so let me sum up
Response to fact 1
>>
The french have stated that they wish to keep the status quo indefinitely, this begs the question of why as well as looks for motives.
<<
Bill WTF has your response got to do with Blix's report to the UN ???
*******************
Blix's report as discussed between Blix and Condi, changed after meetings with the French. The French wanted an ambigous report and got it, this begs the question of why as well as looks for motives.
Response to fact 2
>>
the majority of the UN would vote tommorow to eliminate Israel, station troops in America and disarm the population if they thought they could get away with it. I know that and you know that for a fact. I am not saying or implying that the major powers would want to do that. I am saying a majority would in a shot. This makes the body irrelavent.
<<
What the f*** has your response to do with Iraq & UN ??? How can you conclude 'This makes the body irrelavent' from your tangential waffle ????
******************
you know damn well its true which is why you completely sidestepped the question to mumble Iraq, UN. How could I not conclude that the UN is irrevelant as both an American and a Jew?
point 3 your response. You appear to be a person who would look at the opening and closing remarks of a trial and base your decission on the verdict. Me I like to look at the police work, talk to the folks that didnt show up at the trial. Look at the excluded evidence as well as all motions. Thats the difference here.
thanx,
bill