applauds Excellent piece of social satire.

Removing it entirely would be the best thing you could do on this Memorial Day weekend when we should remember those Americans who died liberating Europe in two World Wars.

uhm - thought about that image long ... you're both right (sinsister - Mycrofted) - so I would just say nothing about it ... :-|

brilliant work .. removing this picture would be a slap in the face of free speech .which americans seem to be so proud of . sinsister is right . its a brilliant piece of satire .. great job

As you seem to have forgotten, Mycro, the Russians did half of the job. Do you think we shouldn't have criticised their politics for the last 50 years for that reason? When I meet someone, I'm more likely to consider him for what he does now than for what his grand father did.

As my grandfather (veteran of three wars rest him) put it the Russians outnumbered the Germans 20 to 1 but that was 20 rifles to 1 tank. They were in trouble. I recon your tune would be different if the past generation of Americans had just left well enough alone, that is if you were even allowed to have a tune. When I meet someone, I'm more likely to consider him for what he does now than for what his grand father did. Isnt that a tad short sighted, know you nothing of loyalty. Ill grant you that technically your image is well constructed good work on the shadows, flags, and the detail of the card and enlarged window of it, but your message, your satire simply indicates a head full of loose wiring to me and misguided priorities. Do you honestly believe what youre implying? If Clinton had still been in the office of president I might have considered it, he had a lacking of morals that would have been in line with such an action as allowing a terrorist attack on the US to bust his own image.

To Mock :1- We're celebrating Memorial Day. Not the people who won, but the people who died. Among others, many Russians died as well (at the rate of 20 riffles for 1 tank, that's not surprising). Could this have been a reason to, let's say, let them invade Afghanistan in the 80's? I don't think so. If I save someone's life today, that doesn't allow me to kill someone else tomorow, does it? 2- If Clinton could have done it, then Chirac can do it. He has no moral at all. Politicians never have. You can't be ambitious enough to become president of a big country and be a nice guy. That involves to many betrayals, fake promises and so on. It is anyway obvious that Bush popularity went from 49 to 90% because someone blew up the WTC. Chirac, who is the most unpopular president of the French fifth republic, might very well dream of the same happening to him. 3- That's none of your concern but my grand father also fought the Germans, escaped twice from their prisonner camps and lost his sight in the process. Do you consider me any better for that? If you do, you shouldn't, for I'm a completely different person and can't get any credit for what he did. 4- I don't know if Bush could have avoided the tragedy of 9-11, but I know that on Sept 20th, as FBI responsibles were admiting that they had no idea of who the hijackers were, Bush declared that he knew very well who directed the attack and which governements were behind it. He obviously knew something that both the FBI and the American population ignored. It is not a secret that the CIA backed up Muslim fundamentalists in Afghanistan for a long time, when it seemed fine to support a Jihad against the great communist Satan. They provided weapons and training for modern warfare, terrorism, torture, etc. They did the same with Saddam soldiers during the Iran-Iraq war. France, Britain and other western countries participated as well, and that's nothing to be proud of, whatever good things those countries might have done in the past. 5- Nobody knows who is really responsible for the 9-11 attacks, but everybody can see to whom the crime profits. It is obvious that unscrupulous politicians (pleonasm), Bush first but Putin and Sharon as well, are using the threat of terrorism to justify increased violence against people or countries that they have been wanting to control for a long time. It is pretty unlikely that Chirac will lead a war to reconquere Algeria, but that illustrates clearly that point, and that also shows to American citizens how the foreing politics of their country are perceived abroad. I read American newspapers as well, and I know how biased they have been since last September, for obvious reasons. May this image help American artists here to keep respectful distances from their governement's official speech. Truth is always the first casuality of war. 6- This pic has nothing to do with Memorial Day. I made it because Bush is in Paris today. It could have been Christmas Eve, I would have made it all the same.

I find it hilarious that some patriotic people think that speaking out against the government is sooo unamerican. Maybe they skipped American history one too many times. Just because someone dislikes the president, doesn't mean he doesn't like America, or at least what America used to stand for. I had read an article a while back saying certain celebrities were going to move away from the US if Bush was elected president. I wonder if they made good on their word.

