pol Pot - I guess if you call US military incursions into Cambodia trying to kill Viet Cong as 'support" for Pol Pot, then there is not much I can do to help you. God you are a lying idiot.

God you're in such denial. Pol Pot filled the vacuum left after the Camodian bombings (in which you don't deny the estimated 30,000-50,000 innocent deaths by US warplanes. "Communists" who turned out to be peasants clueless about your "great intentions").

Pol Pot, an enemy of the Soviet Union, also gained support from Thailand and the US. In particular, the US and the PRC vetoed the allocation of Cambodia's United Nations General Assembly seat to a representative of Heng Samrin's government. The US directly and indirectly supported Pol Pot, including for example funneling aid raised for Cambodian relief to the Khmer Rouge. Pol Pot espoused a radically revised variant of Maoism adapted to Khmer nationalism. Envisaging a perfectly egalitarian agrarianism, the Khmer Rouge favored a completely agrarian society to the point that all modern technological contrivances were banned. An autonomist, Pol Pot was quite the opponent of Soviet orthodoxy. Because he was anti-Soviet, the United States, Thailand and People's Republic of China considered him preferable to the pro-Vietnamese government.

Is it hard for you to understand that the US (as well as France) in order to acheive its own agenda, didn't see the butchering of tens of thousands as a priority? Do you think I'm the only one to know that? Where do you live, in a hole?

Amin - What the hell are you talking about with US support of Amin? Wait, let me guess, French papers have him linked to Halliburton, right? Amin got in bed early with Libya (a terrorist country France most definitely supported) which put him on our shit-list over 30 years ago. Even before that, I'm not aware of any significant support given to him by the US.

The CIA funded Idi Amin the same way it did for a multitude of other African and south American states. For you to deny that is incredibly naive, but what's new. Btw, in 1984, France averted an imminant all-out attack on Lybia's forces over a dispute over Chad. French paratroopers were on red alert, Quadaffi backed out. To say that France "supported" Quadaffi's terrorist activities (guess who's making up with the colonel now?) is simply outrageous.

BTW, There is a common element between you, Pato, cannon, pro-freedom etc... that's truly alarming (i.e. France "supporting" terrorism). You don't have a clue what you're lying about.

At least one of the Duvaliers retired in France, not welcome here in the US.

Well we all wink at our little monsters, Blowhard, the same way you welcomed Marcos on the red carpet and kept him on life support, or quietly evacuated the Bin Laden family the day after 9/11.

Diem - After briefly "supporting" him fighting communists (800,000 boat people can tell you more about that), once it became apparent what a scumbag Diem was, he was overthrown in a US approved coup. Another fine example of unwavering US 'support'.

Absolutely. You supported him (as well as anti-French nationalists at the early stage of the Indo-China conflict before, once again, changing your mind and siding with France) while he repressed hundred of thousands, even running prison camps reminiscent of WW2 Germany. Oooops, screwed up again. Next tyran please.

F. Marcos - democratically elected, after he lost election to Aquino, US pressured him to step down.. wow, such unwavering US support

Unwavering support indeed (US naval bases). A corrupted looter. Yes, "democratically" elected and re-elected, just like most right-wing tyrans are, give us a break. The US pressured him to step down when his corruption became a little too embarassing. Again Blowhard, same story, same pattern.

Marcos and Suharto may have been corrupt and brutal, but they never caused anything like the kind of human disaster which took place in Cambodia after the Khmer Rouge came into power, or produced the kind of hellhole which still exists in North Korea.

My guess is that you've never been in any of these countries. But you're right, corruption and abject poverty are preferable to mass killings, in a way. even French evil-doers would agree with you on that.

In cases where Communist revolutionaries did take over, the result was complete disaster.

I don't totally disagree. Of course the alternative, in the case of "anti-communist" tyrans we just mentioned, proved to be a lot better. "Better dead than Red", and that applies to you too, world!

but then corrected, and always with the goal of fighting greater threats such as communism

Again, I somewhat agree (communism is a dead-end state) but like I've said, Bloward, China is still communist, still repressive, but as long as there's something in it for us, we're always willing to forgive them, no?

exploitation of native peoples go on to this very day

Just ask the NIKE corporation, among many others. Of course, such US corporations make kids "earn a living", while France well... just "exploits" them, there's the difference, eh Blowhard? If you're so concerned about that (and that's a legitimate concern), I've got a very long list of imported products you might want to consider avoiding. Another shining example of double-talking on your part, Blow-hard.

