The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewEric Margolis Archive
Sarkozy's Hand in the French Cookie Jar?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

There was something refreshing about watching former French president Nicholas Sarkozy being interrogated in a French jail. Particularly since he may soon be accused of conspiracy in the murder of my old friend, Col. Muammar Khadaffi of Libya.

Sarkozy and his former chief of staff, Claude Guéant, are being investigated for secretly accepting at least fifty million Euros from Khadaffi for his 2007 electoral campaign. Such a payment violated France’s maximum permissible limit for political donation, not to mention a ban on foreign financing of candidates and failure to report the payments. Sarko also faces investigation over secret payments from the Gulf oil states.

French political candidates often have to wade through the sewers to finance their campaigns because spending limits were set relatively low to prevent big money from buying the elections, as in the United States.

These charges against Khadaffi and Guéant have been percolating for years with only a muted response. Sarkozy also got into hot water after he was accused of bilking large sums of cash from a senile heiress to France’s L’Oréal cosmetics company.

But three years ago, a French-Lebanese businessman told the French investigative site Mediapart that he had given suitcases with 5 million Euros (US \$6.2 million) to Guéant. The former chief of staff would later claim the cash was payment for a painting he had sold to the shady Lebanese. Of course it was!

In 2007, Sarkozy became president of France. At the time, he and Khadaffi appeared to be best of friends. The Libyan leader made a gala visit to Paris, pitched his Bedouin tent on the grounds of the presidential palace and received the lavish official welcome that the French do so well.

France was interested in Libya’s high quality oil and using Libya as a beachhead for expanding Paris’ former influence in North Africa. France and Libya secretly colluded to fight Islamist rebels in the region who were battling French-installed puppet rulers in West and Central Africa.

But then Sarkozy turned sharply against the Khadaffi regime and joined US and British efforts to overthrow it. This was not the first time. Former French president, François Mitterrand, ordered his intelligence chief, Count de Marenches, to destroy Khadaffi’s personal jet with an altitude-fused bomb. Marenches told me the bomb was secreted aboard the plane, then removed when relations with Tripoli improved.

British intelligence, MI6, also tried to assassinate Khadaffi by means of a car bomb in Benghazi, Libya, but failed, though many civilians were killed.

Sarkozy eventually heeded demands from Hillary Clinton, then US Secretary of State, to launch a war against ostensible ally, Khadaffi, and seize his oil riches.

Warplanes and special forces from the US, France and Britain joined in a sustained attack on Libya, which was cynically misrepresented as a humanitarian rescue mission. French aircraft strafed Khadaffi’s convoy. French special forces and Libyan mercenaries caught Khadaffi, tortured him with a knife, then shot him dead.


Khadaffi had made the fatal mistake of telling his eldest son, Saif al-Islam, and senior officials about his secret payment to Sarkozy. When word leaked out from Saif, Sarkozy quickly ordered the attack on Libya. Dead men tell no tales. French intelligence is very skilled at rubbing out foes and nuisances.

My surmise is that French justice will find some tenuous link between Sarkozy and Khadaffi’s murder, but no hard proof Sarko was directly involved. If George W. Bush and Dick Cheney could get away Scott free after killing over one million Iraqi civilians in a trumped-up war, why prosecute Sarko for this minor ‘contretemps?’

(Republished from by permission of author or representative)
Hide 42 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. “French political candidates often have to wade through the sewers to finance their campaigns”?

    ALL Western political candidates often have to wade through the sewers to finance their campaigns. That’s why the US has pushed its ridiculous model of two party ‘democracy’ and that’s why we have the CIA and the NSA: their job is to blackmail politicians–domestic and foreign–by detecting their sewer-wading excursions.

    That’s why they all line up when the whip is cracked, and blame Russia (or attack Syria) on the basis of ridiculous allegations.

  2. @Godfree Roberts

    That’s why they all line up when the whip is cracked, and blame Russia (or attack Syria) on the basis of ridiculous allegations.

