Sarkozy vs Royal= Cardinal Richelieu vs Marie Antoinette

by Norwegian Chef Fri Nov 17th, 2006 at 07:42:35 PM EST

Ségolène Royal's selection by the Socialists really angers me. She still refuses to come clean about her and her family's role in the state-sponsored terrorist attack of the sinking the Rainbow Warrior.

In 1985, when Mitterrand gave orders for the terrorist attack on the Rainbow Warrior Ségolène Royal was working as Conseillère Technique au Secrétariat Général de la Présidence de la République and very likely was involved or at least knowledgeable about the attack.

Her brother Gérard Royal, was involved in planting of the bomb that sunk the Rainbow Warrior and killed Greenpeace Photographer Fernando Pereira. He was implicated by his brother Antoine Royal.

Ségolène Royal has refused to come clean about her or her brother's role in this express terrorist attack and to condemn this act of State-sponsored French terrorism which her and her family were so integrally involved. In fact she seems to wear it as a badge of courage for the Republic.

With choices like this for their presidency, no wonder the situation in France is hopeless!!

Sarkozy vs Royal= Cardinal Richelieu vs Marie Antoinette

And Sarkozy.....--don't even get me started on this pseudo-populist ideologue. Talk about the "worst excesses of the French Revolution".

See Wikipedia Article.

Having talked to my friend who is an ED of one of the large European Greenpeace Offices. They are shocked and dismayed by this selection and her arrogance and contempt for the people and families involved in this terrorism as well as her contempt for the environment and related issues generally.

GO GREENS!!!!!!!!!

I have cross-posted this in part from my article on Daily-Kos.

Sarkozy vs Royal= Cardinal Richelieu vs Marie Antoinette | 26 comments (26 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: Sarkozy vs Royal= Cardinal Richelieu vs Marie (4.00 / 3)

With all due respect, while I think it's important to get to the bottom of this, Ségolène was not the one planting bombs on that ship. Her brother may have been involved, and it's HIS issue. If my brother killed someone, it would be quite presumptious to think I know what happened. Granted she was in a government position at the time, she is not necessarily privy to every bit of private information out there.

Mikhail from SF

by Tsarrio (dj_tsar@yahoo.com) on Sat Nov 18th, 2006 at 03:49:56 AM EST

Therefore she should come clean and say (none / 0)

what she knew and when she knew it. She refuses to discuss it and keeps dismissing the issue by saying it happened 20 years ago and that it is just a smear campaign. For a person who is possibly going to be President of a major nation to refuse to discuss her possible involvement in clear terrorist bombing when her immediate employer was directly implicated in the matter and her brother was directly involved is not acceptable.

She has never denied that she knew about the plot, and if she did know and took no action to stop it, then she is guilty. France can keep promoting the people involved in this terrorism all the want. But it does not absolve the fact that anyone involved in the action or with knowledge aforehand is guilty of terrorism and murder.

This is huge news in Australia and New Zealand,and neither of our nations nor Greenpeace will not let this issue fade away.

Until she comes clean, she will certianly not be welcome on the streets of Auckland, Wellington or Christchurch.

I like the silence of a church, before the service begins better than any preaching. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

by Norwegian Chef (hephaestion@surfbirder.com) on Sat Nov 18th, 2006 at 04:42:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Therefore she should come clean and say (none / 1)

Well, if this scandal hit the papers in the last year, it is a smear campaign.

This whole thing reminds me a bit of the story about Lyndon S. Johnson instructing his campaign manager to hint that his congressional opponent had "routine carnal knowledge of his barnyard sows". Johnson admitted it was a barefaced lie, "but let the bastard deny it."

Her refusal to talk at lenght about her brothers involvement in vicious murder does not prove her guilt nor her innocence. Royale has nothing to gain by tying herself to that criminal fuckup, so I dont see where the outrage comes from. She is a politican after all, not a saint.

by Trond Ove on Sat Nov 18th, 2006 at 10:44:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

In an early October interview with (none / 0)

La Parisien, "she expressed pride in her brother as a soldier and she didn't express any sadness for the murdered photographer or regret at the irresponsibility of an act of war against a friendly nation.

That tells an awful lot about her fitness for office - that she lacks human compassion and lacks judgement in handling international affairs."