More conspiracy mongering. I've looked at some of your other renders, SurfAce, and I can say with some conviction that I think you're an ignorant person. "Please have the kindness to remember that we under-developed them. We are rich because they are poor," you wrote in an earlier render. You're completely wrong. The Muslim and Arab nations in South Asia didn't somehow become underdeveloped--rather they have failed to develop. You can blame this on whomever you like, but I would start with the citizenry in general of those countries. The United States is rich because it is a free society with a structured, rational, fairly honestly enforced legal system. And the United States--unlike France--was too busy taming the North American continent to spend much effort building an overseas empire.

I agree, good satire is needed. Dunno who is wrong and whos right, but conversation is always a good thing.

Thats the problem with proper education.You never know what those smart graduates are up to and if they might turn against you one day. Thats the downside of "the good cause justifies the bad means" - whatever good that good cause might be actually.

Where to begin...ok, first off, this is a brilliant piece, and technically very well done. I am particularly impressed with the morphs employed to create these caricatures of Bush and Chirac. Now to the comments...Mock smells of a fundamentalist Christian. I say this because of the reference to "morals" which is a real staple of fundy dogma. To think that a leader such as Clinton would have done anything differently than a leader such as Bush is incredibly naive. All politicians are thieves and liars and, preferably, murderers...otherwise they would not be in office. To think that anyone in any political office is in any way representative of the people whom they are supposed to represent is infantile in its ignorance. May I site the incident of Bush, the senior, not recognizing what a barcode scanner was in a grocery store. This man was the President of the United States of America and he had never seen a barcode scanner? How on Earth is someone that removed from the reality of everyday life for everyday citizens supposed to be representing those everyday citizens? It is preposterous at best. Also, consider how much it costs to run for office. Can you afford it? I sure know I can't...no one I know could afford it, and I do know some exceptionally wealthy people, but they are not THAT wealthy. And if you don't think that Bush is a liar and thief, consider that when the ballots had actually been totalled in Florida, several months after the "election results" were finalized, the count was in favor of Gore. And please don't think me a supporter of either Republicans or Democrats; I can see through that pathetically thin veil and consider them all to be, as I stated, liars, thieves, and sometimes murderers. Now to Mock, get a dictionary. It is very ironic that you state "bust" his image when you meant "boost." I am sure that W. will be "busted" one way or another, sooner or later...otherwise I agree with everthing in SurfAce's rebuttle to you. Now to Mighty Lingster...you obviously need to read some history. You apparently have no clue about how various countries were "developed" and why...here's one clue, for profit, duh. This is a capitalist nation and, in case you haven't heard, the main objective of capitalism is to raise capital, at the expensive of whatever or whoever may cause a hindrance. Also, there is no correlation between the wealth of the U.S. and it's supposedly being a "free" society with a "structured, rational, fairly honestly enforced legal system." I won't even get into the freedom issue, but let me assure you of a couple of things. Our legal system only works if you have either the right skin color or, better yet, enough money. Believe you me, if O.J. Simpson was just a street nigger he would be in jail right now. Our legal system is biased to class and capital. As for the enforcement of our laws, you may find cops to be the runner-up to politicians regarding corruption. The Detroit Police Department is initiating an investigation into the abundant corruption within its ranks, while it contemplates paying off a rogue officer of some tenure with an early retirement plan to the tune of $300K so that he doesn't kill another innocent deaf/mute and make the department look even worse. Dallas cops had a ring going with busting migrant workers by planting plaster dust on them and claiming it was cocaine. The list goes on and on and on. Also, the primary objective of the police, i.e. State Power, is to inject the populace with fear, which they do quite well. Why do you think "Cops" has been on the air so long...so you will know what the State can do if it so desires. As for "taming" the North American continent, that is a rather clever use of terminology. Let us instead employ a more realistic term, conquer. At least I imagine the Native Americans who were lied to, who's treaties were not honored, and were killed if they did not cooperate, would prefer the use of a more accurate term. Or perhaps we can ask some of the descents of the 100million slaves that were purchased or stolen from Africa over the course of 300 years what their feelings are about the building of this nation. And it would be interesting to hear their opinions regarding why the U.S. is a wealthy nation. Like most American morons, you apparently think you know all there is to know regarding this country and its foundations, when you have not even scratched the surface. Yes, I will give you this, our education system does not provide us with either the proper information or socialization to be curious enough for the average citizen to seek out this information of their own accord. But, that is really no excuse. And to make this just one step longer, may I say to everyone who considers any criticism of the leadership of the U.S. to be somehow un-American, please don't forget that one of your own Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, wrote that it is the duty of the people to overthrow the government about once every one hundred years, just so that we don't get trapped in the ruts of corruption and disinformation. I'm not quite sure if he wrote that before or after raping Sally Hemmings, but I will consult my local library.

