MOSAIC - The Latest Big Brother

The following is a rather involved story that I will try to simplify. I have to admit at the outset that it caused me more trouble than it's worth, and that some articles from the French websites have undergone serious revision as more information became available. But the events are an indication of the degree of naïveté and/or complicity of both Catholics and Jews with regard to Islam and its claims of obedience to the French law on "laïcité" (separation of Church and State). I am maintaining the French word "laïcité" and its corresponding adjective "laïque":

In June 2009, Le Salon Beige posted an article drawn from Yves Daoudal's weekly newsletter that is only available to subscribers:

CREATING MOSAIC

On June 10, the official Conference of Imams of France was launched, and on June 12 the creation of the "national 'laïque' federation of citizens of the Muslim persuasion", known as 'MOSAIC" was announced. There was no reaction from the CFCM (French Council on the Muslim Faith, created by Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy), considered to be the only official representative of the Islam of France. The Conference took place in Drancy (Seine-Saint-Denis), and was presided over by Christine Boutin in the presence of the mayor of Drancy, Jean-Christophe Lagarde.

Note: Christine Boutin is a liberal Catholic, who at one time appeared to be a traditionalist because of her stand on certain bioethical issues. She was made minister of housing and urban affairs when Sarkozy became president. She proved herself to be a friend of immigrants and very accommodating to Islam, but at the same time too Catholic for the Sarkozy administration. She was removed, and she formed her own party called the "Christian Democrats". To the best of my knowledge this amounts to a one-woman party, at most a very small group. My impression of her is that she is very weak - a bleeding heart Catholic who serves the establishment well despite her dismissal, for her minor party is one of several "satellite" parties tethered to Sarlozy's UMP.

As for Mayor Lagarde, he boasted about having lied to the people of Drancy when he built a type of "multiplex" that turned out to be a mosque. Le Salon Beige recalls that he declared at the time:

"Yes, I deliberately hid from you the fact that it would be a mosque. I wanted to show how normal such a project is. (...) I didn't announce it to the population because it would have surely created tension. (...)"

Note: Need I point out that if such a project were "normal" there would not have been any "tension" in the first place.

(...) At the Conference, Christine Boutin declared that she had come "as a Catholic" (...) because, she says, "I believe deeply that religions are factors in mediation and pacification..."

Present at the Conference also were the president of the Drancy City Council, Claude Bartolone, the adjunct mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, diplomats from Arab countries and the United States, the president of CRIF (Representative Council of French Jewish Institutions), and the grand rabbi of Paris. (...)

The idea for MOSAIC came from the celebrated imam of Drancy, Hassen Chalghoumi, the darling of the mayor and of the Jewish community who have made him into a symbol of "living together". He has already brought together forty imams from the Parisian region, and is now proposing "inter-religious dialogue, the promotion of an open Islam, and the monitoring of imams." "What we want is to participate fully in the Republic," he says.

But at the Ministry of the Interior, they recall that Hassen Chalghoumi is "part of the fundamentalist persuasion, trained in Syria", and "not representative."

Not representative of what? Of "moderate" Islam? Of "fundamentalist" Islam? The statement from Salon Beige article is not clear. Since there is only ONE Islam, then we have to assume that his attempts to reach out to non-Muslims may be a sham, or "taqqiya" as the Muslims call it.

The crux of the issue is the sincerity of Chalghoumi. Is he or isn't he a real imam? Is he really reaching out to the Jewish and Catholics communities as he has insisted, or is he practicing "taqqiya"? In either case, and considering the severe crisis in France, how can either Christine Boutin or the Jewish community be proud of their relations with this man? Even if he were sincere (something that is highly debatable), he would then be the exception that proves the rule. And if he is not sincere, then he is the rule.

At any rate at the end of January all the websites were talking about him. It seems that while he was preaching in his mosque in Drancy, a "commando" of 80 masked persons burst into the mosque, and threatened Chalghoumi who had just expressed his support for the newly-proposed French law that would ban the burqa (total body covering) in public places. He did this, he says, in the name of "laïcité". Remember it was at his behest that the laïcité-oriented MOSAIC was formed.

The law banning the burqa would also be enacted in the name of "laïcité". So everybody is claiming to be working on behalf of "laïcité", when we know perfectly well that the law of 1905 is no longer worth the paper it's written on.

