French Ban ALL protests for W's visit

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-06-02 04:44pm

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServe ... 5944467743

Paris bans protests ahead of Bush's visit
By Robert Graham in Paris
Published: June 2 2004 19:14 | Last Updated: June 2 2004 19:14

Demonstrations have been banned in central Paris throughout this week to ensure no hostile protests are in evidence to disturb President George W. Bush's brief presence in the French capital on Saturday, where he will be dining with President Jacques Chirac.

This blanket ban cannot conceal the groundswell of French hostility to the US president and the unpopularity of his policies on Iraq and the broader Middle East.

It nevertheless underscores Mr Chirac's determination to make Mr Bush's stay in France for the 60th anniversary of the D-Day celebrations a friendly occasion and a chance to improve the chilly state of Franco-American relations.

At the beginning of the year Mr Bush had yet to confirm his attendance at the D-Day celebrations of June 6, such was the residue of accumulated mistrust after France's opposition to the US-led invasion of Iraq. Even when confirmation came, it seemed his time on French soil would be limited to a diplomatic minimum.

Since then an informal dinner has been arranged as a sign that the leaders accept the need to talk face to face, which has been accepted by French officials as evidence of a modest thaw between two men of different generations and divergent global views.

Paris is well aware that the US president is embroiled in a tough re-election campaign and that Mr Bush needs to wring domestic political capital from his D-Day appearance on the beaches of Normandy.

However, French officials hope he will not seek to link too openly the liberation of Europe from Nazi Germany with the US's removal of the dictatorship in Baghdad and Mr Bush's broader war against terrorism.

Any such muddying of the historical waters will not endear the US president to his French hosts. Mr Chirac has invited German chancellor Gerhard Schröder and Russian leader Vladimir Putin to the ceremonies as a symbol of Europe's historic reconciliation.

President Bush has eased tensions with a friendly telephone call on May 25 to the French head of state. But this contact was less about D-Day and more to do with Mr Bush's desire to obtain French support for a new resolution on Iraq within the United Nations Security Council.

A year on from the awkward Bush-Chirac meeting at the G8 summit in Evian in the immediate aftermath of the overthrow of the Saddam Hussein regime, French officials believe the onus is on Washington to take more account of its international allies over Iraq's future. Mr Chirac has been notably restrained in recent months, avoiding any overt criticism of the US's handling of the Iraqi occupation.

But the measured response of the Elysée to the Bush phone call - that the US was moving in the right direction - still showed Washington had to make up further ground. Mr Chirac is insisting that the June 30 handover of sovereignty by the US-led administration in Baghdad not be "cosmetic". This means the Iraqis must be seen to be in control of their rich oil resources and enjoy a real say in security matters.

Mr Chirac has made it clear that France will abstain if not satisfied with the resolution. French officials say this is not an opportunistic threat but a means of demonstrating to Washington that UN backing for the new government in Iraq after June 30 can only be credible if also endorsed by the opponents of the invasion - a similar line advanced by Russia.

France has also told the US it is not willing to send troops to Iraq under any circumstances: only that it would be ready to train Iraqi security forces at a later date.

It is also linking discussions on resolving Iraq's debt to being able to deal with a proper sovereign authority in Baghdad.

The debt issue was the first area in which Paris-Washington relations began to thaw late last year, following Mr Bush's appointment of James Baker, former US secretary of state, as a special envoy.

The other key area of disagreement is that of the US's Middle East policy. Mr Chirac believes Mr Bush's plan to create an "arc of freedom" from Morocco to Afghanistan is unrealistic as long as Washington remains so openly supportive of the Sharon government in Israel.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-06-02 04:46pm

What the fuck is going on?

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2004-06-02 05:07pm

okay. so it bans hostile protest. does that mean they can still protest if it's not hostile? and what exactly do they mean by hostile protest anyways?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-06-02 05:09pm

Darth_Zod wrote:okay. so it bans hostile protest. does that mean they can still protest if it's not hostile? and what exactly do they mean by hostile protest anyways?

A protest that is hostile, silly.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2004-06-02 05:11pm

Admiral Valdemar wrote:
Darth_Zod wrote:okay. so it bans hostile protest. does that mean they can still protest if it's not hostile? and what exactly do they mean by hostile protest anyways?
A protest that is hostile, silly.

*thwap* well, yeah, that kinda goes without saying. but what's it gotta be to get classified as hostile? throwing vegetables and pies at the stage? simply booing?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-06-02 05:12pm

Darth_Zod wrote:
Admiral Valdemar wrote:
Darth_Zod wrote:okay. so it bans hostile protest. does that mean they can still protest if it's not hostile? and what exactly do they mean by hostile protest anyways?
A protest that is hostile, silly.
*thwap* well, yeah, that kinda goes without saying. but what's it gotta be to get classified as hostile? throwing vegetables and pies at the stage? simply booing?

When it gets hostile, the it's time to stop.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-06-02 05:15pm

Posturing. Frankly, I think that Bush's image in the international arena is beyond repair. At this point, leaders from other countries are sick of putting up with his bullshit, so they'll tell him to go fuck himself when he asks for aid. They want him out of office, so they're going to do whatever they can to make him look bad. I imagine they'll just keep withholding support until after the election.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-06-02 05:16pm

What if, god forbid, he gets another term in the ol' White House?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-06-02 05:21pm

Durandal wrote:Posturing. Frankly, I think that Bush's image in the international arena is beyond repair. At this point, leaders from other countries are sick of putting up with his bullshit, so they'll tell him to go fuck himself when he asks for aid. They want him out of office, so they're going to do whatever they can to make him look bad. I imagine they'll just keep withholding support until after the election.

How exactly is them shutting down anti-Bush protests on their own initiative going to make Bush look bad?

