Chirac Corruption Scandels

[adios]

For all you Chirac sympathizers out there, here's a link to a small story indicating the issues of corruption involving Chirac. I found it interesting that Chirac claimed "presedential immunity" as reasons to dodge investigative questions about the alleged corruption. Sound like Richard Nixon claiming executive priveledge in the Watergate investigation.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1448471.stm

Looks like some of you have aligned yourselfs with not only a pompous, intolerant SOB, but a sleazy dishonest one as well.

[nicky g]

Chirac is a crook. The fact that he is against the war does not mean us anti-war folk have aligned ourselves with him or are Chirac "sympathisers". He was personally involved with arms deals to Saddam in the 80s. So was Donald Rumsfeld. He has vested interests in Iraq. So does the Bush administration. Your point in the other thread about not being able to use certain arguments about Bush without applying them to Chirac etc works both ways; they're both scumbags. The war case should be argued on its merits and not according to which international sleazebag is on which side. We could spend all day discrediting Bush's attitude to the war by bringing up his father, his energy conections, his own corruption scandals and various other things, but that's barely happened in the war threads because we believe our case stands up on its own merits. If you want it to degenerate into a slanging match about the credentials of leaders on opposing sides, keep at it. Perhaps you could look into Bush and Blair's ally on Iraq and good friend Silvio Berlusconi? Does his long and illustrious history of massive corruption destroy the case for war?
What's the point in debating on a forum if you're going to put people who disagree with you on an "ignore" list? Why not just listen to Ari Fleischer speeches all day instead? Am i on it, by the way? I'd be interested to know.