Le Figaro, among many other sites, reported the mosque incident.

(...) An adviser from the Conference of Imams described what happened. "They forced open the door and grabbed the mike after some shoving. Then they shouted anathemas and threats at the imam, calling him 'non-believer' and 'apostate' and declaring they would 'liquidate his case, this imam of the Jews' (...) You don't need a diploma to realize that the terms are the equivalent of a fatwa (...)" The adviser pointed the finger at the Muslim Brotherhood, in particular a group called "Cheikh Yassine" from the name of the founder of Hamas who was killed in 2004 during an Israeli raid. (...) As for Hassen Chalghoumi he announced on Radio Orient his decision to file a suit. "They want me dead, someone could rub me out (...)" He explained that the perpetrators wanted "extremism and hatred due to my views on the burqa and my rapprochement with the Christian and Jewish communities."

Hassen Chalghoumi had declared his support for a law banning the burqa provided it was accompanied by "an education program", as was done for the simple veil in schools in 2004. He compared the burqa to a "prison for women, a tool of sexist domination and Islamist indoctrination."

In the photo below Chalghoumi is flanked on the right by Mouloud Aounit (red scarf), president of MRAP, the notorious anti-racist association that recently published its black list of undesirable websites.


While the "commando" story is still available at many websites, Islamisation (administered by Joachim Véliocas) has suppressed its version of the raid on the mosque. It is however still available as a Google cache. The only reason I can think of is that the story proved to be either a concoction by Muslims for the purpose of duping the credulous or simply a false report based on inadequate information. This is not to say that there was no uproar in the mosque that day, rather that the uproar might have been planned as part of a strategy to show that the open-minded Chalghoumi was being targeted by "radical" Islamists, thus winning him more friends and supporters in the non-Muslim community. Such stagings are not uncommon among Muslims whose goal is to win sympathy.

Another website, Bivouac-Id has updated at least twice its original version of the story. The latest account says that Chalghoumi was not preaching that day, that 30, not 80, intruders broke into the mosque, shouting anathema on Chalghoumi. The mayor defends Chalghoumi in everything the latter has said in his own defense, and maintains that he is really a friend of the non-Muslim communities as he claims, and that this really was an attempt to intimidate. (Can we trust the mayor who has admitted to being a liar?)

Whatever happened that day, there is more urgent information on MOSAIC. The most recent revelations indicate that its goals, while purporting to be "laïque" in nature are a bit more ominous. Though Chalghoumi was the creator of MOSAIC, its president is one Marouane Bouloudhnine. The following is a condensed version of an article in L'Express describing the true agenda of MOSAIC:

"The image of Muslims is ridiculed," thunders Marouane Bouloudhnine, president of MOSAIC. "There is a real sense of malaise: Muslims today are no longer comfortable being French because they constantly have their Islamic identity thrown back at them.

AN OBSERVATORY OF ISLAMOPHOBIC ACTS

The MOSAIC federation therefore has announced the launching this month of an "observatory of Islamophobic acts", an initiative that will gather precise facts and statistics from the Internet and transmit them regularly back to the Ministry of the Interior.

Note: In addition to MRAP, and HALDE, and groups such as SOS Racism, we now have MOSAIC gathering data on those who comment, blog, and publish online.

Created in June with the blessings of the general secretary of Elysée Palace, Claude Guéant, MOSAIC hopes to become a reference organization for the Muslim community.

It presents itself as the "laïque counterweight" to the often-criticized CFCM (French Council on the Muslim Faith), which had no comment regarding the new entity, but which may have to put up with its influence.

Note: The article attempts to pit the two organizations against each other as rival factions. This is possible, but more likely, the two groups have common interests and goals.

"We want to change the perception of the Muslims of France," stresses Marouane Bouloudhnine. (...) They intend to launch an extensive publicity campaign to change mindsets. "The idea," he explains "is to tell people that the Muslim could be your postman,your pharmacist, or the corner butcher."

That's just the problem. The Muslim most likely IS your corner butcher already.

There's much more on banning the burqa and on Internet black lists. See future articles.