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2004-06-02 05:23pm

Admiral Valdemar wrote:What if, god forbid, he gets another term in the ol' White House?

We'll all be damned.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-06-02 05:23pm

Wicked Pilot wrote:
Admiral Valdemar wrote:What if, god forbid, he gets another term in the ol' White House?
We'll all be damned.

He can't damn me! I'm too nice!

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2004-06-02 05:31pm

Joe wrote:
Durandal wrote:Posturing. Frankly, I think that Bush's image in the international arena is beyond repair. At this point, leaders from other countries are sick of putting up with his bullshit, so they'll tell him to go fuck himself when he asks for aid. They want him out of office, so they're going to do whatever they can to make him look bad. I imagine they'll just keep withholding support until after the election.
How exactly is them shutting down anti-Bush protests on their own initiative going to make Bush look bad?

Just because they want him out of office doesn't mean they want him assasinated, you know.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2004-06-02 07:49pm

Andrew J. wrote:Just because they want him out of office doesn't mean they want him assasinated, you know.

Yeah, because if that happened they'd be classified as terrorist scum and get nuked or invaded.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-06-02 08:19pm

Joe wrote:
Durandal wrote:Posturing. Frankly, I think that Bush's image in the international arena is beyond repair. At this point, leaders from other countries are sick of putting up with his bullshit, so they'll tell him to go fuck himself when he asks for aid. They want him out of office, so they're going to do whatever they can to make him look bad. I imagine they'll just keep withholding support until after the election.
How exactly is them shutting down anti-Bush protests on their own initiative going to make Bush look bad?

It doesn't have to. Bush already looks bad, so the French probably see the protest as another pointless time waster for police that they simply don't want to deal with.

JME2 · Post by **JME2** » 2004-06-02 08:36pm

Yep, nothing like good old freedom of speech being curtailed. What's next? The French kick us out of Euro Disney? Oh wait a minute -- there's nobody there!

Lonestar · Post by **Lonestar** » 2004-06-03 12:22am

Wicked Pilot wrote: We'll all be damned.

You better watch that kind of language, considering where you're stationed.

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2004-06-03 12:29am

This might be a ruse on the part of Chirac. What better way to guarantee that people turn out in droves to jeer Numbnuts than telling them not to?

The one I think will get nasty is the Olympics in Greece. Right after 9-11, a poll was taken asking Greeks what they thought and the favorite answer was "they deserved it" (or something similar). The Greek government pleaded with papers not to run the poll. I get the feeling that the first American to get a medal will get booed worse than the Oakland Raiders at Arrowhead Stadium.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-06-03 12:49am

aerius wrote:
Andrew J. wrote:Just because they want him out of office doesn't mean they want him assasinated, you know.
Yeah, because if that happened they'd be classified as terrorist scum and get nuked or invaded.

Or heaven forbid they simply don't want it to happen because it would be some one dying.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-06-03 12:57am

Elfdart wrote:This might be a ruse on the part of Chirac. What better way to guarantee that people turn out in droves to jeer Numbnuts than telling them not to?

The one I think will get nasty is the Olympics in Greece. Right after 9-11, a poll was taken asking Greeks what they thought and the favorite answer was "they deserved it" (or something similar). The Greek government pleaded with papers not to run the poll. I get the feeling that the first American to get a medal will get booed worse than the Oakland Raiders at Arrowhead Stadium.

The Greeks from what I understand hate us with an intensity that isn't even found in many Muslim countries, so that seems like an accurate prediction. It's going to be depressing to watch.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-06-03 01:06am

I tell you, it's thing like that make you wonder why we bother with Europe at all.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2004-06-03 01:16am

Joe wrote:
Elfdart wrote:This might be a ruse on the part of Chirac. What better way to guarantee that people turn out in droves to jeer Numbnuts than telling them not to?

The one I think will get nasty is the Olympics in Greece. Right after 9-11, a poll was taken asking Greeks what they thought and the favorite answer was "they deserved it" (or something similar). The Greek government pleaded with papers not to run the poll. I get the feeling that the first American to get a medal will get booed worse than the Oakland Raiders at Arrowhead Stadium.
The Greeks from what I understand hate us with an intensity that isn't even found in many Muslim countries, so that seems like an accurate prediction. It's going to be depressing to watch.

I'd guess that one of the reasons why they hate us is because we backed an anti-communist junta in '67.

JME2 · Post by **JME2** » 2004-06-03 01:33am

Stormbringer wrote:I tell you, it's thing like that make you wonder why we bother with Europe at all.

Because Europe is the cradle of Western civilization and we're it's 'birg Brother' if you catch my drift...

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-06-03 03:17am

Hamel wrote:I'd guess that one of the reasons why they hate us is because we backed an anti-communist junta in '67.

Then I guess whe should have let them enjoy the enlightened rule
of a Stalin clone for forty years

Lord Sander · Post by **Lord Sander** » 2004-06-03 04:28am

MKSheppard wrote:Then I guess whe should have let them enjoy the enlightened rule of a Stalin clone for forty years

Greece was in no danger of falling to that kind of communism when Papadopoulos took control.

CJvR · Post by **CJvR** » 2004-06-03 05:44am

Considering the rabidness of the anti-US "demonstrators" a general ban is quite likely the best and cheapest way to handle the situation. The only real losers, appart from the fredom of speech, is the the glass industry - no smashed city to restore.

France has also told the US it is not willing to send troops to Iraq under any circumstances: only that it would be ready to train Iraqi security forces at a later date.

Trained by France, how many victorious armies suffer from that? Don't the Iraqi security forces have enough problems without suffering from that as well?

What if, god forbid, he gets another term in the ol' White House?

Four more years! Yeah! I can hear the poping of arteries as the Euro-left suffers a massive collective stroke from that one... Four more years!!!