But he is a control freak, and a typical member of the French State apparatus (even if he hasn't gone to ENA, he has been in French politics for the past 25+ years, and behaves just the same), and he has some nationalist and statist instincts that will certainly not endear him to neo-cons once he is in power.

See him as a combination of Blair (for the exclusive focus on, and mastery of, spin) and Chirac (for the opportunitism, the vicious killer instinct and the utter lack of personal beliefs in any policy or priority).

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

Why should we believe a single word of this ???

In 1991, I believe that Sarko had only ever held local council positions (was he already mayor of Neuilly?) and was a member of a weakened opossition party.  Why on earth would have he received any kickbacks from the Taiwan sale, unless of course every politician in France had, but he would have ranked fairly low in the pecking order then?

'La fin désastreuse a répondu aux moyens indignes' Germain Tillion

And things don't fit in this theory. See this:

The neo-cons are using Clearstream and their man Sarkozy to hammer DeVillepin as a way of clearing the path for Sarkozy to become the next French President.

I'm afraid Sarkozy already had every chance of becoming President without it. The opinion polls never gave Villepin winning, in any case. Now, on the other hand, the Clearstream scandal may get out of hand and damage the chances of any candidate from the right, handing the election to the left. Oops, silly neo-cons!

Just a detail: "the neo-Nazi French National Front". The NF is racist, anti-semitic, xenophobic, extreme right, but it is not neo-Nazi.

You yourself say Madsen is not a good source. I don't know where he gets his stuff from, but most of it seems pure conspiracy fantasy. As others have said above, there's not an ounce of substantiation for the tale he tells about Sarko.