"The Snows of Yesteryear" by François Villon

If you didn't know, the title of the previous post is from a poem, known to all students of French literature, by François Villon (1431 - 1463, approx.), a rebellious young man whose wild reckless life has inspired many a budding poet, and no doubt led some of them to reject their dull bourgeois upbringing for a life of adventure and lawlessness. Rebel, thief, quarrelsome hothead, Villon was condemned to several prison sentences for serious crimes, but he probably matches Harry Houdini in his ability to slip out of bondage, only to return as quickly as his bad temper could get him into another fix. He was not heard of after 1463 when the courts banished him (had he become an intolerable nuisance?), so the exact length of his life is not known. See Wikipedia for more.

Here is the French text of Villon's great poem from which the line about the "snows of yesteryear" is drawn:

Ballade des dames du temps jadis

Dites-moi où, n'en quel pays,
Est Flora la belle Romaine,
Archipiades, ni Thais,
Qui fut sa cousine germaine,
Écho parlant quand bruit on mène
Dessus rivière ou sus étang,
Qui beauté eut trop plus qu'humaine.
Mais où sont les neiges d'antan ?

Où est la très sage Hélois,
Pour qui châtré fut et puis moine
Pierre Esbaillart à Saint Denis ?
Pour son amour eut cette essoyne.
Semblablement où est la reine
Qui commanda que Buridan
Fut jeté en un sac en Seine ?
Mais où sont les neiges d'antan ?

La reine Blanche comme lys
Qui chantait à voix de sirène,
Berthe au grand pied, Bietris, Alis,
Haremburgis qui tint le Maine,
Et Jeanne la bonne Lorraine
Qu'Anglais brulèrent à Rouen ;
Où sont-ils, où, Vierge souv'raine ?
Mais où sont les neiges d'antan ?

Prince, n'enquerrez de semaine
Où elles sont, ni de cet an,
Qu'à ce refrain ne vous ramène :
Mais où sont les neiges d'antan ?

And here is a readable English version

Ballad of the Ladies of Bygone Times

Tell me where, or in what land
is Flora, the lovely Roman,
or Archipiades, or Thaïs,
who was her first cousin;
or Echo, replying whenever called
across river or pool,
and whose beauty was more than human?
But where are the snows of yesteryear?

Where is that brilliant lady Heloise,
for whose sake Peter Abelard was castrated
and became a monk at Saint-Denis?
He suffered that misfortune because of his love for her.
And where is that queen who
ordered that Buridan
be thrown into the Seine in a sack?
But where are the snows of yesteryear?

Queen Blanche, white as a lily,
who sang with a siren’s voice;
Big-footed Bertha, Beatrice, Alice,
Arembourg who ruled over Maine;
and Joan, the good maiden of Lorraine
who was burned by the English at Rouen —
where are they, where, O sovereign Virgin?
But where are the snows of yesteryear?

Prince, do not ask in a week
where they are, or in a year.
The only answer you will get is this refrain:
But where are the snows of yesteryear?

The above English version is from Bureau of Public Secrets, with excellent notes on the various proper names in the poem. It's an unusual website with translations of "radical" works.

For a somewhat outdated, but very famous, translation into 19th century English, with rhyme, by Dante Gabriel Rossetti, click here.

Now listen to the poem set to music by Georges Brassens (1921 - 1981), one of France's great troubadours of the 20th century. Brassens is beloved in France and among Francophiles everywhere, but it is best to know French to appreciate him.



At top, a painting by American Impressionist Albert Krehbiel (1873 - 1945), an artist I recently discovered. I think I've used up most of the winter scenes by Claude Monet!

"Where Are the Snows of Yesteryear?"

THEY'RE HERE!


I was awake at 3:00 a.m. (Saturday) and looked outside to a snow scene, and I thought "Hey, it's snowing". Isn't that a profound thought? Since Thursday the radio news had been hammering away at the reality of a snowstorm headed our way. However, when I looked out again several hours later (around 10:00 a.m.) I was flabbergasted to see a scene similar to the ones above. It's been a long time since we've seen anything like this. We have at least 28 inches. Gorgeous yes, but treacherous. I pity anyone who has to go out, especially sick people trying to get to hospitals. Many hospitals are understaffed anyway, since everyone was snowed in. Streets were (and are) impassable. Shoveling this morning was useless, because by late afternoon it had piled up again.