    For a longtime I had the suspicion that being a potential victim of blackmail is not a disqualification but rather the first necessary step toward a high flung career.

    Saves so much trouble …

    • Replies: @TheJester
    , @jacques sheete
  3. When word leaked out from Saif, Sarkozy quickly ordered the attack on Libya. Dead men tell no tales. French intelligence is very skilled at rubbing out foes and nuisances.

    My surmise is that French justice will find some tenuous link between Sarkozy and Khadaffi’s murder, but no hard proof Sarko was directly involved.

    That doesn’t seem so tenuous.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  4. anonymous[283] • Disclaimer says:

    This sort of lifts the cover a bit on the fact that the leadership of the much-touted western democracies run things like mafia bosses. If a person isn’t a complete cynic by age thirty then they’ve had their head in the sand all along.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  5. George says:

    “Khadaffi had made the fatal mistake of telling his eldest son, Saif al-Islam”

    How do you know that? Why is Khadaffi dead and Al-Islam alive?

  6. What I miss is Reagan trying to kill Ghadaffi,by USA bombing ‘the mad dog of Africa’, or of the Middle East, I forgot.
    How Reagan was fooled into this bombing by Mossad, that planted a transmitter close to Ghadaffi’s residence:
    Victor Ostrovsky, ‘Mossad – the other side of deception’, 1994

    Ghadaffi of course was a dictator, the only form of government that is possible in a tribal culture, but he did great things, such as the Man Made River.
    Transporting deep underground water from the Sahara to the coastal area over a distance of, do not remember exactly, 2000 km.
    If it still functions now, I wonder.

  7. @The Anti-Gnostic

    In 2005 Sarko was minister of internal affairs, such as police and security.
    It was then that the French civil war began, Muslim insurrection in their ghetto’s, the banlieues.
    French people far from the big cities were frightened.
    Sarko put down the rebellions with harsh measures.
    It later was asserted that he had deliberately let the unrest escalate, in order to promote himself for the presidential elections.
    If this is true, I do not know, but he became president.
    Shortly after the election his wife left him ‘he only loves himself’.
    Sarko returned France into NATO.
    After his election Israeli newspapers were jubilant ‘he came from an old Greek jewish dynasty’.
    And this while Sarko is catholic.
    This did not prevent a number of antisemitic utterings directed against him in France during his presidency.
    BTW, there is no doubt that Hollande is a jew.
    If Macron is a jew, I wonder, he worked for Rothschild bank, where he was paid millions.

  8. @Godfree Roberts

    Not all, with us, the Netherlands, the only case we know of is the VVD, the party of present prime minister Rutte.
    In the seventies Heineken illegally financed the VVD to undermine socialist Den Uyl, who tried to create a more or less centrally directed economy.
    At the time, Rutte was still a university, I suppose.
    But it succeeded, the Den Uyl era ended around 1980.
    I maybe should mention that Dutch political parties are subsidised with taxpayer’s money, once they exist.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  9. BlogviewEric Margolis Archive
    Sarkozy’s Hand in the French Cookie Jar?

    Apparently Netanyhoo’s too.

    Netanyahu, wife, son questioned by police in corruption case

    And Trump’s hands in girlies’ panties.

    Why, without “leadership,” we’d have an-arkee!!!” ‘N kay-oss ‘n stuff!

    An’ never fergit, Eye-ran ‘n Russhya are de enemy!!! 😉

    “The adversary is closer to home; it’s the Pentagon bureaucracy…”

    – Donald Rumsfeld on Sept. 10, 2001

    And behind every Pentagon slinks a Hexagon…

    But there were other enemies within, anyone who dared voice any skepticism about their grand plans…

    – Jim Lobe , How neo-cons influence the Pentagon …

  10. TheJester says:

    For a long time, I had the suspicion that being a potential victim of blackmail is not a disqualification but rather the first necessary step toward a high flung career.

