French ship explodes as the result of terrorism.

[ZoboZeWarrior]

I'm not such that the french compagny will paid for the cleanup ...
They are not responsable of the sinking.

Actually, it's was really hard to force American Oil Compagny to pay the clean-up of french beaches each time one of their floating junk sunk near our coast.

[Xeones]

"You misspelled "Interests".

I love how people complain about the intelligence of Dubya and go off like this....

Yes, yes, I know English may not be his/her's first language. I look for my victories where I can find them., And people who want to descend to Fez's level and say stupid stuff about America (or "Eurocommies") just on principle rate.

Bonehead"



for what its worth, Lonestar, the misspelling itself was a joke on shurb's pronunciation and over-use of the phrase. yeah. take your victories where you can ... even if its only your perception of victory. shrug. quick! jump on me for not capitalizing my sentences!

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
If this turns out to be an al Qaeda attack, then it was a really stupid one.

Gotta agree there.

An attack on a lone, distant freighter will have little effect on French foreign policy, and the French people will care little. The Americans will sit around and smugly say, "told ya so."

Not necessarily. The French have been standoffish about many things since Indochina, but they arent wimps and they arent afraid of unilateral action.

The countries this will really affect will be the Saudis, the Kuwaitis, the Iraqis, the Iranians and everyone else who is exporting oil from the area. They will see this as an attack on their income stream. Every potential friend al Qaeda has in the Gulf will turn against them.

If this is an AL Queda attack then it was a poorly conceived one. The potential destabilizing effects on our markets may be nothing in comparison to the wake-up effect on the oil producing Arab states.

[ZoboZeWarrior]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Not necessarily. The French have been standoffish about many things since Indochina, but they arent wimps and they arent afraid of unilateral action.

In fact average French citizens don't care so much about the event. But i'm waiting how will react our politicals...

Will we send war ships in area ? I don't know.
Our marine is underpowered. They ask to have more funds since years. But lately, they seems have more funds. Actually we're building a second nuclear powered carrier (hope it will more efficient than the previous).

[SpencerH]

I think it will depend on how its played up (or not) by the French news and politicians. A swing toward clear French support of "anti-terrorist actions" could have a big political effect on other European nations especially since congress looks set to support war powers for Bush.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Xeones
for what its worth, Lonestar, the misspelling itself was a joke

Liar!

[Adam Smith]

Chegitz:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
I realize that's a joke, but for the clueless lurkers (and Fez), Greenpeace doesn't use violence.

Didn't they blow up a French ship in the South Pacific with a couple of Zodiac boats?

Sagacious Dolphin:

If proven (details are sketchy) this is still not the first attack on the French, they have been targeted for years. Remember the Algerian bombings on the Metro, or the attack on the bus of French navy officers in Karachi?

Word was the French bought off the Algerians.

[ZoboZeWarrior]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
Word was the French bought off the Algerians.

what do you mean ?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
Chegitz:
Didn't they blow up a French ship in the South Pacific with a couple of Zodiac boats?

I thought it was a Japanese ship.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by ZoboZeWarrior
we suffered terrorism far before USA.

That is because the less irrational terroists know that you are weenie appeasers rather than vengeful USAians who prefer killing terrorists to paying them off.

[ZoboZeWarrior]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
That is because the less irrational terroists know that you are weenie appeasers rather than vengeful USAians who prefer killing terrorists to paying them off.

The large part of terrorists who commited terror acts in 90' are killed or in prison actually. We are judging some terrorists who commited ter-act during 95.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
Chegitz:
Didn't they blow up a French ship in the South Pacific with a couple of Zodiac boats?

I'm not sure if you're joking.........the French blew up a Greenpeace ship in a New Zealand harbor.

[ZoboZeWarrior]

It was an error !

[Gangerolf]

Although Greenpeace insists that its activities are entirely nonviolent, growing evidence suggests that it may covertly participate in direct violence against people and property. Indeed, even animals are not exempt. As reported by Robert W. Lee in the November 20, 1989 issue of The New American, members of the group have in the past sprayed Canadian baby seals with brightly colored dyes, making their fur economically useless but also increasing the susceptibility of the seals to cold and to predators. Greenpeace also appears to work closely with other organizations that more openly boast of violence.

Formed by Greenpeace co-founder Paul Watson in the late 1970s, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society has a history of taking militant action against whalers. In the early 1980s, Watson loaded his ship, the Sea Shepherd, with heavy concrete and rammed and sank several whaling ships off the coast of Portugal. Then, in September of 1987, a sabotage team from Watson's group used the cover of darkness to board and scuttle two whaling boats in the harbor of Iceland's capital, Reykjavik. That same night the saboteurs broke into a whaling station and destroyed its underground communications station.

The covert ties between Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd become more apparent from investigations following the destruction of the Icelandic communications station. The Sea Shepherd saboteurs could not have found their way around the station at night without having previously scouted it. This job was probably performed by a "journalist" who had previously visited the station, since she was the only outsider who had ever gained access to the facility; this "journalist" turns out to have been a member of Greenpeace.

Greenpeace also maintains unofficial ties to the violent sabotage organization Earth First!, a group of environmentalists who destroy equipment and endanger human lives. According to the July 1990 Organization Trends, published by the Capital Research Center, some of Greenpeace's events have been organized by one of Earth First!'s founders, Mike Roselle. Greenpeace employees have also gathered signatures for a 1986 petition circulated by Earth First!, and the September/October issue of Greenpeace encouraged readers to contribute to the legal defense of four Earth First! members arrested by the FBI for trying to cut electrical power lines.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Gangerolf
As reported by Robert W. Lee in the November 20, 1989 issue of The New American, members of the group have in the past sprayed Canadian baby seals with brightly colored dyes, making their fur economically useless but also increasing the susceptibility of the seals to cold and to predators.

So instead of all of the seals being destroyed for fur, an increased number of them die from cold and being spotted by preditors. Seems like a good trade-off to me. It's an un-thought through swipe that doesn't consider that fact that because of the dyeing, more seals still survive.

Formed by Greenpeace co-founder Paul Watson in the late 1970s, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society has a history of taking militant action against whalers.

The Sea Shepherds are a different organization from Greenpeace, and while individual members of the two organizations may maintain close ties (like all left organizations) that does not mean the Greenpeace covertly supports them. Officially, Greenpeace says that the Sea Shepherds hurt the movement. They have the same policy about Earth First!

That doesn't mean they aren't going to help raise defense funds for fellow environmentalists who are being prosecuted by the state. If I write a letter to the government of Mexico complaining about the prosecution of Catholic poverty activists, does this mean I am a supporter of the Catholic Church or instead a fellow enemy of oppression?