Zoomer, I'm not going to deal w/every factual mistatement and lie that you've thrown out right now, but 3 particularly outrageous claims you've made I would like you to explain:

1. Your insistence that the US "supported" Pol Pot in no uncertain terms. Please provide evidence of any sort of meaningful US support of Pol Pot outside of humanitarian aid

In 1975, the Khmer Rouge, led by Pol Pot, seized control of Phnom Penh and overthrew the U.S.-backed government of Lon Nol. Pol Pot, a follower of Stalinist communism, mass murderer, and enemy of the US

2. Please explain with more detail exactly how the US "put" Saddam into power as you claim above. I'm really interested to gain some insight into this brilliant piece of French "logic". Did you read that the US installed Saddam into power from the same French sources which proclaim that 9/11 was all a US govt plot?

3. And finally, your comment:

My guess is that you've never been in any of these countries. But you're right, corruption and abject poverty are preferable to mass killings, in a way

First of all, how in the hell would you know where I've traveled or where I've lived? More importantly, what difference does that make you idiot?

Are you seriously arguing here, that overall corruption and poverty is worse in Indonesia or Phillipines as compared to Cambodia or N. Korea?? Because it sure as hell sounds as if you're really that stupid and ignorant.

My exact words were: "Marcos and Suharto may have been corrupt and brutal, but they never caused anything like the kind of human disaster which took place in Cambodia after the Khmer Rouge came into power, or produced the kind of hellhole which still exists in North Korea."

Are you saying that those words are anything other than a 100% statement of fact? Because your weasel answer sure as hell sounds as if you don't believe it to be the case... worse poverty in Indonesia than N. Korea, right zoomer?

You voice all these strong opinions as if you have a clue. Are you ever embarrassed by your ignorance? Just curious

I've said, Bloward, China is still communist, still repressive, but as long as there's something in it for us, we're always willing to forgive them, no?

More dishonesty, equating China with N. Korea. China began sweeping reforms back in the 80's dismantling much of its communist structure. Huge chunks of government industry were privatized, workers can buy and own cars and housing... some govt leader have stated that future tax reforms will be like "Reagonomics"

Like France, China is corrupt and willing to sell weapons to unstable threatening regimes.. but these days China is more like France than N. Korea

Blow-hard,

There are lots of sources that demonstrate full well the US' indirect complicity with the Khmer Rouge. No matter what I will supply you, you will deny it anyway. By "complicity" I do not imply "direct involvement" in those massacres, but "turning a blind eye", which ammounts to a big part of responsability.

Former US National Security Adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, on China and the Khmer Rouge, 1979:

“I encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot. Pol Pot was an abomination. We could never support him, but China could.” According to Brzezinski, the USA “winked, semi-publicly” at Chinese and Thai aid to the Khmer Rouge.

Well well well... just like I said. Winking at "communist China" (of all people) when it suits you, in order to keep a bloody tyrant in power... Are you getting the picture now, or are you going to keep denying anything you don't want to hear?

Since you like to state that France "supports" terrorists, is it safe to assume the US "supported" Pol Pot? I told you, Blow-hard, governments always turn a blind eye when it's politically convenient for them. And guess what? I do not necessarly blame the US for everything. You, on the other hand, like to pontificate without the slightest clue, high on your pedestal, above any suspicion of any wrong doing (and a terrible knowledge of historical facts). You're a fool.

As for the CIA connection with Saddam, it's really no secret. Im not really sure if you're plain stupid or you're just pulling my leg.

Did you read that the US installed Saddam into power from the same French sources which proclaim that 9/11 was all a US govt plot?

Many Americans think 9/11 was a government plot too (I've met one of them). Fools. No Blowhard, I understand you don't have a high opinion of me but I wouldn't go that far. BTW, note that I make the effort of always quoting US sources, not French ones.

