French State Visit to United Kingdom: March 2008 - Page 3

BeatrixFan · #41 02-27-2008, 03:22 PM

Does France have to be collapsing for it's President to go back? He may have to be present for other reasons that haven't been made public.

**Elspeth** · #42 02-27-2008, 03:27 PM

Unless this decision is to be seen as a public snub, the reasons (if they exist) should be made public - or at least, some good reason should be given, even if it isn't the actual one.

BeatrixFan · #43 02-27-2008, 03:29 PM

Why does he have to have a reason for going home early once the major business of the visit has been and gone?

**Empress** · #44 02-27-2008, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

I'm sorry, I disagree. When the Queen next goes to France, that's an opportunity to repay the favour. I think the objection to his visit is nothing to do with Mr Sarzoky, it's because he's married a model and that's too ridiculous for words. Look at the negative statements that are already surfacing about Madame Sarzoky as if she should sit in a dark room in a burkah and never be seen. He's been invited to visit Britain, he is visiting Britain. He is bringing his wife. He isn't spending a week, he's spending a couple of days. Where's the problem in that? I think all this "discourteous" stuff is just an excuse, the real reason people seem to be against the man is that he's married a pretty young wife.

And why should the Queen of England stoop to his level?

Furthermore, he accepted a visit of 3 days and 2 nights. He has changed/cancelled part of the invitation that he accepted. It is not the same as being invited for 2 days, and saying, "I would really like to come, but I have other engagements.. may I come for 1 night instead?" He accepted, plans were made, (which in regards to a State Visit requires some serious planning and time, and which begins quite some time in advance) and now suddenly with no good reason that we know of, changes his mind? It is rude, uncouth in any circle to put your hosts out like that, never mind in "higher circles" where considerable time and money has already been expended.

There is protocol, never mind good manners, which indicate that a reason should be given, and should be a good one, when a visit is modified or cancelled. and the "business" of the visit might very well have gone on, and will now have to be squashed into a shorter time period.

BeatrixFan · #45 02-27-2008, 03:37 PM

Who's asking the Queen to do anything? Whats all this about stooping to a level? Am I being thick here? Has he ripped off a baby's head and fashioned it into a brooch? Has he eaten small dogs? Has he ordered the deaths of 1000s? Because I missed that. And I also missed the canonisation of the Queen which meant only the purest are allowed to speak her name.

**TheTruth** · #46 02-27-2008, 03:38 PM

Exactly Empress. If you agree to go, then you must do everything to keep this engagement in the state it was planned. Engagements that were made after should be canceled or moved to another day since you had given your agreement for the first. Imagine if people around the world behaved like he did.

BeatrixFan · #47 02-27-2008, 03:40 PM

And how do you know it wasn't planned for just 2 days?

Nico · #48 02-27-2008, 03:54 PM

From the BBC, in december 2007

BBC NEWS | UK | State visit for French president

The British monarchy website has been updated yesterday.

**Empress** · #49 02-27-2008, 03:55 PM

Because originally it was on the BRF and several other websites as 26-28 march

**Elspeth** · #50 02-27-2008, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

Why does he have to have a reason for going home early once the major business of the visit has been and gone?

The major business of a state visit is the visit itself. Otherwise a private meeting would be sufficient. It's a matter of diplomacy, and the relationship between Britain and France isn't the firmest one around. If one head of state decides to deliver a public snub like this to another, it isn't going to help matters. Heck, George Bush climbed into white tie and tails for the Queen's visit last year in recognition of the "special relationship" between the two countries, and it was the first time in his presidency he'd done so. That gesture of respect does actually mean something. Equally, a gesture of studied indifference or even contempt also means something, and that's what Sarkozy is doing.

CasiraghiTrio · #51 02-27-2008, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

I'm sorry, I disagree. When the Queen next goes to France, that's an opportunity to repay the favour. I think the objection to his visit is nothing to do with Mr Sarzoky, it's because he's married a model and that's too ridiculous for words. Look at the negative statements that are already surfacing about Madame Sarzoky as if she should sit in a dark room in a burkah and never be seen. He's been invited to visit Britain, he is visiting Britain. He is bringing his wife. He isn't spending a week, he's spending a couple of days. Where's the problem in that? I think all this "discourteous" stuff is just an excuse, the real reason people seem to be against the man is that he's married a pretty young wife.

That would be really sad if true. I hope you are wrong because it wouldn't speak well of Buckingham Palace if they would intentionally snub a president's wife simply because of her age or profession or whatever.

I mean, goodness knows Buckingham Palace has had many opportunities to be caddy in the past, and often for better reasons than that Madame Sarkozy is a model and singer! So if you are right in this case, it would show them in a most negative light in my opinion.

I hope the real reasons are more mundane, perhaps due to a scheduling conflict or some other oversight.

Alison20 · #52 02-27-2008, 04:46 PM

The Queen would never snub the wife of the President of France. Goodness, over the decades that she has been Queen, she has courtiously and formally met Presidents, and their wives/husbands, from just about everywhere in the world. And some of them have been very rum people!

A State Visit (if this is what was planned) is always of 3 days and 2 nights. I find it unbelievable (like Elspeth) that it should be changed/shortened at such short notice. I cannot believe it was at the request of Buckingham Palace - that sort of thing just does not happen there! So it must have been President Sarkozy's decision. I find it without parallel between friendly countries. :-(

COUNTESS · #53 02-27-2008, 05:33 PM

In the overall scheme of things noithing in life will change. This is all so unimportant. Beatrix Fan, I love you and your turn of a phrase. You see this for what it is.

Nico · #54 02-27-2008, 05:58 PM

Quote:

You see this for what it is.

And it's totally wrong.
As The truth already said:just spend some days here in France and you'll uderstand very quikly why we are so fed up with them...
But it's always interesting to see a different point a view from abroad, and i respect that...

Al_bina · #55 02-27-2008, 06:13 PM

Allow to remind once again that Mr. Sarkozy has been elected by the same Frenchmen, who are fed up now with him and his new wife.

**Elspeth** · #56 02-27-2008, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

And how do you know it wasn't planned for just 2 days?

State visits follow the same basic schedule and have done for decades.

Madame Royale · #57 02-27-2008, 06:16 PM

Quote:

the real reason people seem to be against the man is that he's married a pretty young wife.

Ugh, wrong! It doesn't help that a whirlwind relationship then makes her First lady, but you're quite wrong if you think that the principle reason.

Quote:

But French people are like that, don't forget we cut the head of our beloved King Louis XVI

Listen to The Truth. She's on to something here...hehe.