Fortune helps those who help themselves and Mdm. Aubenas certainly helped herself with her recent plea for her life. The usual folk finally got around to politely making the obvious request, well, more a suggestion than a request:

EU APPEALS FOR RELEASE OF JOURNALISTS IN IRAQ

FRENCH MUSLIM LEADER URGES JOURNALISTS’ RELEASE

However, it was her plaintive call for French MP Didier Julia to intervene that ignited widespread interest in the heretofore phlegmatic French media.

Jack and crew were blindsided and are not happy about it. M. Julia hails from Jack's UMP, where he is a pariah following his earlier bizarre intervention on behalf of Messrs. Chesnot et Malbrunot. M. Julia for his part has taken the opportuity to have things his way.

FRENCH MP TO HELP IRAQ HOSTAGE ON HIS TERMS

France was on Thursday mulling its options to free a reporter taken hostage in Iraq as one of its lawmakers with links to Iraqi insurgents infuriated authorities by putting conditions on his aid.

Julia, in his statement to AFP, underlined that the video "contains a single and solitary demand: my mediation."

But while he was "ready without any hesitation" to help, he stressed that he could not do so until legal action targeting him and his two assistants was lifted.

The above elicited an immediate response from Jack's PM:

French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin on Thursday demanded that the kidnappers [scil., terrorists] of a journalist taken hostage in Iraq deal with French officials only, after a maverick MP named in a video they released this week put conditions on his aid.

He said it would be "unacceptable" for the MP in question - Didier Julia, a member of the ruling UMP party who has links to former members of Saddam Hussein's regime - to act alone to mediate Aubenas's

That Jack's folk detest M. Julia can be gleaned from the way his background is being reported.

FRENCH MP DIDIER JULIA: 'PRO-SYRIA, PRO-SADDAM'

The 71-year-old representative of the Seine-et-Marne region outside Paris first rose to prominence last September, when he headed an unofficial - and unsuccessful - mission to free two other French reporters kidnapped in Iraq.

The failure of that venture, conducted from a luxury hotel suite in the Syrian capital Damascus, earned him the scorn of his UMP party and the media, especially after the two reporters themselves said he was "beneath contempt" for jeopardising a parallel official bid that eventually freed them in December.

He was also seen as a pro-Iraq lobbyist during the regime of Saddam Hussein, and enjoyed contacts with Iraqi officials from that era.

Many of those Iraqis are now believed to be active in the insurgency battling US-led forces, some with the surreptitious support of Syria.

When did being pro-Syria and pro-Saddam become liabilities in France? Oo-la-la !

Then there is this strange twist:

The government last week received another video of Aubenas - never made public - in which she identified herself but made no mention of Julia.

There was no reference to Saadi, no identification of the kidnappers nor any demand from them in either video. It was not even clear when or where the videos were made.

The reference to Julia, known for grandstanding before the media, has led many observers to speculate that Syria might be involved and that the video plea was part of a wider geopolitical game related to France's sponsorship of a UN resolution demanding Syria withdraw from Lebanon.

Understandably the Aubenas family isn't happy that their daughter's life hangs on the outcome of a political grudge match:

FRENCH HOSTAGE’S FAMILY OUTRAGED BY POLITICAL SPAT

The family of a French journalist taken hostage in Iraq expressed outrage Friday at a political spat sparked by a video released by the kidnappers calling for the intervention of a maverick French MP.

The government...has dismissed the appeal to Julia, towards whom officials have not disguised their animosity. ... For his part, Julia attempted to portray the government as playing with the journalist's life by not involving him as a mediator.

Jacqueline Aubenas told radio station France Info: "I really couldn't care less whether Mr Julia is involved or not. I want Florence to be freed and not be used as a pawn in the battles between power cliques, in personal and secret struggles, in the jostling between services.

"Really, I am outraged."

Meanwhile, good news elsewhere:

REPORT: ITALIAN JOURNALIST FREED IN IRAQ

Italy's Apcom news agency quoted the Italian newspaper Il Manifesto as saying that Giuliana Sgrena, who was abducted in Baghdad [February 4], has been freed. The Al-Jazeera television network also reported the journalist's release.

From what little I've seen here spouting forth from talking heads, D Julia is seen as too stupid to realize that he is being manipulated by the kidnappers. Of course, it would be a terrible blow to Raffarin's govt if Julia did manage to get the journalist liberated...

The embarrassment caused by this plea will help to up the eventual ransom that is paid to get her released, of course.

And make it all the more urgent for Jacques to actually get something done.

You just have got to love the irony here, you're almost safer in the hands of hostage takers in Iraq than you are in the streets of Bagdad, at the mercy of getting shot at by U.S troops. It clearly speaks volume about the chaotic sitution there and I would imagine this kind of accidents to occur on a regular basis.

[FFF meant to include this link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4320111.stm

The Management]

"About 2100 [1800 GMT], a patrol in western Baghdad observed the vehicle speeding towards their checkpoint and attempted to warn the driver to stop by hand and arm signals, flashing white lights, and firing warning shots in front of the car," it said in a statement.

"When the driver didn't stop, the soldiers shot into the engine block, which stopped the vehicle, killing one and wounding two others."

FFF believes it speaks volumes that a car traveling in a hot zone and not responding to obvious signals to stop should get shot up. The volumes it speaks, alas, remain a mystery that FFF did not deem fit to share. Perhaps FFF missed the headlines of the terrorist car bombs in Baghdad in the last few days. Shooting up suspect cars is SOP.

We do not feel compelled to love the irony, as does FFF, so much as lament it.

As for being safer in the hands of the terrorists, perhaps he can ring up Mdm. Aubenas for her opinion on that. We're keen to know.