    This idea periodically surfaces on the Utz Review: The Deep State will only run political candidates who are tainted and subject to blackmail. There has to be something hidden in their “closets”. This ensures loyalty and deference to the Deep State’s political and economic agendas. (It also helps to have direct or familial connections to the CIA: H. W. Bush, Clinton, G. W. Bush, Omaba.) JFK and Trump show what happens to accidental political candidates who deviate from that agenda.

    The other side of this is that the Deep State protects its agents and sycophants. The Obama administration maintains it was squeaky clean … no subterranean rumors of mistresses, prostitutes, or interns.

    So, what did the Deep State have on Obama? There has to be something. Yes, it occasionally appears and quickly disappears down the memory hole. Obama continues to be protected for having assiduously carried out the Deep State’s agenda.

  11. @Byrresheim

    For a longtime I had the suspicion that being a potential victim of blackmail is not a disqualification but rather the first necessary step toward a high flung career.

    No doubt.

    Do you know the story of Woody Wilson’s rise to power?

    The Trumpster got selected by Big Mafia probably because he’s extremely vulnerable to blackmail as well.

  12. Obama continues to be protected for having assiduously carried out the Deep State’s agenda.

    Until he does a Khadaffi.

  13. Jake says:

    Sarkozy turned full whore for the Anglo-American Empire, which means he may well scoot away free as a bird. But then again, the WASP Empire, even before it became obvious it was an Anglo-Zionist Empire, proved ever ready to back stab those who had done dirty deeds for it.

    The Anglo-Zionist Empire could hire some Mohammedans to take him out, and then use their press to blame it all on the racist French right.

  14. It would be great to see all the Zionist neocons who were responsible for 911 in prison here in the U.S..

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  15. @jilles dykstra

    Yes, the Dutch have always been willing to experiment with rational forms of government. They don’t get enough credit for that.

  16. utu says:

    Marenches told me the bomb was secreted aboard the plane, then removed when relations with Tripoli improved.

    And you believed him? Maybe you did not but could not resist name dropping. Margolis is disappointing as usual.

  17. Chiron says:

    Sarkozy is a scumbag no doubt but the real reason the French media and authorities started to go after him and his Party is because he a friend of Putin, a cardinal sin in the West today, also his Party would become more anti-Islam and anti-immigration with Francois Fillon who political career was derailed by corruption charges.

    Macron has been groomed to be President for a long time, the job with the Rotshchilds and being in the 2014 Bilderberg conference when he was nobody is a proof of this.

  18. Sarkozy corrupt? But of course he is Sybil! The last honest President they had in France was DeGaulle.
    Engeland and the US prolly never had an honest head of state or it is so long ago allhas been forgotten

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  19. JamesG says: • Website

    “France was interested in Libya’s high quality oil … ”

    Correct. It was sweet (low or no sulphur) light (requiring less refining than heavier crudes such as Venezuela’s) and a short distance from a major market … Europe.

  20. annamaria says:

    “British intelligence, MI6, also tried to assassinate Khadaffi by means of a car bomb in Benghazi, Libya, but failed, though many civilians were killed.”
    — When people like Steele and Allen are M16′ stars, expect stupidity and incompetence flourish.

  21. Art says:

    You take a 50 million gift from a guy — then when politically expedient and profitable – you kill him.

    No matter how you slice it – Sarkozy is a disgusting human being.

    Think Peace — Art

    p.s. Politicians are the scum of the Earth. Don’t you want to vomit when they tell each other “thank you for your service?”

