When Hubris Meets Vanity

Some political careers can end at the back door to reality. This is of course the wear & tear process, a result of exaggerated ambitions and in particular with hubris. With so much hubris it is clear Nicolas Sarkozy could only persuade himself to be right. In his recent "performance" at the police, where it was about to be determined to file an act against favouring, he put reproach against reproach. For the vast majority, however, it looked as if he was trying to suppress an previous scandal with a new scandal.
Yes he allegedly has accepted financial support for his presidential election campaign from this naughty "dictator" Gaddafi. That's at least what the investigators are saying. Oh well, don't even think the the sun-glass wearing "floppy hats" are only bugging you. The investigators had tapped Sarkozy phone. As we all know,  they bug whom ever they what and justify this with "for our own security". Whistleblowers are traitors...

All this hype about former French President Nico Sarkozy is rather a warning for current President François Hollande then it is a a political gain. Above all, we have to keep in mind that a scandal here another one there, the vanity & arrogance is  affecting the compliance with the basic principles of democracy. So what? The problem is that, ultimately at a certain point, it can not be distinguished between truth and fairy tales. A rogue who does not now believe that the goal is to turn away frustrated voters from politics so they sit quietly on their sofas watching television to let panopticum pass revue.

Like Obama it is the same with Hollande: fights against the tentacles of a "security" industry and "war-toys-manufacturer-lobbies", plus those industries who are depending on this "defence" & "security" networks (war-ministries, surveillance etc). Its the "Security & Defence" which enables these global operating enterprises to continue shady tax-free business activities overseas. Unfortunately for them, the times for more and more  "wars of conveniences" are coming to an end. There is simply not enough money left. Also people don't buy all their crap. More dangerous they just vote for populistic candidates who have even less political experiances...

I don't need to remember that French citizens mainly voted for François Hollande to get Sarkozy out, and then there is a Laurent Fabius, actually the member in Hollandes government I appreciated the most because he was the only professional politician with a long political agenda as he was appointed as Foreign Minster in Hollandes government. But then Fabius wheedled his boss into Mali, which was only necessary in order to clean up the consequences of the failed "democratization" in Libya. And despite so many people died, both, Libya and Mali are now failed states. Human-rights hippies and war mongers alike can continue to talk about: "Responsibility to protect", the only out-come was: the tax payer pays to host refugees from countries, we think, we are responsible to protect people against obscure "dictators". In reality global-player together with their politicians harvest the cash while the rest of the citizans are sucking their thumbs.

So, what is not so simple to understand that if a "dictator" who is "donating" a few millions for a election champaign for a candidate. The "dictator" is doing it because he wants to avoid to become a prey of the sanction policy by the political leaders of the so called civilized world. "Dictators" fear bad publicity caused by the nagging of think-tank-pundits and their institutionalized human-rights hippies forcing politicians to act.

Sarkozys once cozy relationship with the Libyan "dictator" originated just three months into his presidency as Sarkozy persuaded Gaddafi to release five Bulgarian health workers who had been imprisoned for years in Libya on what were considered bogus charges that they’d intentionally infected children with HIV.  Month later Sarkozy hosted Gaddafi during a high-profile state visit to Paris to symbolize the reformed Libya’s return to polite global political agendas. And then, out of a sudden, Sarkozy spearheaded the NATO "operation" that resulted not only in Gaddafi’s ouster but also his assassination. Gaddafi was history.

What one is a Saddam is for the other a Moammar

Numerous institutions have called for an investigation of the exact circumstances of Gaddafi's death, amid concerns that it might have been an extra-judicial killing and a war crime. According to some sources, Gaddafi was in fact killed by a French spy who infiltrated the mob of rebels that captured Gaddafi, and shot him in the head after his capture. The motive for the operation was said to be to prevent Gaddafi from being interrogated and revealing his highly suspicious links with French President Nicolas Sarkozy. The perpetrator who killed Gaddafi in a drainpipe, Ben Omran Shaaban, 22, was a year later kidnapped himself, tortured and then shot in the neck. It was certainly not mercy as Ben Omran Shaaban was flown to France, where he was receiving medical treatment for his injuries, but he died.

From oil doctrine over water doctrine to uranium doctrine.

Few know that Libya sits over the  Nubian Sandstone Aquifer; that is, an ocean of extremely valuable fresh water. And here is where the "three sisters" - Veolia, Suez Ondeo and Saur - the French companies that control over 40% of the global water market are coming into play.

Water pipelines - buried underground deep in the desert along 4,000 km - is the Great Man-Made River Project (GMMRP), which Gaddafi built for $25 billion without borrowing a single cent from IMF or  World Bank. The GMMRP supplies Tripoli, Benghazi and the whole Libyan coastline. The amount of water is estimated by scientists to be the equivalent to 200 years of water flowing down the Nile. Nothing was so server damaged and none of the three sisters could get hold on this profitable asset.Has the "peasant" done his duty and can be dropped? Libya is now a failed state and there is no one to negotiate, is this the view through the back door on the reality? No only 2 year after Libya, there was Mali because the uranium mine in Niger where under threat and just another war with the same outcome...

---