Much worse than the snow is the freezing temperature. Being outside is not pleasant, as it usually is in snow. There are powerful winds and huge snow drifts. All in all, a good time to make a good cup of hot coffee and surf the net.

In D.C. hundreds of thousands were without electricity. Most airports were closed.

I've heard of two deaths - a father and son who stopped to help passengers injured in a car accident and were struck by a tractor-trailer that jack-knifed. Utterly tragic.

Another storm is expected on Tuesday. Could this be Year One of the Post-Global-Warming Era?

From Le Figaro: at top, a scene in Baltimore. Dogs love this stuff. Above, a park bench somewhere near Washington.

Below, from the NYT slide show, Broad Street in Philadelphia. It's lonely out there.

Haiti - An Update

On Wednesday I received the following "Flash" from Novopress regarding unnecessary amputations performed by American doctors in Haïti:

Many members of the French humanitarian personnel sent to Haiti are starting to testify to the hasty practices of the American medical teams. In this case it concerns the thousands of amputations, for the most part improvised or performed without a medical follow-up, that were said to have been carried out in a systematic way.

The worst accusation is in that last line: "in a systematic way." This implies a deliberate policy of amputation without medical justification. This particular accusation was in Le Monde.

Concerned by this news, I did a very quick Google search, but there is so much information about Haiti, it is impossible to know where to begin or whom to believe.

Articles in the NYT attest to the massive influx of wounded, including amputees, that are being brought into American hospitals. The Florida facilities became saturated and the victims are now being brought to other cities on the East Coast, including Atlanta, Philadelphia, New York, and Boston.

It is very difficult to find the truth in view of the poor Franco-American relations, the absolute confusion that reigned on the island, the magnitude of the disaster, the impossibility of avoiding amputations, hence the difficulty in knowing which ones were justified and which were not, and no small amount of prejudice against the US, as well as some understandable criticisms, especially of the Baptists who "stole" or attempted to steal children, presumably for adoption.

I cannot do anything near an exhaustive research. Here are some links. Please do your own Googling. I used keywords such as "Amputations in Haiti", "French doctors accuse Americans", and things of that nature.

ENGLISH-LANGUAGE ARTICLES:

This article from Expatica discusses mass amputations, from the point of view of French doctors, without accusing anyone of wrongdoing. Here is just one excerpt:

Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders, MSF) "have carried out caesareans and amputations. MSF's experienced medical staff say they have never seen so many people with such serious injuries," the group said in a statement issued in Paris.

Here is a vivid and very disturbing article from New Jersey News, on the incredible number of amputees. Check out the very graphic slide show. Some excerpts:

"We had people who had been amputated just so they could be pulled from the rubble," Fletcher said by phone Thursday night, as another helicopter with patients readied to land. "That means it was done in the field, with no anesthesia, and they showed up here with an infected stump."

Fletcher, a general surgeon at St. Barnabas Medical Center, was among the dozens of local physicians and health care workers who volunteered in Haiti after the country's medical system collapsed in the earthquake.

"I have no way to describe the patient load," said Margaret Olibrice Saint-Fleur, a Livingston resident who returned from a three-day mission in Port-au-Prince last week. "I have never seen so many amputees in my career." (...)

Fletcher, along with three other doctors and two nurses from St. Barnabas, flew into northern Haiti four days after the earthquake struck, using funds from the Knights of Malta, a Catholic charity. They headed to the Hopital Sacre Coeur, a private facility that was unaffected and relatively well-stocked to receive patients airlifted by the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Navy. Their operations grew more frenzied as the week wore on. (...)

"We were doing 20 to 25 operations a day then," the Morris Plains resident said. "There was God-awful stuff. Some of these people were so injured they need anesthesia just to change their dressing." (...)

Here's an article from a Chinese site that speaks of 3000 amputations, some unnecessary, without any direct accusations.

This article from Tampa Bay News attempts to describe the agony of amputees who see their lives ruined, but does not answer the question of the necessity of such procedures. There are dozens of photos at this Florida site.

Here are two (of many) articles from the NYT on the plight of amputees and the transfer to American hospitals of as many victims as the hospitals can manage. The hospitals, according to one article, will be reimbursed by the government.

New York Times, February 3.

New York Times, January 25.