  22. annamaria says:

    Meanwhile, in Queendom, the Skripal affair is coming to the next stage for Theresa and Boris (and their ziocon handlers):
    Embassy Press Officer on unanswered questions [old ones] regarding the Salisbury poisoning:
    Question: At yesterday’s briefing, the Official Representative of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that the Embassy had asked quite a few questions that remain unanswered. What are those questions?
    Answer: Indeed, we are witnessing a blatant violation by the UK of its international obligations under the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the 1968 bilateral Consular Convention. We have not received a response to our multiple questions and requests made through diplomatic notes. Failure by Britain to engage in the normal diplomatic exchange with the Embassy on this matter is regrettable.
    The questions to which we are awaiting answers are as follows:


    1) What is Mr and Ms Skripal’s exact diagnosis and condition?
    2) What treatment are they receiving?
    3) Is that treatment the same as that provided to Sgt Nick Bailey?
    4) Is it true that Yulia Skripal has regained consciousness and can communicate, eat and drink?
    5) Mr Bailey has been discharged, Yulia Skripal is getting better, but why is Sergei Skripal still in a critical condition?
    6) Did Mr Bailey, Mr Skripal and Ms Skripal receive antidotes?
    7) Which antidotes?
    8) How were the right antidotes identified?
    9) Did they actually help or harm?
    10) The Embassy immediately informed the FCO that Mr Skripal’s niece has been enquiring of her uncle’s and cousin’s health. Why have the authorities ignored her?
    11) Why are there no photos/videos confirming that the Skripals are alive and at hospital?
    12) Did the Skripals agree on Salisbury CCTV footage to be shown on TV?
    13) If not, who agreed on their behalf?
    14) Can that person also agree on hospital photos/videos to be published?
    15) Why are consuls not allowed to see the Skripals?
    16) How are doctors protected against chemical exposure?
    17) Can consuls use the same protection?
    18) Where, how and by whom were blood samples collected from the Skripals?
    19) How was it documented?
    20) Who can certify that the data is credible?
    21) How can we be sure that the chain of custody was up to international standards?
    22) Through what methods did experts identify the substance so quickly?
    23) Had they possessed a sample against which to test the substance?
    24) Where had that sample come from?
    25) Nerve agents act immediately. Why was it not the case with the Skripals?
    26) Leaks suggest the Skripals were poisoned at a pub, at a restaurant, in their car, at the airport, at home… Which version is the official one?
    27) How to reconcile quick political moves with Scotland Yard’s statement that the investigation will take “months”?

  23. annamaria says:

    France enters the scene of the Skripal affair: “14 simple yet crucial questions London needs to answer”
    “1. Why has Russia been denied the right of consular access to the two Russian citizens, who came to harm on British territory?
    2. What specific antidotes and in what form were the victims injected with? How did such antidotes come into the possession of British doctors at the scene of the incident?
    3. On what grounds was France involved in technical cooperation in the investigation of the incident, in which Russian citizens were injured?
    4. Did the UK notify the OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) of France’s involvement in the investigation of the Salisbury incident?
    5. What does France have to do with the incident, involving two Russian citizens in the UK?
    6. What rules of UK procedural legislation allow for the involvement of a foreign state in an internal investigation?
    7. What evidence was handed over to France to be studied and for the investigation to be conducted?
    8. Were the French experts present during the sampling of biomaterial from Sergei and Yulia Skripal?
    9. Was the study of biomaterials from Sergei and Yulia Skripal conducted by the French experts and, if so, in which specific laboratories?
    10. Does the UK have the materials involved in the investigation carried out by France?
    11. Have the results of the French investigation been presented to the OPCW Technical Secretariat?
    12. Based on what attributes was the alleged “Russian origin” of the substance used in Salisbury established?
    13. Does the UK have control samples of the chemical warfare agent, which British representatives refer to as “Novichok”?
    14. Have the samples of a chemical warfare agent of the same type as “Novichok” (in accordance with British terminology) or its analogs been developed in the UK?”

    — Some commenters believe that the “French connection” in the Skripal affair has its roots in France’ involvement in Lybia and Syria.

  24. @Desert Fox

    All, you say? Now that would be cause for a new public holiday in recognition of it and for the instigator a place on Mt Rushmore.