Are you seriously arguing here, that overall corruption and poverty is worse in Indonesia or Phillipines as compared to Cambodia or N. Korea?? Because it sure as hell sounds as if you're really that stupid and ignorant.

Did I imply anything? Sorry for my ignorance, the Phillipines and Inonesia only rank 102th and 133rd out of 145 nations in the corruption index. Great examples, Blow-hard.

worse poverty in Indonesia than N. Korea, right zoomer?

Did I ever suggest that? Show me where.

You voice all these strong opinions as if you have a clue. Are you ever embarrassed by your ignorance? Just curious

Don't make up questions based on statements I've never made. Should I re-read you some unanswered points I made? You can't even recognize facts from your own US sources, who's clueless?

Get out of your trailer, Blow-hard, go to a library, travel (Indonesia's OK, they love you there. Especially in the poor muslim suburbs)...

And don't forget to vote.

The question was not Saddam's "CIA connection". My question was in regards to your specific comment:

"Remind me who put "anti-communist" Saddam in power again?"

How does one make the leap from using Saddam on a CIA contract mission(s), to putting him into power? That's what I'd like to know

Along similar lines, you earlier claimed that because the CIA gave some money to Idi Amin, that meant the CIA is "funding" him. Oh really? It's damn likely that the CIA gave him some money or helicopter parts, or whatever to Amin and other connections, for info on the Soviets who were a bigger threat..as opposed to French-style corrupt dealings where only selfish financial greed is at stake. No doubt you are unaware the US closed it's Uganda embassy in the early 70's and pulled up stakes there. Do you see how dishonest your definitions of "support" and "funded by" are?

Regarding your comments about Indonesia and Phillipines compared to N. Korea and Cambodia: Did I imply anything?. You did a helluva lot more than just 'imply'. You said: My guess is that you've never been in any of these countries. But you're right, corruption and abject poverty are preferable to mass killings, in a way As if the tradeoff was corruption & poverty (under corrupt strong men) vs mass killings (under communism) without the poverty or corruption, rather than corruption & poverty vs far worse corruption, far worse poverty AND mass killings under communism.

Regarding your quote from Zbigniew Brzezinski, on China and the Khmer Rouge in 1979, you do realize that Pol Pot was out of power at the time of Brzezinski's statement..don't you zoomer? And explain for me, how his statement that "We could never support him" translates into your original claim that the US "supported" Pol Pot, someone our country fought against

Your original claim was that the US "supported" Pol Pot, not that we looked the other way.

Support is selling 100 advanced Mirage aircraft to Khaddafi in Libya in the 70's. Selling it to him after it became known he paid a reward to PLO terrorists who had killed jews at the '72 Olympics in Munich. And after it was clear that Khaddafi had set up terrorist training camps in his country. France had no problem supporting a terrorist country like Libya with the most advanced weaponry.. that is, until Khaddafi invaded French interests in Chad. Suddenly, it became a problem then, huh?

And don't forget to vote.

And you don't forget to bathe you filthy animal!

If you still deny the CIA directly assisted Saddam to rise in power, you're a blind fool and an idiot, indeed. Still not convinced?

Along similar lines, you earlier claimed that because the CIA gave some money to Idi Amin, that meant the CIA is "funding" him. Oh really?

OK, wrong word. The CIA "supplied" Idi Amin with helicopters, intelligence, arms and "police training". Money, Intel, arms... what's the difference?

As if the tradeoff was corruption & poverty (under corrupt strong men) vs mass killings (under communism) without the poverty or corruption, rather than corruption & poverty vs far worse corruption, far worse poverty AND mass killings under communism.

You're just babbling nonsense here.

Corruption and poverty are not synonymous with single regime type (look at ENRON and HALLIBURTON, eh eh). Better be poor and abused under a US-backed right wing dictatorship than under a communist regime, eh blow-hard?

Your original claim was that the US "supported" Pol Pot, not that we looked the other way

You supported him indirectly. You just hate facts, don't you? Read again.

Regarding your quote from Zbigniew Brzezinski, on China and the Khmer Rouge in 1979, you do realize that Pol Pot was out of power at the time of Brzezinski's statement..don't you zoomer?

