2004/10/13

Le Monde fustige Bush suite au rapport Duelfer, tout en se gardant bien de mentionner les parties consacrées au scandale impliquant la France

All Le Monde 's articles (well, the very few articles the independent newspaper has written, I should say) on the Iraq Survey Group report implicating France in the UN's food-for-oil graft scandal are being presented with the emphasis on Paris's denials of any implication (Le rapport pointe le rôle de la France et de la Russie, La France dément les accusation de corruption du rapport Duelfer). "Without foundation", screams an article in its subhead, whose author I cannot quote because, very oddly, none of the articles are signed.

"There are good reason to be careful [and withhold judgment]" (something that is rarely done in France when Uncle Sam is involved), "Absurd and totally false" (Pierre Joxe), "It's delirious and absolutely impossible" (Patrick Maugein), and, of course, the victimitis-of-Anglo-Saxon-treachery defense ("it's not the first time that one has sought to implicate French companies", Jean-François Bureau). Yes, you got that right: by the time of the second article, the report and author Charles Duelfer are not quoted once, nobody but French officials being quoted, French officials, to be precise, who in any case have a stake in denying any corruption (well, maybe it isn't so strange given the number of articles on foreign policy where the only people interviewed and/or quoted are… French officals).

The newspaper of reference also relativizes the word "corruption" by putting it in quotation marks, something it already did concerning the "liberation" of Baghdad, but which it rarely (if ever), does while discussing the "lies" of Bush, Blair, and Aznar.

One single, solitary (unsigned) article on the first day, one single, soltary (unsigned) article on the second day, and by the third day, the story was being relegated to filler status (once again promising France's "total cooperation" in the independent investigation)… We have not seen the story since…

Fait étrange, aucun des articles sur le scandale impliquant la France dans le scandale de nourriture-contre-pétrole n'est signé. Les articles n'occupent pas une place primordiale dans le journal de référence, loin de là (page 5 ou en bas de la page 3, après et en-dessous d'un magistral Un rapport ruine l'argumentaire de Bush), et pas question d'un titre — ou d'un article — qui mette en question ne fût-ce qu'une partie de la politique française (de l'ordre de En trois jours, les fondements de la politique irakienne de la Maison Blanche ont été mis à mal). Jusqu'à présent, ces deux articles — jamais en premier page — sont tout ce que le journal indépendant consacre au scandale ; aucun éditorial, aucun éditorialiste — éditorialiste maison ou invité — n'en parle. Pas de cartoons de Plantu ou de Pessin, tandis que Pancho préfère orienter son dessin vers… le nouveau bâtiment du Parlement d'Écosse…

Il est vrai que comme ce bâtiment ultramoderne à Edimbourg, il y a des sujets plus importants à traiter (les embrouilleurs de filiations [trois formes de parentalité : biologique, nominative, et éducative], militer pour une journée mondiale de lutte contre l'homophobie, les goûts et les dégoûts musicaux des nazis)… Quant aux internautes du Monde.fr, eux aussi ont des sujets bien plus brûlants à recommander à leurs amis, comme la "chasse aux pédés" à Marseille ou les deux études auscultant les rapports des Français avec leur assiette ou Comment choisir son thérapeute

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I don't even know how I stopped up right here, however I assumed this publish used to be good. I don't recognise who you might
be however definitely you're going to a famous blogger if you happen to are not already. Cheers!

Feel free to visit my web-site Converse

Anonymous said...

Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wished to say that
I have really enjoyed browsing your blog posts.
After all I will be subscribing to your rss feed and I hope you write
again soon!

Feel free to surf to my webpage: Converse All Star

Anonymous said...

When someone writes an article he/she retains the idea of a user in
his/her mind that how a user can know it. So that's why this post is great. Thanks!

My page - Oakley Frogskins