  25. @Godfree Roberts

    Your “all” is the most damaging word you could have used to uphold your credibility on UR. Sorry to see you descend to the aĺl too frequent bluster of UR commenters. You didn’t even bother to use “often” in a way which clarified and possibly justified your assertion.

    So we are left with a seriously unquantified version of your beliefs about, or knowledge of what you assert. Given the US plutocracy’s demographic weight there may be a promising start for your real case but… it doesn’t take it far.

    If you turn your mind to facts you might care to theorise about the differences between presidential systems like the US and France and parliamentary systems like most of the Anglosphere.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  26. @Den Lille Abe

    Who is “Engeland’s’” head of state (sic)? Or the UK’s if your actual knowledge is up to understanding your solecism that I am pointing to?

  27. @Wizard of Oz

    Instead of waving your hands and breathing heavily, can you provide an counter-example?

    A contemporary Western politician, not personally wealthy, who has NOT waded through that sewer?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  28. @Godfree Roberts

    Talk about pots and kettles! I refer to the hand waving allusion.

    You obviously know nothing about most countries but are trying to wriggle out of it by adding “not personally wealthy” to which the slightest imagination should have caused you to add reference to family wealth. If you want one name – which is absurd – I’ll give you Bob Brown a national Senator from Tasmania and until recently head of the Greens Party. (Equally his successor Richard di Natale).

    You would obviously be surprised to learn that when I was actively concerned the then dominant (because of Catholic- Communist splits in the Labor Party) Liberal Party in Victoria had a rule against candidates soliciting donations which all were meant, for the sake of propriety, to go through the party. Now it is likely that a friendly support group will hold a subscription lunch at whuch the mrmber/candidate will be at least one of the speakers.

    There have long been legal limits on campaign spending by the candidate as to which he has to lodge a declaration. OK not all that difficult to get round, but it is safe to say that securing party preselection and endorsement is what matters to 90 per cent of Australian politicians. There is much less freedom to vote against party positions (virtually none in the Labor Party) and no question of candidates/members being able to say “I won a primary on these pledges: that is my mandate, not party policy”. The ideal is just to accrue allies in the party so you win preselection for a safe electorate. Some are so safe that any constituency party fundraising is likely to result in funds being handed over to those campaigning in marginal seats.

    Even the unions’ ownership of Labor politicians is not much about money. It is much more about preselection votes for what are often safe seats that need no campaigning (though the Greens are now giving trouble on the inner city left). A fortiori for the faction heads/fixers who get themselves on to the Senate (or state upper house) ballot paper as top of the list of party candidates to be elected by proportional representation on the Hare-Clark system.

    There is also substantial public funding of election campaigns. While that which I know about is based on the number of first preference votes a party’s candidates have already obtained in the recent election the number is reasonably predictable.

  29. @Wizard of Oz

    Indeed there are other models for democratish government than that of the US and quite a few are less flyblown than the US plutocratic- with-democratic- rhetorical- flavouring model. I commend you, as an American, breaking the mould of American insularity to learn so much about China. But there is still a lot more diversity in the big wide world.

  30. Anonymous [AKA "J. K."] says:

    Le pion des Desmarais a fricoté avec le régime de Khadafi avant de s’en débarasser :

    Preparation for the colonization of Africa (Kebek 2008):

    ON TARGET: Current Mess In Libya: How Much Is Canada To Blame?

    2000 laser-guided bombs dropped on Libya thanks to CFB Bagotville and AIPAC’s Irwin Cotler who gave the ok for the no-fly zone at the UNSC.

    Preparation of the next G7 (i.e., IRAN):

  31. @Godfree Roberts

    I did. Read again. Senator Richard di Natale is current head of the Greens – and without private money just to cover your added quibble and a possible one.

    And let me rub in my emphasis on your continentaly insular ignorance by nominating Kelly O’Dwyer the Assistant Treasurer (or Minister of Finance) who was one of two preselected toon candidates for her seat, the other being a self made multi millionaire.

