To: Machaon who wrote (377143 ) 3/23/2003 7:37:15 PM From: Crossy Respond to of 769667 Bob, Mitterand was French premier not Austrian president. You might have meant Kurt Waldheim. I wouldn't call that guy a Nazi - his origins where christian-democrat and his background was a conservative one. His only problem was that he was drafted into the German Wehrmacht in WW2 where he served as a translatíng officer on the Balcans. In post WW2 Waldheim was a member of the conservative party, later UN chairman. When Waldheim was about to get elected in the 80ies our socialists sort of "tipped" all international news services on his alleged WW2 record. Even Simon Wiesenthal disputed most of the claims that were raised. Astonishingly, while Haider certainly is far more to the right than Waldheim, it's factual not correct to attach the NAZI tag to each of them. Haider is a right wing populist, pretty much like Norway's Carl Hagen. His populist stance amounted to quite erratic initiatives without a clear strategic thrust. Real nazis are rare these days. In Germany you would have to look at parties like the NPD and the DVU but both are rather small fringe groups. In Austra, all similar circles where outlawed in the late 1980ies. In subculture amalgamations, some skinheads might fit this definition nowadays. << The reason for this - (vlaams bloc seeking secession), outlined at their website, is because Belgium is trying to outlaw their political party >> Well, some political correct governments (especially Belgium and other left wing oriented ones) would like to outlaw a number of parties on the right - like those opposing immigration etc.. The Vlaams Bloc among them.. However, I think it's up to the voter to decide what kind of politics to run in a country - within the constitutional bounds present of course. If Belgish people elect a government with Vlaams Bloc participation, well - so be it. rgrds CROSSY