Say this for the French, there are no climb-downs, no regrets, only newer realities. After earlier denials, the French now think that the sightlines of warning shots fired by French troops -- instead of pointing to the big open sky -- may have been subtended by crowds of Ivorians:

[French Defence Minister Michele] Alliot-Marie said the French troops sometimes had no choice but to open fire, particularly when they were returning from other parts of the country to protect French and other foreign nationals from attack in Abidjan.

"When they tried to stop our armoured vehicles from getting to Abidjan, to stop them from protecting our citizens and other foreigners who were victims of the violence, they had to fire," she said.

"Naturally, they fired warning shots and in some cases, most probably, they had to make full use of their firearms. That is the reality. There was nothing else that could be done."

Alliot-Marie said the troops had also fired to disperse crowds blocking two bridges linking residential and commercial parts of Abidjan to the airport.

She said the crowds were being forced to block the bridges by other protesters carrying arms.

"(The French troops) had to stop this crowd coming into contact (with the expatriates) otherwise there was a risk of a real massacre," she said.

At least these Ivorians were afforded the dignity and finality of death, unlike the hapless souls of Abu Ghraib, scarred for life by wardens held to account for cruel and inhuman hazing. How is a child rapist to get on with his life after being led around naked on a leash? At least the French have spared the Ivorians the existential bother of getting on. Well, except for the Ivorians the French only winged (see below).

Of course, some Ivorians aren't so appreciative:

France on Sunday faced the threat of legal action at the world court following its destruction of Ivorian military aircraft, as an Ivorian police chief said he saw French troops fire directly at unarmed demonstrators at a rally in Abidjan.

Meanwhile, French Defence Minister Alliot Michele-Marie acknowledged that French troops may have been responsible for some Ivorian casualties during demonstrations this month, having earlier said the deaths had been caused by clashes between demonstrators and local police.

Meanwhile in Ivory Coast's main city Abidjan, Ivorian police chief Colonel Georges Guiai Bi Poin gave a damning account of clashes that reportedly pitted French forces against protesters at a rally on November 9.

He told AFP: "French troops fired directly into the crowd. They opened fire on the orders of their chief Colonel D'Estremon. Without warning."

Guiai Bi Poin he said he was at the French colonel's side in the hotel lobby throughout the night.

Ivorian authorities said a total of 57 civilians were killed and more than 2,200 injured between November 6 and 10, including an unconfirmed number by French troops - but there is no specific toll for the Hotel Ivoire protest.

Until now, Alliot-Marie has insisted the victims were killed in clashes between Young Patriots and Ivorian police. The French military says only that warning shots were fired in the air.

That's a lot of warning shots.

And the lawsuit before the International Court of Justice in The Hague? Not to worry, says, Mdm. Michele-Marie, the dimmest bulb in Jack's dim cabinet marquee:

"As a lawyer by training, I cannot see this leading anywhere," she added.

[Emphases added.]

UPDATE 12.01.04: France admits that among the Ivorians her troops didn't shoot, they killed "about 20".

Defense Ministry spokesman Jean-Francois Bureau said the estimated 20 victims died as the result "of legitimate defense" in which French troops were left with "no alternatives." ... He did not specify the number of Ivory Coast citizens injured.

US marine shoots a wounded terrorist who was not surrendering and it makes world headlines. US soldiers make prisoners stand on boxes in Abu Ghraib, this makes world headlines for months running.

French massacre in cold blood unarmed protesters in the Ivory coast (caught on film, and with numerous European and African witnesses), among the dead are several women, and there is virtually NO media coverage.

The soldiers were NOT, I repeat NOT American. For that reason, no war crime was possible. Puhleeze, when are you guys gonna understand?

OBH,

Well, in defense of the French let me point out again that they fired warning shots, albeit into the crowd of unarmed Ivorians.

Also it should not go unmentioned that the French played by the rules and got a UN "shoot-the-Hell-out-of-everything" UNSCR. America is in Iraq under the flimsy principle of sovereign self-protection.

Finally let me join the millions of commentators and newspaper reports who cannot remind us often enough of the complaints of Ba'athist thugs, sadists, and rapists (who coincidently may have felt pressured to peach on their armed Ba'athist thug-sadist-rapist buddies) being stripped naked and made to stand on precariously unstable boxes and wear hoods - yes, I noticed you omitted these damning details. Who knows the psychological damage visited on these once-proud Arab gentlemen? On the other hand, we can easily assess the French damage done. A lot of dead Ivorians (who I don't hear complaining) and some wounded who will probably heal up nicely.

So let's try to keep the discussion fair. Please remember that the French are America's allies and pals before launching into harsh, if deserved, criticism. The French are every bit as sensitive as Ba'athist murderers, rapists, and all-purpose sadists. More so.

Regards,
DGB

Should I take the roll of zoomerx and point out that all of this is OK because America is bad?