  32. @Wizard of Oz

    Oops! Preselection candidates. As I am having to take new space I add the fact that she was one of the first candidates chosen under the party’s then new system of allowing every registered local branch Liberal to turn up at the convention, ask questions, lobby and vote. It was a safe seat, recently vacated by her former boss the country’s longest serving Treasurer and supposed-one-day-to-be PM. The voting was close but she was backed by her predecessor and his then cronies who pushed her as the young hope for the future. That her opponent could easily have guaranteed to pay the whole cost of fending off a Green eruption in her upper middle class seat was disregarded**. (i was rude to point to the America – OK and China – limited range of your political horizon. I recall having to explain to the UK Deputy PM that our preferential system of voting was not proportional representation though we also have a bit of that for various legislative chambers).
    ** What happens as the Greens expand their minority vote – now I trust going backwards – is that the Greens candidate’s preferences will be given usually to Labor and vice versa. Fortunately, some of the “doctors’ wives”, as the relevant class of voters in once safe Liberal (i.e. right of centre) seats have been called, can’t quite bring themselves to follow the Greens preferences and elect Labor.

  33. @Wizard of Oz

    Get serious. Such people are political hobbyists. Why? Because they refuse to wade in the sewer.

    Sewer-wading is a prerequisite for election and you and I and everyone knows that.

  34. @Godfree Roberts

    What makes you think thete’s omly a financial sewer? The Greens have their own ways of being appalling but, unfortunately, they are no hobbyists.

    And you didn’t wriggle hard enough to evade the weight of my offering a federal Minister as an example. Moreover hers is a typical case in our system of government.

    Let me offer another aid to your understanding. Australia has compusory registration to vote, and voting, for all citizens over 18. So 80 to 90+ per cent vote and the American problem of getting out the vote doesn’t have to be dealt with in any major way. There are fewer scare tactics and less money spent.

    If you were talking about buying votes with public money by making extravagant promises at election time you would be closer to a truth. But that is what parties as a whole do in my country not individuals.

  35. If for nothing else, Gaddhafi deserves the recognition of having predicted the twin surges of Islamism and of immigration across the Med should Libya be dismantled by NATO, as it was.

  36. Ace says:

    Don’t forget the French attempt to assassinate the crew of the Rainbow Warrior.

  37. annamaria says:
    “The Turkish Press Agency, Anadolu Agency, has published a map of five secret military bases in Syria belonging to France… Under international law, France’s military presence in Syria is illegal.”
    –And why and for what these French nationals are prepared to die? For Mr. Macron (who is childless) politicking?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  38. @Godfree Roberts

    And another thing. Would you call a single issue fanatic or enthusiast whose one issue was pro-life or saving the Sacred Lake a hobbyist? Minority parties and independents often trade their votes in legislatures on major tax measures for something that no government would voluntarily legislate for.

  39. @annamaria

    Very surprising on the face of it. One base needs an explanation for its purpose but five????

    Who says “illegal”? And how so? When were they established? What was the Syriam government’s position at the time? (Does it reallyhave much to do with the recently elected Macron?).

  40. TT says:

    Some interesting old articles on Sarkosky, as CIA & Mossad assets, Jewish link.

    Operation Sarkozy : how the CIA placed one of its agents at the presidency of the French Republic See how Sarkosky grow up, his US links and propelled to France Prez.

    Sarkozy accused of working for Israeli intelligence

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Eric Margolis Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
“America’s strategic and economic interests in the Mideast and Muslim world are being threatened by the agony in...
Bin Laden is dead, but his strategy still bleeds the United States.
Egyptians revolted against American rule as well as Mubarak’s.
A menace grows from Bush’s Korean blind spot.
Far from being a model for a “liberated” Iraq, Afghanistan shows how the U.S. can get bogged down Soviet-style.