FRENCH-LANGUAGE ARTICLES

Now what about the French accusations? Le Post has a summary with links to MSM articles. Figures on the number of amputations vary:

In all, over a thousand persons lost one or more limbs, according to Handicap International. Some speak of a "slaughter". Arms, hands, fingers, legs... these amputations are increasing at a questionable rate.

Were they done too quickly?

All of the doctors agree that it is first a question of priorities.

In a NouvelObs interview with Robert Beccari of MSF (Doctors Without Borders), the following came to light:

- What operations are being performed?

- We are treating crushed limbs, open fractures with infections and gangrene... It's a race against time to save lives and avoid infection. We perform lots of amputations. In France, my job is to replant amputated limbs. The first day in Haiti was terrible. I tried to save all the limbs of the people I treated, but I quickly realized that it was a lost cause. To have to amputate the limbs of children of the same age as my own was very difficult. You have to be schizophrenic to be able to stand what I lived through there. The anaesthesia by ketamine was minimal. Fortunately, no patient was lost because of that.

- What kind of relations did you have with the other NGO's?

- When I was in Iraq, I noticed that there was a war between members of different NGO's. In Haiti, the situation was such that there was no room for that type of conflict. Everyone worked together.

An article in Romandie (a Swiss website) discusses the huge number of amputations:

(...) "Thousands of persons were amputated in this catastrophe. In some hospitals, we saw 30 to 100 amputations per day," indicated Paul Garwood of the WHO, during a press conference in Geneva. (...)

All told, these mutilations "surpass anything we have seen elsewhere," said Wendy Batson, director of the American branch of Handicap International. (...)

"We are in the process of establishing a data base of amputated persons in order to deliver the medical necessities, to help the wounds to heal. We are applying DynaCast prostheses that can last from four to six months", added Mrs. Batson. "But considering the magnitude of the devastation of medical infrastructure, the more technically advanced procedures that would have allowed us to save limbs cannot be performed. In these cases, amputation is preferred to prevent death from infection."

"WHO and other health organizations are now concentrating on the best way to bring post-operative care and rehabilitation of the patients...", stressed Paul Garwood.

The most incriminating article I could find (other than a pro-Palestinian site that accuses us of the same kinds of unethical practices in Haiti as in Iraq, citing horrible photos posted at Facebook of American doctors jubilantly cutting off limbs) comes from Le Monde. Unfortunately the article was conveniently archived and I do not have access to it. Le Post provides a few excerpts from the article, focusing on interviews with doctors:

- Were amputations done too quickly?

- "Yes, a team of Texas doctors, who have already gone back, were the cause of the ravages and performed war medicine," said one doctor from the Paris Fire Department. "Amputation is a way of saving lives only as a last resort, when a limb is crushed or when blood poisoning is a threat. But the Americans did it almost systematically, without taking the time to envisage other solutions, proud of this slaughter that gave them a chance to produce the most impressive numbers of patients..."

- Were amputations an easy solution?

Another doctor, according to Le Monde, had a talk with an American surgeon:

- "He said to me, 'What's the use? This country is too poor. There will be no real follow-up for your patients. It's so much easier to amputate them. It's clean, and definitive.'"

(Regarding the photos at Facebook - I do not use Facebook yet. I don't know enough about it, although it seems to be a new Internet necessity. If you find something there that proves or disproves what has been said, let me know, but I am not signed up at Facebook. Is it possible to download photos from there?)

Finally, at VFR there is a letter that was forwarded from a man just back from Haiti. This eye-witness account incriminates the French, but primarily the French UN personnel, and French-speaking persons on the scene.

This is all I can do for now. As I indicated, everyone can do his own research, and ponder the issues raised. The main priority is that help be provided to the maximum number of victims. What the fate of the island will be, we don't know. You might be interested in reading the comments from a Haitian reader who lives in Haiti, but was not in Port-au-Prince at the time. Though he incriminates the colonizers, he is most concerned about the need for Haitians to govern themselves.

The photo at the top shows Mexican rescuers pulling a woman alive from the rubble. Below, one of thousands of amputees.

The MRAP Report

One of my favorite websites, Le Conservateur, had not posted since December 3. I became concerned, as I'm sure all of his readers did. Yesterday, at last! he posted this very short entry with a link to a report from MRAP:

This report has nothing to do with my decision to take a break, temporary or permanent only time will tell, from my blogging activity, since I only learned about this little moral lesson today.