"Americans' Role Eyed in U.N. Oil Scandal -

Dec. 1, 2004 — Former American fugitive Marc Rich was a middleman for several of Iraq's suspect oil deals in February 2001, just one month after his pardon from President Clinton, according to oil industry shipping records obtained by ABC News. "

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=295926&page=1

Whadya know? France's favorite US president is involve in the murderous and corrupt sanctions that the left peddled to us as the alternative to war a decade ago.

You just had to know that Clinton would be involved in the Food for Oil scandel somehow.
Add that to the giant trailer museum of reasons not to vote Democrat/Clinton library.

Perhaps we will find Hillary was involved too.
One can only hope.

Maybe this is why Clinton wants to be the next UN Prime Criminal after Kofi quits. America really needs to stop giving tax payer money to these criminals.

http://www.moveamericaforward.org/?Page=Petition

I Still considere that the destruction of the warplanes used against us was the right thing to do.

As well I won't join those ranting against the marine killing an unarmed wounded terrorist/resistant in Fallujah. In all battles things like this happend. The soldier COULD NOT guess if the quiy was already dead, wounded or ready to explode a grenade etc. This Marine simply did his job which was "securing the place". If we don't want such events to happend the only solution is: don't start war...

Abu Grahib and Abidjan events are together in another category: Those things which should never happend but happend anyway because of human faults. None of them where planed from the top (it would then be a war crime) but occure because soldiers are sent "like this" to do a job without the appropriate instruction training etc.

I Must admit this: Abu Grahib was known because of the action and enquiries from the American authorities while Abidjan's crowd firing was known DESPITE the action of French authorities which tried first to minimize and lie.

This difference is not on our favor... SHIT, I hope I won't have to admit that kind of thing too often.

Pierre

Pierre

Did you ever see the Passion of the Christ? I suspect in your chest beats the heart of a Republican.

I suspect in your chest beats the heart of a Republican.

No Papertiger, as long as my own heart works properly, why should I stole the heart of anyone else ? (republican or not...;-D)

Thank you Pierre. I respect the fact that any Frenchman who reads this site has some degree of curiousity about the truth, and therefore does make an effort to look at both sides.

I completely disagree that Abhu Graib is anywhere near the same level of 'heinousness' as shooting into a crowd however.

As for the lack of Zoomer posts, I believe it was Thomas Paine who said that "Time makes more converts than reason" It seems like the past few months have been bearing out the views of the pavers more than the pavees. It must be depressing for him.

I completely disagree that Abhu Graib is anywhere near the same level of 'heinousness' as shooting into a crowd however.

Losing nerves against a threatening mob is deplorable, yet understandable. US troops have done it in Irak yet I do not blame them (they have also shot at a journalists headquarters killing several, without any provocation whatsoever according to western journalists but I'm sure you'd rather forget that).

The Abu Grahib abuse IS heineous and for you to diminish its horrors is the height of self-denial. Torture is one thing in the context of getting information in matters of life and death(didn't "God-fearing" Americans learn anything from the Franco-Algerian war?). Humiliating people's strict cultural codes and parading such gratuitous acts in front of the cameras like a bunch of drunken adolescents is another. There's no comparaison between the context of the IC shootout and the Abu Grahib scandal.

If only the French troops had given those Ivorians who were showing their backsides an atomic wedgie, then the two incidents would have been equal.
Jihadi cultural codes are handed down by a plethora of discordant Religious leaders and are thus changable. In the absence our God fearing American troops impose their own moral strictures. The top one being don't shoot into crowds.
French troops could use a bit of religion.

"Torture is one thing in the context of getting information in matters of life and death"

So you think that humiliating these members of the Islamic death cult before interogating them was not a matter of "life and death?" American soldiers were being killed every day by people whom these terrorists could identify. I seam to remember you crowing about 2 to 3 American soldiers a day being killed at the time.

Oh yeah, link please on the killing of that journalist, I think that I recall the incident to which you refer, and I think that there is more to it than your French press is willing to tell you. Tell me which incident, and which date, and I will give you the other side of the story.

Sorry, before I send you to your English dictionary for new senses of the word 'seam', I ment to write 'seem'.

Zoomeridiot is right for a change! Having your picture taken with women's panties on your head ala Abu Graib is worse than being killed! After all as a masculine Iraqi how could you ever live with yourself after such humiliation? Whereas those dead Ivorians are blessed by never having to deal with another frog ever. They Ivorians are much better off.

Sarcasm off.

The real question is whose bright idea it was to send French troops to an anti-French protest.

Torture is one thing in the context of getting information in matters of life and death(didn't "God-fearing" Americans learn anything from the Franco-Algerian war?).

How could we? Didn't the Francos do everything possible to be sure no one would?

As for the incident I think Zoomer's referring to, I think he'd prefer not to know that the Committee to Protect Journalists' investigation concluded that it was an accident. Why is it that the French would castigate those who endanger journalists by mistake, but sympathise with those who kill them on purpose?