-quote from Rue Rude

I like the silence of a church, before the service begins better than any preaching. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

by Norwegian Chef (hephaestion@surfbirder.com) on Sat Nov 18th, 2006 at 05:34:20 AM EST

OK (4.00 / 2)

I can see what you're trying to say wrt to the Rainbow Warrior, but i don't understand this:

With choices like this for their presidency, no wonder the situation in France is hopeless!!
Sarkozy vs Royal= Cardinal Richelieu vs Marie Antoinette
And Sarkozy.....--don't even get me started on this pseudo-populist ideologue. Talk about the "worst excesses of the French Revolution".

Would you substantiate all or any of this in any way? I have no idea what you mean.

As to this:

her contempt for the environment and related issues generally.

This is silly, absurd and unsubstantiated. She's been the major candidate that's talked the most about the environment and the need to start thinking about sustainability in our economy. It's not nearly enough, but by talking about "contempt" you show you're not serious.

As a general matter, the only chance greens have to influence policy in France is by allying with the socialist party - as happened in 1997-2002. Purists will always say that not enough was done, and that the greens in government betrayed their principles, but at least they gave it a try. Currently, the greens in France are so busy testing who's the "purest" green and calling one another traitors that they have become totally inaudible to everybody else.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sat Nov 18th, 2006 at 09:11:06 AM EST

Explanation: (4.00 / 2)

Thanks for the post Jerome--I am happy to try to explain myself.

Sarkozy vs Royal= Cardinal Richelieu vs Marie Antoinette

This is a probably not so clever device comparing Cardinal Richelieu (a mean and frightenly ambitious man ie Sarkozy) with Marie Antoinette (an arrogant woman who put style ahead of substance ie Royal).

The "worst excesses of the French Revolution" is taken from Wilde's Importance of Being Earnest with the meaning construed here much as it is meant there-rather tongue and cheek.

I trust you understand why I called Sarkozy a Pseudo-populist ideologue. I am certainly not the only one.

Lets face it, I think France has two very bad choices, almost as bad as...let's see....oh that's right....Chirac and Le Pen. You guys don't exactly have a good record here. But you are not alone on this in the world. My own country of Australia is plagued by this lack of leadership as well (see my comment above).

her contempt for the environment and related issues generally.

While I will grant you that the use of "contempt" here may be overly strong, Royal's time as Environment Minister and her environmental activities before and after have been largely taken up with activities that could be put down to the"beautification" of the rural countryside. While this in and of itself can be a useful thing if it is done properly with good habitat models, it is not really a meaty environmental issue.

She talks a good talk but her record seems ultra-light.

Having worked with the Ibex Program in the Vanoise National Park in the French Alps, anyone there will tell you that on the issue of endangered species and hunting that the success of this program and other related ones across France has always been in spite of the Government in Paris regardless of whether it was Socialist or Conservative.

Furthermore I am not the only one who feels she is all style and little substance, read the very interesting BBC blog about her winning the Socialist candidacy. Many if not most of the French bloggers there are lamenting the Sarkozy/Royal choice much along the same lines that frustrates me.

This is not to say Royal does not have good policies. Her work on GLBT issues is probably one area where she is regarded highly both in talk and in substance. I certainly agree with her there, and hope that like Prime Minister Zapatero she tackles the marriage issue head on if she gets into office.

Also I take your points on the French Greens--they have been a disorganised lot and plagued with serious anti-Semitic issues. However, it seems like they may have got their act together in the last few months.

I am sorry if I seem over the top, but you need to understand the depth of feeling with the Rainbow Warrior Issue down here. France committed a terrorist attack on an NGO and on a friendly Pacific nation. France has been less than apologetic and not acted with integrity in this issue, and now Ségolène Royal is continuing in this rather ignoble vein. This is indeed contemptuous behaviour in my book.

I like the silence of a church, before the service begins better than any preaching. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

by Norwegian Chef (hephaestion@surfbirder.com) on Sat Nov 18th, 2006 at 03:00:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Explanation: (4.00 / 2)

Thanks for the more substantial response.

I understand your feelings about the Rainbow Warrior, it's clearly not the best thing in recent French history, but i think the link between Ségolène Royal and that act is a lot more tenuous, if at all existant (as explained by afew above) than you make it to be.