DGB

My old man who drove tanks through Northern Yerp in WW2 (on the allied side) always reckoned that they were always in greater danger of being shot up from the USAAF "aces" than the Luftwaffe.

And don't get me started on my experiences with gung-ho doped up Seppo infantrymen in South Vietnam.

I dare say the unit who perpetrated this incident are entirely drug free, well trained and all college graduates. Yeah right.

Plus ca change, I suppose.

At http://www.crikey.com.au/articles/2005/03/007-0001-5205.html about half down the page corroboration of my theory:

"The shooting of the rescued Italian hostage and an Italian secret service officer will not be news to anyone who has served anywhere with US troops.

Miscellany could never feel really bad about the Viet Cong having a go – it was their country after all and we were the other side. But he could never get used to the US doing it too. Indeed, he often remembers one evening when the battery was firing in some close mortar positions and all of a sudden several large calibre machine guns started firing at our position. Being a cowardly type Miscellany was looking for somewhere to hide as the calibre seemed to suggest a full NVA regiment was out there. It wasn’t though - just another lot of US cowboys in APCs who fortunately couldn’t shoot straight.

40 years later the cowboys are more dangerous – not because they have finally learned to shoot straight – but because their firepower has been increased so much that they end up killing and wounding everything in sight anyway."

Wait for the usual white wash following a friendly fire incident.
Accidents do happen but the US administration should have the guts to hold open enquiries and not try to white wash everything as they usually do.

I doubt if the Italians have forgotten about the ski lift incident back in 1999, where 20 people died after a US military jet flew into a ski lift cable, severing it.

At the subsequent inquest, it was found that the pilots had wiped the video footage of the flight.

The RAF are still awaiting an explanation as to why a Patriot anti-missle battery incorrectly identified an RAF Tornado fighterbomber, returning from a mission over Baghdad and shot it down.
The RAF Tornado was returning in a "safe" air corridor and was obviously flying much slower than an incoming missile would have been. Its radar profile is also completely different.

The British Army are still waiting for an explanation as to why an A10 Thunderbolt attacked and destroyed a convoy of British armoured vehicles in Iraq, killing and wounding serveral of the crews, despite the fact that not only did the vehicles have the correct coalition identification markings etc but they were also flying union flags as well.
The bastard wasn't happy with his first attack and came around for a second run, trying to machine gun the survivors.

One British soldier repeatedly went back to the burning vehicles to rescue wounded crew men, despite being under attack and was awarded the George Cross. The second highest British military honour. His commanding officer said that the trooper would have received the highest military honour for his bravery, the Victoria Cross but this can only be given for bravery in the face of the enemy. The A10 being American couldn't be classed as the enemy.

Yes, we all anxiously await your prognosticated white wash.

At the subsequent inquest, it was found that the pilots had wiped the video footage of the flight.

Well, we hope yahoo Americans do a better job of white-washing than revealing damning evidence at the inquest.

BIF, you obviously have a bone to pick, and though you do not appear as simple-minded as Mr. Albatross, generalizing your complaints to characterize the American command is pretty weak tea. We hope the British get satisfaction for these incidents, but most probably, contrary to your suggestion, nothing insidious informed these accidents. The fact that you know of them in detail does not much augur for a white wash.

DGB

Think back to the 'incident' in January at Tal Afar in which US soldiers killed the mother and father of six kids.
Getty Images photographer Chris Hondros was there.
We know about the killing of the father and mother of six kids because a photographer was there and we've seen his evidence. Same for the murder of the wounded prisoner in Fallujah. And we know about the killing of the Italian official because there is a high-profile former hostage still alive to tell us what really happened.

But if these 'incidents' had not involved independent witnesses we would have been told nothing about them.
They would have gone unrecorded, as have unknown numbers of similar atrocities in and around many cities.
The Washington Post of 7 March says US officials "have declined to estimate how many civilians . . . have been killed accidentally by US forces at checkpoints or elsewhere in Iraq" This is no surprise, because although countless Iraqis have been killed by being sprayed with bullets by delinquent troops, the stories recounted by Iraqi witnesses of these terrible events are ignored.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-iraq-photostory0119,1,2751777.photogallery?coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=2&cset=true

A British officer in Basra said: “The Americans can be pretty pumped-up. Sometimes they fire in broad daylight when we are travelling at two miles per hour, shouting that we are British out of the window and waving the Union Jack. If they shoot, our drill is to slam on the brakes and race in the opposite direction.”
US commanders were so worried that their men were shooting at the British because they failed to recognise the Union Jack or other distinguishing military markings that, in an unprecedented move, they asked the British Army to supply vehicles, men and flags to teach their soldiers what their allies looked like.

The Times, March 9, 2005

We've only so much time for answering stupid responses, so let's quickly dispatch BIF's proposition:

We know of incidents because people witnessed them.

To which we say, duh.

Photographers are running around Iraq recording these things because the Army wants incriminating evidence out front prefatory to conducting BIF's whitewash.

And of course, since independent witnesses aren't always to hand, well, you can just bet the farm on BIF's surety of "unknown numbers of similar atrocities in and around many cities". Since there are probably an inifinte number of occasions bereft of their "independent witnesses", well, then by BIF's reckoning there is a high probability of an infinte number of atrocities.

As for BIF's "high-profile former hostage still alive to tell us what really happened", everyday Signora Sgrena is revealed to be more of a fraud promoting a discredited political agenda. Her rescue car having been "riddled" with "300-400 rounds" -- the Signora claiming to have picked up handfuls of spent rounds from the seats -- is virtually unscratched. As for poor Mr. Calipari, it comes to light his mission was poorly planned and worse coordinated.

We don't particularly care if you agree with us here, just don't post stupid.

DGB