De Gaulle [1], c’est de lui qu’il s’agit. En 1967, cet homme que les iraniens vénèrent peut-être plus que les français a fait une déclaration juste avant la « Guerre des 6 Jours » [2], la troisième guerre israélo-arabe.

Il s’en suivra une menace sur le ravitaillement en pétrole de l’Occident et surtout de l’Europe. Enfin, le problème palestinien, qui n’est encore qu’un problème de réfugiés, deviendra une grande cause nationale. En conclusion, je dirai ceci à M. Eban : Nous ne voulons à Israël que du bien. Les avertissements que nous vous prodiguons doivent être considérés comme des marques d’intérêt et d’amitié. Ne prenez pas le mors aux dents.»

http://www.iran-resist.org/article2410.html

visionnaire, isn’t he ?

I think you want to see De Gaulle as a fieffé racist, though it’s your contemporain reading of him, De Gaulle was a man that had the maurrasian views of the late half 19th century and of the earlier half of 20th’s, not of an enlightened internationalist’s. Some of his thoughts could be pronounced by you :

” Les musulmans, vous êtes allés les voir ? Vous les avez regardés avec leurs turbans et leur djellabas, vous voyez bien que ce ne sont pas des Français ! Ceux qui prônent l’intégration ont une cervelle de colibri, même s’ils sont très intelligents. Essayez d’intégrer de l’huile et du vinaigre. Agitez la bouteille. Au bout d’un moment, ils se séparent de nouveau. Les Arabes sont des Arabes, les Français sont des Français. Vous croyez que le corps français peut absorber 10 millions de musulmans qui demain seront 20 millions, et après demain 40 ? ”

I guess his vocabulary and some of his other opinions hurt you.If he was born in the fourties, he wouldn’t advocate theses that hurt you, he would be the kind of conservative that you are praising.

some of his colorful sentences from a person that surely doesn’t see de Gaulle as a sympathetic man (DG would be attacked by anti-racist associations nowadays) :

http://contreculture.org/AG%20De%20Gaulle%20id%E9es%20directrices.html

who should have been catching up on that work they dropped in 1940. And you come saying that they were there because of Eisenhower

umm, difficult to follow your logic, as it seems to deny us any good intention, or courage

though as far as 1940, this american army historian doesn’t say that the French didn’t try anything, but that the elite misunderstood when it could have been its chances to take over Germany :

http :// http://www.historynet.com/operation-saar-a-lost-opportunity-september-99-world-war-ii-feature.htm

as far as the Bulge operation, Leclerc was on Strassburg’s, of course with his heteroclite army (resistants + colonials).

Avant la fin de l’année 1944, le 23 novembre, ses troupes libèrent Strasbourg, occasion d’une prise d’arme pour rappeler que le serment de Koufra a été tenu. Ultimes faits d’armes, ce sont les soldats français de Leclerc qui s’emparent du Kehlsteinhaus, le « nid d’aigle » d’Adolf Hitler à Berchtesgaden en Bavière, quelques jours seulement avant l’armistice du 8 mai 1945.

The point was that those North Africabns had been French enough to fight and die for saving Strasburg then they were FRENCH. Period. Far more French than any Vychist. That has ever been a cornerstone of western civilization since Sparta granted citizenship to the helots who had fought for her.

Well these are the rules to become American, these also are the rules in our foreign legion, these should have become the rules for these colonial fighters, though lot of them used their experience of WW2 to initiate independance guerilla afterwords.

The Graduate” you notice that Americans weren’t fat in the sixties.

hey, you are not American ; An American would tell you that California is apart, that that’s where the people mensurations look more like the Europeans’… I went to Florida (Fort Lauderdale, Miami) in 1973, I was young, What schocked me were the fat people in the streets, I was expecting to see some kind of hollywood creatures, I’m not saying they were all fat, the average ones were.

