I me in abstained until today because I only wanted to put evil at ease the friend that had allowed me to meet him one evening with Anne Sinclair and I needed somehow wait media downstream of the latter. What happened with his interview with Laurent Delahousse, who could be so rich and so deep. This is not because destiny has fallen in France and the United States, in a mixture of sexual vulgarity and media frenzy and that it has generated amazement, regret, or political and democratic outrage that should apprehend without delicacy or gravity. There’s nothing worse, in this case, mockery or sarcasm too often attached to the personality and behaviors of DSK. These reactions, in my opinion, reveal the gene that one experiences before a human mystery that a time had put all chances on his side and which, however, has squandered. Making our mark even more complex due to the fact that it feels like the occurrence of this failover of destiny if not as deliberate at least as aware and familiar risk voluptuously confronted both but victoriously thwarted usually. It seems in fact that DSK, no offense to this political world, which likes to accuse the contrast between him and that one as to erect an impassable barrier between scandalous attitudes on one side and the banality of its galanteries multiple and so ‘French’ on the other, represents only the climax of a perverse system. But, I do not forget, went farther, too far. At worst, over time, an attempt to rape in France and a rape in the USA and a noxious organization of its pleasures having its source in Lille. It would badly DSK if it merely tag it compulsive, sick to the point of be less concerned about the object of his desire by satisfaction at any price of the latter which ultimately involved through the available body, only a dialogue of instinct among the hungry DSK and the released DSK. Indeed, how do not perceive, if efficient programming here his impulses and their gratification and there, enjoyable improvisation of his games, an aesthetic practice of danger? Not that he had need of it reaching the bliss of flesh. But because this so impeccable sharing between the serious DSK, often to excess as to give certainty to others that he was a man of duty and jurisdiction, and the frivolous, libertine and deliciously reckless DSK revealed as a playful pleasure, a desire, at all times, in its existence and its various facets, to jump borders, to Exchange and to compensate its compunction forced by its ironic secretshide its clandestinites by the indisputable appearance of the Economist, the brilliant Minister and future president hoped? DSK had only conducted its existence by reference to its ambitions of man power, if his strategy had led him to arbitrate every second between precautions abstentions on the one hand and on the other hand the daring, splurge, he would have obviously known to resist this opportunity that the fate put at its disposal and that its authority facilitated. But, in this hotel room, as no doubt he had already done and as inevitably it would have renewed it, he played his fate dice, persuaded to not having to pay a ransom for his meteoric transgression, all powerful being on the wire between a possible sinkhole and a sumptuous future and, again, being sure to project on the right side of fate. I don’t believe in conspiracies, handling even if it is more than likely that DSK, if he had won the Socialist Party primary, 2012, had allegedly been attacked by all kinds of means and documents. There was no home, in my view, whatever may have been the extreme difficulty of what to expect, the suicidal temptation to avoid aspiring confusedly to a disaster that it would have relieved. Superficially, its activities relate to everything that even his opponents had always credited it: economic and financial insight, knowledge and expertise unparalleled, a coherent world vision. He must swear to nothing. Disasters have never prevented the returns. But the time will be long no doubt so the DSK influential and unofficial returns that he could have been. .