He then links to a 154-page report in pdf format from MRAP (Movement Against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples), one of several so-called watchdog agencies monitoring "racism" in France. The report contains the findings of an exhaustive investigation undertaken in 2008-2009 that traced, tracked, and identified websites deemed by MRAP as "racist", "anti-Semitic", "racialist", "ethno-differentialist", "extreme-right", extreme-Catholic right, "Nazi", etc... I cannot here list all categories because I have only skimmed the report.

Le Conservateur is cited on page 58 (I believe it actually starts on page 57). I was mildly surprised to find GalliaWatch cited on page 132, not as a racist site but as a site that VISITED a racist site, namely Novopress. The report states that those sites hosted in countries that do not have laws against hate-speech, such as the United States, cannot be pursued by MRAP. This does not prevent MRAP from citing countless Blogspot websites hosted by Google.

Translating such a report is out of the question. French readers can consult it, and it is linked at the MRAP website. There is an introduction to the report that summarizes its aims. Here are excerpts:

More that two thousand URL (including 1000 blogs) were thus rated. A summary analysis of the general tendency was done for almost 1500 of them and a few dozen were analyzed in detail, with quotations.

Since anybody today can express himself on the web, it is necessary to be able to differentiate between an isolated blog of a fanatic and the networks that are formed, between a site with confidential followers and those that are referenced by dozens of others that gather there information.

Note: The above statement requires more research. Websites that are frequently referenced theoretically include sites like Le Monde, don't they? If an "extreme Catholic" site references Le Monde scores of times, why is the Catholic site accused, and not Le Monde? I do not remember seeing the MSM cited on MRAP's list, however I MUST do more careful reading of that report, something I'm loathe to do because it is a waste of time for now.

Back to the introduction and some "global" findings:

Sites and blogs that develop overtly racist themes: Anti-Semitic: 44; Islamophobic: 75; Nazi: 25; Negationist: 11; Diverse racist: 23.

Other sites, without being qualified as racist, develop themes exploited by the racists: denunciation of the "dangers of immigration," clash of civilizations, lack of security, etc... :

Extreme Catholic Right: 101; Front National: 106; Identitarian: 264; MPF: 33; Parti de la France: 9; Soral: 14; Other extreme Right site: 125.

The report notes the following:

The very great interconnection of the sites: the study identified the "hubs" of the web: François Desouche (Identitarian), Le Salon Beige and E-Deo (extreme Catholic Right), Novopress (Identitarian press agency), for example.

Note: To accuse websites such as Le Salon Beige of racism is in itself "racist" against the Catholic religion. In recent years, the main theme at Le Salon Beige has been the pro-life movement, not anti-Islamism. Bernard Antony is also cited numerous times. He is a defender of Catholicism and Christianity. He is not a racist. To read this report one would think that being a traditional Catholic is grounds for prosecution on "racist" grounds, presumably because such sites do not want Islam in France.

Here are more ways of identifying undesirable sites:

The role of auction sites, of sites where videos are shared, of Wiki encyclopedias.

Note: Why auction sites? I think it is because some of them may sell items such as Nazi emblems (or possibly a Mohammed cartoon?). I wonder if MRAP would condemn an auction site for selling a photo of Hitler conferring with the grand mufti of Jerusalem?

The persistence of Nazi themes.

The difficulties of the struggle against negationist sites.

Note: I'm not sure what that refers to.

"Traditional" anti-Semitic sites, heirs to pre-war publishers, hosted by Anne Kling, Hervé Ryssen, Boris Le Lay, as well as the anti-Semitic drift of the site "Les Ogres", connected to Dieudonné, that use as a pretext the defense of the rights of Palestinians...

Note: The above is carefully twisted language. While MRAP cites Anne Kling directly, it only cites Les Ogres and its founder Dieudonné obliquely - notice the "drifts" and the "connected to" as if Dieudonné really is not responsible.