Uh... yes the quote was from a 1979 interview, and?.... You're babbling again, Blow-hard, is it naptime?

Here's more, dimwit.

Support is selling 100 advanced Mirage aircraft to Khaddafi in Libya in the 70's. Selling it to him after it became known he paid a reward to PLO terrorists who had killed jews at the '72 Olympics in Munich.

Not that I don't beleive you but do you have a detailed link? That's not "support", that's greed since contracts of this scale are usually ratified long before the actual delivery, btw. Still, bad, bad evil-doer French. Is France one of the most greedy western powers, willing to put principles aside for profit? Absolutely. Can you say the same or does God speaks through you too?

9 out of 10 of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis, Saudi Arabia is THE hotbed of anti-US fundamentalism with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia has close ties with (and supposedly funds) Hamas, the PLO etc..., we all know the Saudis speak from both sides of their mouth yet your support them unconditionally. What do you call that, Blo-hard?

Requested links: Libya purchases Mirage aircraft following US and UK boycotts because of terrorist concerns with Libya. And here

Zoomer, hiring Saddam in his early years to do some CIA dirty work against Soviet interests does not equal the US installing him into power. And links showing that he once did some work for the CIA are unconvincing evidence that the US installed him into power. But assuming for the sake of argument that the US did 'put' Saddam into power (we didn't), what's your point? Because we supported elements of the Taliban in their (noble) fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan, following your 'logic' does that mean it wasn't the right thing to do at the time? Because we supported a monster like Stalin against Hitler, was that the wrong thing to do at the time?

You just hate facts, don't you?

I do? The problem zoomer, is that your "facts" regarding alleged US support of Pol Pot consist of articles written by anti-vietnam war activist John Pilger. Very clever, providing the re-posted link through Free Republic. In fact, both of your articles "proving" that the US supported Pol Pot are written by Pilger who writes articles for counterpunch.org . Counterpunch is moonbat headquarters, having actually written articles seriously comparing Bush to Hitler.

I'm not prepared to say Pilger is wrong based on his extreme political leanings, but I've read Pilger relied on a purported CIA contact who is officially denied by Thailand who were supposedly involved according to him

Since Pilger himself claims that US support of Pol Pot was in the 80's, I find this difficult to square given Reagan's hardcore, and I mean reallly hardcore opposition to communism... Reagan denounced Pol Pot in many of his speeches and was near-fanatical in his fight against communism, and yet we're supposed to believe that Reagan was really into propping up a Communist movement in Cambodia? Seriously, this makes no sense at all, which is probably why the story is believed hook, line and sinker by so many ignorant idiotic Frenchmen..it falls into their weak-minded, logic-free conspiracy theories of the eeevil US

Apparently the Cambodian refugees aren't buying either, given their tribute to Reagan. Would they have done such a thing for someone thought to have "supported" Pol Pot? and here

In the cold war we were fighting a communist enemy who had taken control of Eastern Europe, Cuba,much of Africa, and much of Asia, and trying to spread further. Fighting this meant that we sometimes had to back unsavory people..That's the reality of what has to be done if you get involved in opposing a worldwide movement of death and repression like Communism. Fortunately for ungrateful scum like the French, the United States took a stand and opposed them, and the world is a far better place because of our sacrifices.

It's interesting that it never occurs to you morons that the alternative to the back-a-local-strongman approach would be to invade a country and install democracy...But wait.. that's what we did in Iraq! yet we're being criticized and smeared by the very same idiots like you who said we were so wrong and evil by doing the opposite during the Cold War.

It's the worst type of horrible revisionist history to say that Communism was no threat and was destined to collapse even if we'd done nothing, but that's typical of what you (and most Frenchmen) do when you dishonestly minimize the communist threat

Is it hard for you to understand that the US (as well as France) in order to acheive its own agenda

And therein lies the the problem. The US agenda was a noble fight against communism and nazism.. the French agenda was nothing but self-centered rape and exploitation of countries for selfish gain. France has no honor and everyone knows it

Given France's whining self-righteous condemnations of Guantanamo and our Patriot act, this is interesting.