As far as French movies, you can’t rely on them for witnessings of reality, they were all made inside studios, the population that you want to see as “well feed”, were “figurants”, I suppose that the Regissor chose them on photogenical criteriums, like it used to be for fictional movies before that the italian school initiated “cinema neorealism”, ie de Sica, Rosselini…

http :// fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%A9or%C3%A9alisme_(cin%C3%A9ma)

just shoot or deport a few thousands vichysts and communists (who in addition of their 1940 betrayal had been helping the FLN and in some occasions setting bombs who killed French) and hey presto: There is room now. /i>

What I also find utterly apalling is your complete lack of morality.

HAHAHA, I don’t know what you mean, what is your morality ? from what I read, you want to exterminate all the muslims, next, the French, next, the Russians….

Your last paragraph is still repeating your own fictions of events that you don’t want to acknoledge in neutral history books, though different from your version, in the reliant sources, but your agenda is to make the French look “evil”, this was part of the former neo-con administration agendas : define an enemi, useful to unify a population behind a cause, the “supposed global war on terrorism”, investing their territories, naturally rich in energy sources, would find its justification !

It doesn’t matter for you how many incoherences there are in the frame, people won’t bother to verify them if you hammered them like advertising slogans, they become part of the collective memory !

But, the neo-cons lose, you’re a “has been” now ! and they don’t make history anymore, ah, may-be are you going to initiate a new-age revolution, like the last hippies’one, hey, you’v got to wash your brain first, a tabula rasa is need

You are really incredible. Ever trying to divert attention. I was telling that the North Africans (untermenschen in De Gaulle’s mind) should have not been fighting the Bulge battle and doing the dying when there were so many French (the real ones, the herrensvolk) who should have been catching up on that work they dropped in 1940. And you come saying that they were there because of Eisenhower. That was not the point. The point was that those North Africabns had been French enough to fight and die for saving Strasburg then they were FRENCH. Period. Far more French than any Vychist. That has ever been a cornerstone of western civilization since Sparta granted citizenship to the helots who had fought for her.

Also you told that France was broke and when I pointed at contemporary movies you laughed at me. You shouldn’t have. You can learn a lot from movies if you look at the crowd. Not at the actors (these are ever beautiful people), not at the extras but at the crowd. For instance when you look at the people far away from the camera in the Berkeley shots in “The Graduate” you notice that Americans weren’t fat in the sixties. And when you look at what is far away from the camera (ie beond the extras) you don’t see derelict buildings or people in shabby clothes and looking hungry.

But even if France was far worse off than it was it was her duty to take those who had fought for it,, specially given the savage and sadistic nature of the FLN thugs. And in case you had no room for them (two hundred thousand people on a population of fourty millions) just shoot or deport a few thousands vichysts and communists (who in addition of their 1940 betrayal had been helping the FLN and in some occasions setting bombs who killed French) and hey presto: There is room now.

What I also find utterly apalling is your complete lack of morality. Now I could understand that you justified atrocities when like for the man in the Russian tale who throws his son to the wolves, France’s existence was at stake. But it wasn’t at stake at Lepanto (look at the painting “Les Massacres de Scio” and multiply by one thousnad), it wasn’t at stake at the second siege of Vienna, it wasn’t at stake for the harkis just slightly tightening its belt and tens of thousands dies in the most horrible ways, it wasn’t at stake for the Six days War (genocide had Israel lost), it wasn’t at stake when you tried hard to have Saddam own nukes), it wasn’t at stake for Rwanda (just Total’s balance sheet) when you supported a government you klnew too weel was pfreparingf for genocide, later covered the retreat of the Interamwe and ended rearmeing them. Nothing of this is ever wrong to you.

http://www.lepoint.fr/actualites-monde/la-division-leclerc-l-homme-a-la-canne-de-la-2e-db/924/0/18021

The partition of India has been crucial to the resurgence of Islam, as Pakistan is the only Muslim nation with nuclear weapons so far. Partition happened for several reasons, one of them the lack of vision and hard-headed policy of Mahatma Gandhi when trying to appease the Muslim League and Mr. Jinna. It never works with the Muslims. Not accepting the Sir Stafford Cripps’ proposal for Dominion Status in 1942 was a big mistake, and even though Nehru was for it at first, Gandhi finally convinced him against it. The only clear head during this process was Sri Aurobindo, exiled in Pondicherry, who sent a personal friend to the Indian Congress to advocate for the Cripps’ proposal, and said that the Hindus must prepare to fight the Muslims if necessary to prevent partition.