The report accuses Dieudonné of being an extreme right-winger (!) and part of the Front National, with a pretense of helping the Palestinians, a highly debatable (and not worth debating now) claim. The machinations and provocations of the attention-seeking Dieudonné, and the ambiguities of the Front National are topics unto themselves. Dieudonné is at bottom a friend of MRAP, but since he has made anti-Semitic comments he must be included on MRAP's list. Anne Kling is not a friend of MRAP, so her anti-Semitism can be attacked directly. MRAP has to deal as deftly as it can with the fact that it is expected to fight anti-Semitism, all the while being a protector of Muslims in France. Using left-wing Jews as pro-Muslim agents is an excellent way to "amalgamate" two entirely different issues; just as using Muslims as pro-Jewish agents can show that Muslims are friends of Jews. (Note: this happened recently when an "imam" claimed he was attacked by Muslims because he was a friend of Jews.)

The twists and turns of the language used by the report, its fallacies, its "amalgamations", i.e., what we call "guilt by association" are staggering.

The report lists websites entering into those sites called "hubs", as well as websites referenced by the hubs.

The report cites the readers' comments at François Desouche as being "condemnable", noting however that the site itself is "prudent". Would MRAP take to court an FDS reader? Or FDS itself?

Note: I post this with an appeal to be cautious about this report. I do not know if it can be taken seriously, if the French government will take measures against the accused websites, or even if it is worth reading carefully. I leave that up to you for now. I will return to the topic only if I feel it is necessary or helpful.

Here again is a link to the French-language pdf report.

For a very brief English-language introduction to MRAP itself here is a link to Wikipedia.

Below the photo shows the celebration on May 22, 1949, when MRAP was inaugurated. Back then, in the wake of the war, it was primarily an organization that monitored anti-Semitism. It has evolved into a pro-immigration agency that protects Muslims, although many left-wing Jews are still members, often attorneys serving the Muslim cause. Tunisian-born Gisèle Halimi for example, a radical left-wing feminist who befriended and defended Jean-Paul Sartre, collaborated with Simone de Beauvoir, presided over a commission on American war crimes in Viet-Nam, among her other accomplishments. The current leadership of MRAP is in the hands of a "college of presidents": Bernadette Hétier, Mouloud Aounit, and Renée le Mignot.


With its focus on one-way racism, affirmative action and forced métissage, MRAP today is an agency of intellectual terrorism, and quite useful to the State in the implementation of its anti-French policies. MRAP has, on occasion (and I assume only to save face) condemned anti-white racism. I know of no French conservative website or writer that has anything positive to say about MRAP. The KGB-style investigations, the ambiguous language, the stated goals vs the real goals, the fear instilled in innocent people at the prospect of being dragged into court by MRAP, place it on an equal footing with the worst thought-police inquisitions of the past.

Below, The poster from last year for a MRAP convention in Paris. The theme of the meeting was: For a world of solidarity, without racism: migrants and refugees in the world.

Saturday in Donzère

Minister of Immigration Eric Besson is in the news more than Nicolas Sarkozy these days. His now-notorious statement that France is not a people, or a language, or a territory, or a religion, but a conglomerate of peoples, etc... will no doubt come back to haunt him for the rest of his term in office, and beyond. The remark has the great distinction of being not only against France, but inadvertently FOR France, since it aroused the ire of the Ligue du Sud (Southern League) and the Bloc Identitaire. A quick reminder that the Ligue is a new party formation that has joined with the various identitarian movements that represent the regional identities of France. Together, they form a new and hopefully effective patriotic front.

Novopress, the news agency that serves the Bloc Identitaire, has a series of articles with videos and photos of yesterday's demonstration against Eric Besson, in the city of Donzère (department of Drôme), where Besson is mayor. It is normal for French politicians to hold more than one position, and many of Sarkozy's appointees are also mayors.

The demonstration drew only about 200 persons, but it was sufficient to serve at least as a symbol of what many other Frenchmen must have felt (and Donzère is a small town).

Below, the sign says "Masters in our own land".


Below, a daring act in this age of political and racial correctness: the words of Charles de Gaulle:

"We are above all a European people of the white race, of Greek and Latin culture, and of the Christian religion. Otherwise, France would not be France."


Below, the police counted 200 demonstrators, the Bloc Identitaire counted about 250. For once, the figures are close. What is certain is that Eric Besson was not expecting such a mobilization. After thinking he would come to talk to the demonstrators, he changed his mind.