Love the artistry and the message/back story. I myself wondered why GW would decide to be in France on the Memorial Day Weekend. So many Veterans have given....not only lives but Heart and Soul. In my travels this past holiday weekend I saw so many Vets returning from Rolling Thunder in Washington DC. This country is made up of so many people with so many talents and sacrifices, from Native Americans :) to immigrants. We The People are this country, not a figure head who chooses to go 'out of country' for Memorial Day. God bless those who went 'in country'!!!! In the words of John Lennon 'Give Peace a chance'

To the morons who look at this pic with only half a brain: This pic doesn't say that W blew up the WTC to boost up his popularity (that is Mock's interpretation), but simply that he noticed the positive effects. It is also not something new, Hitler burnt the Reichstag with the same consequences.

Good caricatures, but I wonder if you really understand how your picture looks to other people. You certainly seem to be presenting the idea that Bush is promoting terrorism. And this "moron" with "half a brain" still thinks your views are screwy. You may curse me again now for using my free speech to disbelieve your views. (By the way, the whole "insult your viewers into looking" schtick was done much better by Legume.)

Legume is a great artist; his art and mine are not comparable. Use your free speech as much as you want. If I think you're stupid, I will use mine to tell you why.

If you use history as an argument, guys, respect the facts, please. It applies specially to Mock. The facts are following: 1. In June 1941 Russians had 20,000 tanks against 3000 tanks of the Axis on the Eastern Front [that includes not only German, but also Finnish, Slovak, Hungarian, Romanian and Italian tanks [a few Italian divisions fought in Russia]. Of the 20,000 some 2000 were the newest types, that had not equivalent on Axis side. I mean T-34 model 1940 and 1941, KV-1 and KV-2. So why did the Russian loose that long? Well... they were unable to use that power correctly. For many reasons. Let us not make here a history of the military forum, o.k.? 2. The Soviet Union began the Second World War as the Third Reich's ally [yes!!!]. On the 1st of September 1939 Poland was attacked by Hitler and on the 3rd of September France and Great Britain declared war against Germany. This war WWII started. On the 17th of September they attacked Poland from the eastern side. It was a part of a German-Soviet war plan [the so-called Ribbentrop-Molotov pact]. The rest of the Polish military forces were crushed by October 6th. Let us omit Soviet war crimes in Eastern Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. 3. In 1941 Soviets were attacked by their former closest friend [Adolf H.] and the US were attacked by Hitler's ally, Japan. "Enemies of our enemies are our friends", right? But not for eternity. After the Axis was defeated, the Soviets ceased to be friends [and the Cold War started]. 4. Is there no obvious similarity between the above, and the changing attitude of the US government towards Muslim fundamentals? 5. SurfAce, probably a better comparison than Reichstag case would be the case of explosion on the USS "Maine" [was an armoured cruiser] in the port of Havana in 1898. It has been finally proven the explosion was not caused intently by any person. But it gave a good reason to declare war against Spain, to "win some points" by certain US politicians and to make some hysteria in the US press. [see e.g. Barbara W. Tuchman "The Proud Tower"].

I tip my hat. No one inspires debate like you, and the art you produce. Art needs to make us think, not only feel. Great job. (Wish my images got such great commentary!)

Excellent. Watch your back.

I'm not taking this seriously. ...very funny!