Results, ad Ms. Carol Gould points out:
1) Over one million dead, totally the opposite of the “Ahimsa” or non-injury policy of Mahatma Gandhi. Clearly, appeasement and passive resistance works only in very specific circumstances. It did not here.
2) The creation of the mongrel state called Pakistan, and later Bangladesh, and a string of human right violations against Hindus for years and years: murder, mayhem, expulsions, you name it.

Paki come home. Only when the partition of India is reversed, there will a chance of peace in that region (Kashmir is the festering wound now). This will also bring balance is other places within the Muslim world. Reunion is not impossible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwR-5HqL6PE

OAS might have not abandonned their Harkis but they also could fire at them like at rabbits with no sentiments, whenever it was convenient.

Who was the racist? Also it was those “racists” who alongside with those “racist” Americans you hate fought Free France’s battles while the dyed in the wool French collaborated, turned Jews to the Gestapo or laughed off their asses in the stalags thinking in the fools dying at Omaha Beach.

yeah, all the video show that, I wonder who made them, YOU ?

the utter racism of those French commanders who thought their North African troops were not worthy or able to be educated and disciplined, that that they were mere animals and that every rape allowed to despise them a bit more.

and what was my response ? Patton was the commandant in chief there, and could care less of what were doing these troops, besides might be that Americans troops exactlywere making the same thing, I read it somewhere, umm you know the “Repos du guerrier” isn’t a fiction

Broke? With all the money you had got from America? And French don’t look to be that poor in contemporary movies.

Ah OK, your references are movies for statting so, LMAO, aren’t you afraid to look like a joke !!!

You know perfectly that the Marshal plan was ment to rebuilt the infrastructures that your planes destroyed, beside there are videos that you should have viewed, since your references are images, and I doubt that de Gaulle had access to american money LMAO

why didn’t you take their place when they prevented the reoccupation of Strasburg during the Bulge? Why did they have to die in the alsacian snows when so many French were doing nothing more than shaving women’s heads?

who was the big manitou of the armies ? Eisenhower, and d’ya know why the French weren’t sent there, because Patton was, you know why Eisenhower sent him there, cuz he was making such a mess everywhere he went trough the french population, so to make sure his energy was well used the wiseness was to keep him busy to fight on the Germans borders, he made quit a good job, I saw a monument devoted to his bravoure in Thionville !

Not only the French were shaving women’s heads, there are videos from Belgium, Nederland… too, but you didn’t watch them, surprise !

semi slave labor ? how come you dare to talk of it with such an hypocrite pity ! they were paid the same price as french men doing the same job, he socialist laws made that equality ! if they were need, it’s because our following wars made that they weren’t enough frenchmen available, plus the last remains for reconstruction and more for the modernisation of our big cities started at this time too.

hey, how many aliens are not decleared in your country ? 16 millions that can’t pretend to an average salary decreated by laws, so your moral lectures, swallow them, I hope you’ll get an indigestion

Why not read De Gaulle’s memories by himself?

cuz I have videos, and you hold him as a liar ! though I have read some exterpts, and rather his booklets !

About Leclerc, I didn’t say he was there during the WWII, but for Viet Nam’s

No Roosvelt plans were to make a french protectorat, “punish the french”, that he wanted and said to Churchill, that became a well used sentence in some of your late big mouths too !

It is not dangerous to resist Americans.. Pity that you were not so resistant against the Germans.

especially if they are on the net, LMAO, where were you when the Germans were over ? me, not born ! but be sure that I would have been fighting them too

I am not an average American. Also you would be surprised about how much I know about Mustafa Kemal and the fall of the ottoman empire. Would that make me a Turk?

I don’t need a drawing, I know who you are, no normal conversation can be expected, you are on the passionate anger side where I can’t follow you