While I'm with you on Sarkozy, who is a truly dangerous man, your comparison of Royal to, effectively, Le Pen (or possibly Chirac) is really not appropriate. There's been a lot of whining about Royal's lack of substance, but she's been holding her own in the recent campaign, and a lot of that had to do with the slime other Socialist "elephants" tried to use to discredit her. In any case, she'll have several excellent choices for Prime Minister amongst the Socialists, something which would not be true for Sarkozy.

As to her environmentalism - at least she did something then, at a time when nobody cared much about that in France, and she is talking aobut it now. We'll see if it's enough, but she seems to take the topic seriously. I don't understand AT ALL your comment about the Greens' antisemitism. I've never heard of that accusation before.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sat Nov 18th, 2006 at 03:38:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: French Greens and Anti-Semitism (4.00 / 2)

Unfortunately the French Greens have a noted record of Anti-Semitism within part of its ranks. Probably I should characterise it as more Anti-Israel or Anti-Israeli Government, uncritically only seeing Israel or its Government as merely an extension of the USA military establishment. Again this is not peculiar to France, Green Parties in other countries have had this as well to a more or less extent.

This is in contrast to more mainstream Green policy which deplores the excesses on both sides (Israeli and Palestinian) and seeks to find a peaceful way to have 2 independent and viable states next to each other both taking good care of their environments!

This article from Wikipedia addresses the particular issue in regard to France, but if you Google Ginette Skandrani's name, you will get more detailed info in French and English.

One of the party's co-founders, Ginette Skandrani, had long attracted criticism due to her involvement with holocaust deniers.[1]. The Stephen Roth Institute criticized the Green Party in 2004, calling its record "tainted by abortive attempts to expel from within its ranks notorious anti-Jewish activist Ginette Skandrani herself ethnically Jewish[2] who has close contacts with Holocaust deniers." [3].
Other critics, such as Roger Cukierman of the CRIF (council of French Jewish organisations) did not attack the party as a whole, but rather its anti-zionist wing, claiming that it promoted a "brown-green alliance".[1]
In June, 2005, the Greens voted to permanantly expell Skandrani. Among the reasons for her definitlve expulsion were her participation in the holocaust-denial website Aaargh (Association des anciens amateurs de récits de guerres et d'holocaustes).[1] Patrick Farbiaz, a Green leader involved in her explusion, argued that "although she has not written [anti-Semetic texts] herself, she looks like a kingpen of holocaust deniers and avowed antisemites".[1]
The party had previously expelled another co-founder (in 1991), Jean Brière, for signing a text addressing the alleged "war-causing role" of Israel and "the zionist lobby in the Gulf War.[1]

I like the silence of a church, before the service begins better than any preaching. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

by Norwegian Chef (hephaestion@surfbirder.com) on Sat Nov 18th, 2006 at 06:27:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: French Greens and Anti-Semitism (4.00 / 3)

Using one highly contentious individual as a sign of a "noted record of Anti-Semitism" amongst the French Greens is a pretty dubious claim to make.

It's the first I've heard of her, so her role is not very public. And you mention procedures to get rid of her, which seems to show that her positions were not tolerated within the party.

That accusation ("noted record of Anti-Semitism" amongst the French Greens) sounds like the rightwing propaganda coming from the US and Israel that wants to make France appear as anti-semitic in as many ways as possible because it is (in general) critical of Israel and some real antisemites can be found in the country.

This is not serious.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sat Nov 18th, 2006 at 06:45:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: While I am no expert on the French Greens (4.00 / 2)

in particular.

I have worked with the Greens in Australia and globally for decades, and the trial and expulsion of Ginette Skandrani made a lot of news within Green circles and was outlined in an article in the June 30th, 2005 edition of Liberation under the title of: "Une verte trop brune exclue du parti". The link is here.

This article does note that her role in the party had gradually reduced in recent times, but her outlandish politics may well have been a main reason.

Also I qualified my comment to state:

Unfortunately the French Greens have a noted record of Anti-Semitism within part of its ranks. Probably I should characterise it as more Anti-Israel or Anti-Israeli Government, uncritically only seeing Israel or its Government as merely an extension of the USA military establishment. Again this is not peculiar to France, Green Parties in other countries have had this as well to a more or less extent.

While I agree with you that the party has dealt with the situation very well, the fact that two co-founders have been expelled for the same reason does point to a real and noted undercurrent even if not a particularly powerful or successful one.

