Smear campaign against France?
Several times on this blog I have corrected (or have attempted to correct) faulty impressions that circulate in the media about what the French government and the French people stand for. My theme have been that France and the US are really not that different: critiques of French policy apply equally to the US. My only deviation from this message has been to point out that France has been acting more in the spirit of the diplomacy that has emerged since the end of the Second World War than has the US in recent years.
The
French ministry of foreign affairs has charged that there is a
smear campaign underfoot in the US media to discredit the French government. I don't have the competency to judge whether this is true, or that the specific press stories to which they are objecting are completely inaccurate. However, I would point out the following:
A Washington Times story reporting U.S. intelligence sources had received information suggesting French officials in Syria were helping members of the Iraqi leadership escape the U.S. military by issuing French passports to them.
"The passport story had them really hot," said a senior U.S. official. "They delivered passionate, heated and repeated denials that any such thing was occurring."
The official said there was no evidence of the French issuing such passports, and noted the White House never said there was any such evidence.
--CNN
The administration is admitting that false stories are circulating about French involvement in Iraq. I don't know if the French foreign ministry is also claiming that the oil corruption charge is true, or if the White House is saying that the charges about such corruption are unfounded. However, when I first learned of French investments in Iraqi oil before this year, I thought that there would be some corruption involved--it's just how oil works.
A Sad Note
June Carter Cash died. She wrote the beautiful song "Ring of Fire."
Posted by:
Nathanael / 2:00 AM :
(0) comments
Thursday, May 15, 2003
Posted by:
Nathanael / 12:13 PM :
(0) comments
Wednesday, May 14, 2003
Please: Somebody make a movie out of this!
I find that the Texas redistricting fiasco is too funny. It must be the best entertainment I have had all month. Look at the following blogs for great rap-ups and blow-by-blows:
Burnt Orange
The Carpetbagger report
Posted by:
Nathanael / 5:16 PM :
(0) comments
I promised myself that I would not blog today. I could not resist at least a little.
Kirk to the Klingons: We come in peace!
Kirk to Sulu: Shoot to kill!!!
Yes, I ripped that off from
Star Trekkin'. However, it fits the
new US occupational policy on Iraqi looters. How long will it take for the cry to come out: "All he wanted was a loaf of bread to feed his family!" The occupational forces need to act like policemen rather than executioners (but they have inadequately prepared, as I have said below.) I was amused on Monday when the Defense department sent a letter to the UN saying that it was taking over vital policing functions by their rights under the Hague Conventions and the Geneva conventions. The administration is trying to rewrite these treaties. There are no rights that an occupying power can claim whenever it suits them. They are obligations that are pre-assigned to occupying authorities. They have no choice, they must be prepared to provide security.
Posted by:
Nathanael / 1:57 PM :
(0) comments
Monday, May 12, 2003
My Birthday
Like a fine LP, I am now a dizzy 33. However, I have so much to do today that I won't have the time to give any detailed and well-referenced responses and commentaries. Instead, I can give a few quick things to keep minds thinking:
1. Money saved from tax cuts in the last twenty years have not been used to update methods of production in the US. They have been used for personal luxury items. Problems of industrial production that were typical to the 1970s have yet to be solved. Any reform of current financial policies must make more use of tax incentives for investment in the real economy rather than simple increases of short-term consumption or in "paper" investments.
2. The energy industry is rife with corruption, be it American, British, French, ... . It part it is because it is the nature of the industry: producers aim at market domination, which requires unlimited supplies of energy. The corruption practiced by French oil companies in Iraq is hardly unique: one need only look at the relationships between Standard Oil and the Nigerian government or the Angolan government-French arms traders-Bush administrators triangle (so called Angolagate abroad, which doesn't get much attention in the US because it involves neither sex nor Democrats.) Domestically, the energy industry is pushing the Bush administration into repealing environmental legislation form even Nixon's administration. This legislation will keep old, polluting factories running throughout the South for decades (they have no other incentives to modernize.) They have also been involved in market manipulation (California brownouts.)
3. If the Democrats want seriously to challenge Bush in 2004, they must nominate John Edwards (Senator from South Carolina.) The Republicans have constructed a well-disciplined voting block that will not stray. Democrats, in response, must construct a united front of the left. They must forget trying to appeal to moderate republicans: they will still vote for Bush even if they disagree with him because they will not want to appear "liberal." They need someone who can bring the left together, someone who is critical of the right, not too conservative himself, and not too liberal. Edwards seems most able to be critical of the current administration without appearing too far to the left or too obscure or too confrontational (sorry, , Sen. Lieberman, Gov. Dean.) The focus of the primaries must be on how Democrats can defeat Bush.
Later this week I will write about religion and government in the US. Usually I would be supportive of some role for religious institutions, knowing what I know about how it functions in other countries. But I have read some disturbing things this week about how government funding (especially in Texas) has been used by religious institutions to expand proselytization without addressing the original reasons why those funds were granted in the first place. I have also developed some concerns that some religious institutions are not necessarily dedicated to improving living standards in the US.
