Talk:Julien Coupat

French newspaper (like the newspaper "Le monde : http://www.lemonde.fr/police-justice/article/2017/01/10/la-justice-ecarte-definitivement-la-qualification-terroriste-dans-l-affaire-de-tarnac_5060419_1653578.html),mention "the justice " dismiss the "terrorist term" . But my english is too basic for add this in the article.--2A01:CB0C:83D5:1B00:B0A3:9124:BDE9:D0B3 (talk) 16:14, 15 March 2018 (UTC) I'm finally try to write . My english level it's not great, but I identified my sources, this time.--2A01:CB0C:83D5:1B00:143:F48F:E4F1:DEAB (talk) 18:57, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Calling him a "terrorist"

I was reading Terrorist#Key_criteria and he matches the criteria, and therefore should be labeled as terrorist. What do you think? Tony (talk) 03:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I disagree - he's accused of sabotage, not violence against people, and without any obvious intention of 'causing terror'. 'Terrorist' is a highly emotive word, to be used sparingly on Wikipedia; using it here would be misleading and inappropriate. Terraxos (talk) 05:47, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I disagree too and being French I know exactly what. He is not a terrorist. Can be on sabotage, there is no proof. He is wrongly imprisoned because of a critical political fiction which has not been forbidden--legally sold in the good bookstores--on insurrectionary strikes but to which he collaborated as writer and to which the minister of the police attributes a social reality growing with her relationship of power in in a balance of power with President Sarkozy.

It is exactly the same problem than Steve Kurtz from the Critical Art Ensemble in the USA some years ago, into the frame of the Patriot Act of which we have lately inherited.

In the wikipedia article I notice this strange remark that shows a partial point of view from the part of the redactor: "While their family, the opposition and rights groups dismiss such concerns as scaremongering, President Nicolas Sarkozy is clearly worried about a French repeat of the riots in Athens in december 2008. [1]" It is not exactly the truth :

-- From a hand, all the contrary this special theory of "autonomous ultragauche" is the original one from the minister of the police--she has written this theory in a matter to justify her demand of resources and means, then making a doctrine of it, and finally making the doctrine real by having built the affair of November 11--in which Julien Coupat is the ideal experimental subject.

-- From another hand, how can you justify a posteriori the fact he is imprisoned since November 11 by the fact of the riots of Athens in December?-- as a matter of fact: he is not a leader but an individual in relation with friends. If there is a problem it is from the workers inside the Company of the railroad. Second, Sarkozy does not care of Athens riots but the minister; for all that this reasoning can not stay up at the moment: the judges have liberated Ysa a young girl who was imprisoned (since one year) on suspicion without facts concerning rebellious activism and who is not specially a friend of him. If the president Sarkozy had wanted to let the lock he would have asked the public prosecutor's department to prevent the judge from releasing her. So bye bye the double argument of Athens making the president's dismay.

It can be a very current reason which plays the extra time of Coupat's confinement, for example such as the minister playing his personal credibility in this affair. Let us be clear: this is not the presidential affair but the one of his minister.

As for a conclusion: Yldune Lévy as Julien Coupat's girl friend has been freed more than a week ago. Coupat is the last one from the November 11 being still imprisoned. Let us hope for the human rights that the misunderstanding about Coupat will not last as much long than the former misunderstanding having made Kurtz a victim in the USA.

Cordially (I apologize for my Frenglish) A.G. Paris —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.120.194.122 (talk) 01:34, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I edited the part about Sarkozy. The link doesn't agree with the wikipedia version. I would guess this might be politically motivated. Boils (talk) 17:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Re-write

I have almost entirely rewritten the article, which was poorly structured and largely written in franglais. The "controversy" section needs more details and sources now. Mezigue (talk) 15:27, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

FBi

"protesting outside an army recruitment centre in New York City, which was later the target of a bomb attack"
Two months later, when Coupat was definetely NOT in the USA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.139.120.138 (talk) 17:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)