I am also not sure if the French Greens are powerful or large enough to warrant much/any focus from "rightwing propaganda coming from US and Israel", but honestly I do not really know. I have never seen any overt examples of it in relation to the French Greens although the story is a bit different in relation to the German Greens who, due to holding the balance of power with the SPD, have borne relentless propaganda attacks from rightwing forces outside Germany.

I like the silence of a church, before the service begins better than any preaching. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

by Norwegian Chef (hephaestion@surfbirder.com) on Sat Nov 18th, 2006 at 08:19:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: While I am no expert on the French Greens (4.00 / 3)

if the French Greens are powerful or large enough to warrant much/any focus from "rightwing propaganda coming from US and Israel"

We are all, constantly, permanently, the focus of "rightwing propaganda coming from US and Israel". The main intent of which is to disqualify Europe (the EU in particular) from having any influence on what happens in the Near East, above all the Israel/Palestine situation.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Nov 19th, 2006 at 08:51:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: While I am no expert on the French Greens (4.00 / 4)

Secondly, the Wikipedia article on the French Greens seems tendentious to me in that -- speaking of a party that has shared government and is therefore not without a history of some interest -- it consecrates no more than two sentences to the government period thus:

Dominique Voynet was to lead the party into government for the first time, joining Lionel Jospin's Socialist Party (PS) and the Communist Party (PCF). Voynet was rewarded with the cabinet position of Minister for the Environment and Regional Planning, before being replaced by Yves Cochet in 2001.

In general the party's history is sketchily covered. Yet "Skandrani's expulsion" takes up a full section and runs to about a quarter of the entire text about the party. All this for someone who is quite unknown to the public and never held any position, founder member or not. The same can be said of Pierre Brière, totally unknown Green expelled many years before Skandrani (1991). (I strongly suspect the Wikipedia article of having received the attention, quite precisely, of propagandists who want to blow up this affair out of all proportion).

Let me be clear. I am greatly angered and dismayed by Holocaust deniers and consider the French Greens quite right to exclude members who gave their support to any of these. But the two individuals in question are of no great importance. Making out the Greens have issues with anti-semitism is akin, as Jerome says, to making out France is an anti-semitic country, that Europe has not dealt with its anti-semitic past, etc : these are propaganda talking-points originating with the Zionist neocon right.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Nov 19th, 2006 at 09:31:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks again, afew (4.00 / 2)

for the information. This is not in any way a major point so I am happy to defer to you and Jerome here.

Most Wikipedia Green Party Pages are edited and monitored by the various Green Parties themselves. Although I have no idea who in fact does the editing for the French Greens article. If it seems imbalanced as you point out, you may want edit it/ or get them to edit it, to present a more balanced picture of the party. More information on their accomplishments and key policies would be helpful in the article. Since anyone can edit a Wiki article it is easy to do.

I like the silence of a church, before the service begins better than any preaching. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

by Norwegian Chef (hephaestion@surfbirder.com) on Sun Nov 19th, 2006 at 04:06:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks again, afew (4.00 / 2)

You're right, it isn't a major concern. I think the French Greens looked after their French Wikipedia page, but seem to have failed to take a look at the English one.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Nov 19th, 2006 at 04:12:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: While I am no expert on the French Greens (4.00 / 2)

To supplement Jérôme and afew:

the fact that two co-founders have been expelled for the same reason does point to a real and noted undercurrent

Since the French Greens were born in the fusion of two earlier ecologist movements, "founder" describes not a select few but a lot of people.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Mon Nov 20th, 2006 at 05:48:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sarkozy vs Royal= Cardinal Richelieu vs Marie (4.00 / 3)

I don't understand this diary -- or rather, I'm afraid I do, and it's based on a misunderstanding of and contempt for France. I'm not going to say everything is fine in France. There are many real problems. But this:

With choices like this for their presidency, no wonder the situation in France is hopeless!!

kinda gives the game away, imho.

OK. The Rainbow Warrior attack was an appalling, stupid, and unfortunately deadly blunder on the part of the French secret services and of François Mittereand, who gave the go-ahead.

Ségolène Royal was then a junior advisor in the Elysée's general secretariat, which is not a small group of people spending their time in the President's office listening to secrets. Ségolène Royal's remit was health, environment, and youth questions. There is absolutely no reason to suppose she would be told about a top-secret military operation, and she most certainly would not have been involved in its planning. Her brother was a special agent and soldier, and the mission he was sent on was top-secret. There is no reason why he should have blabbed the secret to his sister.

It has long been known that Gérard Royal was involved in the Rainbow Warrior mission, and Ségolène Royal is not denying it. But your supposition that she was necessarily part of the Rainbow Warrior plot has neither proof nor likelihood in favour of it. Yet, when you say she refuses to "come clean", you are finding her guilty in advance.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sat Nov 18th, 2006 at 11:14:11 AM EST

This is not a contempt for France (4.00 / 2)

as we have the same hopeless situation in Australia between our current Conservative Prime Minister and a very weak leader of the Opposition Labor Party to which I belong. So many of us are so frustrated by it. Fortunately the Greens here are strong, united and 80% palatable. So there is an alternative that while not strong enough to win outright can at least often hold the balance of power.

In so many countries the days of great "statespersonship" is so over. This is what I am lamenting, not France in general.

It is a contempt for a person who refuses to tell the truth about a major issue she may have or may have not been part of.

All she would need to say is the following:

"I knew nothing about the terrorist plot to sink the Rainbow Warrior from with my job in the Government or from my family. I find the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior an unacceptable terrorist attack and condemn anyone's active involvement in it. I furthermore greatly regret the loss of life involved and resolve to not let anything of this nature occur during my presidency".

But no, she would rather hem and haw and praise her brother's sterling military career.

Not the kind of statesperson I would want. Is honesty and integrity really that hard?

I like the silence of a church, before the service begins better than any preaching. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

by Norwegian Chef (hephaestion@surfbirder.com) on Sat Nov 18th, 2006 at 02:25:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not a contempt for France (4.00 / 4)

At the time the press was talking about this, (end of September/beginning of October), Ségolène Royal made a statement that is reported here in the NZ Herald:

The Associated Press news agency today quoted Royal as saying: "I have a brother, who 20 years ago was a soldier, a frogman, for whom I have a lot of admiration. He was indeed involved in a detestable act. But he had received orders for that."
She added in an interview on the TF1 television channel: "Fortunately, the nuclear tests stopped. But clearly, and unfortunately, a person died."
Royal said she did not know of her brother's secret role at the time.
"The irony in this story is that I favoured Greenpeace's action against the nuclear tests," she said.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Nov 19th, 2006 at 09:00:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, afew (4.00 / 2)

Wow, This is completely new information to me.

If in fact what the New Zealand Herald is reporting here is true, this is critically important information.

However, I can not find any evidence of the original Associated Press article or any other article mentioning this, or any information on what interview is being referred to. Recent press down here since her election have only covered the more negative talking points that I have again rehashed in this diary. It is surprising that something as important as this would not be widely publicised and relegated to a small article buried in the NZ Herald.

Likewise the people inside Greenpeace are not aware of any such statement like this by her. If she could put this sentiment in a letter and send it to Greenpeace much in the same language as the NZ Herald article quotes, it would go light-years to building her reputation inside this important organisation.

This article in the NZ Herald that you cite comes 5 days after her interview with Le Parisien, and although I do not have a full transcript of that interview, the coverage of it in France, Australia and New Zealand that I saw led everyone to believe she was in fact not at all contrite. Maybe a full transcript of the interview would be more enlightening. IS there any way to get a copy?

So if in fact she is contrite, the message needs to get out.If she has said those things then it needs to be publicised widely and clearly.

Trust me, I would like nothing more than to be able to like Ségolène Royal, and I would more than gladly admit I was wrong and ignorant in my assessment of her if she has in fact said these things and feels this way.

Please if you could find me any transcript or definitive original article where she states these things, I would be more than glad to circulate it widely in the environmental and Greenpeace communities down here. It would mean a lot to people down here to know she was contrite on this issue.

Thanks for taking the time to reply to the diary and pointing out these important aspects.

I like the silence of a church, before the service begins better than any preaching. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

by Norwegian Chef (hephaestion@surfbirder.com) on Sun Nov 19th, 2006 at 03:56:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, afew (4.00 / 4)

She was on the 8 pm news of France's biggest TV channel, TF1, on Wednesday, 4th October. (In the French political world, this newscast is about as bigtime as you can get in terms of public exposure, so she wasn't, you know, mumbling in a corner).

You can see a video of the interview here on the TF1 site -- in French of course.

I haven't yet found a full transcript. The French left magazine Nouvel Observateur summarizes her words in a similar way to the NZ Herald here, but again in French.

I'll get back to this later if I may, because I need a little time to find a more useful source for you.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Nov 19th, 2006 at 04:38:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks for the links, afew (4.00 / 4)

My French is alright as I did an MA in Egyptology a few years back and most of the research was in French and German. I have listened to the interview on the TF1 and read the Nouvel Observateur article. I now feel a good deal of relief knowing that I was wrong and ill-informed in my initial assessment of the situation.

If you or anyone else (dodo, jerome etc) can get me a full transcript of both the Le Parisien and TF1 Interviews (either French or English) relating specifically to the Rainbow Warrior information, I will be happy to post these exact quotes on those sites that are putting out disinformation about Ségolène Royal in relation to the Rainbow Warrior Affair.

I will also seek to amend the Rainbow Warrior and Ségolène Royal Articles on Wiki to include her express quotes so that there is no longer any lack of clarity about her exact position. I will also post a diary on Daily Kos to correct my own wrong information there.

I will also send it to my good friend in Greenpeace who runs the Eastern Mediterranean Office and get him to circulate it around the various Greenpeace offices in Europe and Australia/New Zealand. The fact that she has unequivocally stated on French TV that she was actually in support of the Greenpeace Action will definitely impress them.

So if you or anyone could get me the transcripts that would be great, and I will commence my penance.

I like the silence of a church, before the service begins better than any preaching. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

by Norwegian Chef (hephaestion@surfbirder.com) on Mon Nov 20th, 2006 at 06:46:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks for the links, afew (4.00 / 2)

I had no luck in getting a full transcript of the TF1 News interview, so I did it myself and translated it. It's now up as a diary Media (Mis)perceptions).

I hope it will be useful.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Nov 20th, 2006 at 07:03:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks for the links, afew (none / 0)

That's great! I am happy ET could be of such help.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Mon Nov 20th, 2006 at 08:01:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, afew (4.00 / 2)

A further detail you missed. In the original article in Le Parisien (now behind subscription wall, but the detailed in NZ Herald article), in which Antoine Royal claims his brother Gérard himself placed the bomb (something later interviewed intel guys deny BTW -- they say he only drove the inflatable boat from which the bomb-laying scuba divers set off), Antoine also says that Ségolène only learnt of her brother's participation in the attack from a recent newspaper article (obviously the L'Express article from March this year).

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Mon Nov 20th, 2006 at 06:21:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, afew (none / 1)

...Greenpeace...

Interestingly, I couldn't find a single word on the recent episodes of the Gérard Royal affair on the French and German Greenpeace pages nor on the main international site, even though the New Zealand counterparts went as far as demanding the brother's extradiction.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Mon Nov 20th, 2006 at 06:37:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Norwegian Chef (none / 1)

Thanks for your willingness to provide and discuss the facts (or articles) that generated your concern, and to take into consideration the additional facts provided by others.

Your attitude is much appreciated and enhances this forum.

Thank you.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Mon Nov 20th, 2006 at 07:30:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Sarkozy vs Royal= Cardinal Richelieu vs Marie Antoinette | 26 comments (26 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

Sarkozy vs Royal= Cardinal Richelieu vs Marie Antoinette

Top Diaries

Southern Irish disinterest in Northern Ireland affairs

The end is Nigh?

Leinster's demise and Munster's hope

Joe Biden. America's Interventionist Hero

The law of conservation of transness

Recent Diaries

Southern Irish disinterest in Northern Ireland affairs

Incident Ukrainian War Display Gets Int'l Attention

German Climate Activists Group Outlawed

Leinster's demise and Munster's hope

Joe Biden. America's Interventionist Hero

Targeted Assassinations: a Bankrupt Strategy

The end is Nigh?

Hijacking Peace by Zelensky for War Escalation

UA Drone Attack On Moscow

Rightwing Operation New EU 'Enlightenment’

Energy (and Other) Events Monthly - May 2023

May 2023

The law of conservation of transness

Neocon Years and NATO Expansion of 2008

US Provoked Conflict In Europe

U.S. Will Be Ousted From Middle-East

Settler Extremism Blessed by Jerusalem Leaders