Below, (and notice how the photo masks their eyes, as if to protect them) a group of "young people" who could have stepped out of the Seine-Saint-Denis suburbs. They looked on sullenly, but they did not react. It wasn't the moment...


Below, the sign reads "No National Identity without Local Identities", an important move towards recognition of the various ethnic European roots of France, without discarding the notion of one nation being formed from this variety. In his speech, the leader of the Bloc identitaire, Fabrice Robert said:

"We Frenchmen are diverse. But not in the way they are saying (...) We are Frenchmen, but we are also Provençaux, Dauphinois, Alsatians, Bretons.... There is no contradiction between these identities, but an interaction."

Well said.


Below, a smokey scene (not sure where the smoke came from):


In the scene below Fabrice Robert, chairman of the Bloc Identitaire takes the mike to address the crowd. The caption by Novopress reads:

Who would have thought it possible? We are in front of the Donzère City Hall, and Fabrice Robert proclaims: "They don't like it here? Well, let them go home! Let's get the charter planes ready so that they can fully live their own identity in their own country!" He then goes on, targeting the mayor: "Eric Besson is the archetype of the lying deceitful politician, concerned only with his ego, his career. As mayor of Donzère, he knows that French identity has existed for centuries. Just 100 yards from here, there is the twelfth-century church, a Cluny site. There is this historic center that we have just passed through that has not changed since medieval times. Eric Besson knows all that. But he says and does the opposite. He is proof that we are not fighting against a virtual System, but against a syndicate of interests, composed of real men. He is proof that we do not live in a Greek democracy, in a republic of the ancient world. We live in a plutocracy served by the most vile, the most base, by those who serve themselves before serving the people."


Below, more "young people", with a policeman visible on the right. Their sign reads "Viva l'Algérie". The caption reads:

Integrated? Frenchmen like any other? While Fabrice Robert was speaking, a group of about ten "young people" express their disapproval. An identitarian conception of French identity? Clearly not something of concern to them. "One two three, go back to your home country" chanted the crowd in imitation of the words of the song sung by Diam's (a France-hating rap singer recently converted to Islam): "One two three, Viva l'Algérie!"


In any case, on this Saturday in the department of the Drôme, the supporters of Eric Besson showed their true face.

At YouTube you can view a short video of the event as reported by France 3. Predictably, the identitarians are presented as "extreme right-wingers and xenophobes", with affiliations to the Front National and claims of white supremicism. The reporter emphasizes that the police had to be called in, and disparages the idea that the regional identities can constitute a national identity. However, LouStockfish, the author of the video contradicts France 3:

A very gross misinformation from the France 3 journalist as usual! The slogans were not at all about the "white race". There was absolutely no racial slant or even any confrontations, though the "young" ultra-provocateur Maghrebins hurled projectiles, forcing the riot police to intervene in several spots during the march!!! There you have a wretched manipulation by the left-wing press that has nothing better to do than to compromise itself even more by spreading calumny and falsifying reality. The people of Donzère were surprised and many smiled on hearing the slogans they approved of!

French readers can read the text of Fabrice Robert's speech here.

Lost Territories, Forgotten People

What the French people live through on a day-to-day basis is grim. Especially if they do not have the means to move to better neighborhoods. This article by Mireille Popelin is from Riposte Laïque:

There are 12 million of them. French salaried workers. And everything is being done to make them disappear. No one even talks about them anymore! The radical chic ("bobo") Left even says they no longer exist. They endure discrimination. The workers at Conti, at Caterpillar, etc... who fight against the relocation of their companies, who fight against so-called social plans, i.e., unemployment, have to wage their battles alone. They are the people who live in low-income housing and who are subject to the laws of the fanatics and the mafiosi.

Many left the suburbs that had become unlivable. But not those who did not have the means to buy or rent elsewhere. Old retired people who were not able to leave are insulted: "dirty French, old whores, and 4 square meters." You don't know what "4 square meters" refers to? It's the grave. They reduce these older workers to the grave! With targeted spitting, near their shoes. With seats in the bus offered to a veiled Muslim woman apparently younger than they are. At the marketplace it is the Muslim woman who is served first, ostensibly, while the French woman has to wait. The merchants are Arabs. The butcher shops are almost all halal and the retirees have to take a bus or subway to stock up on meat that is not halal. I know them, I listen to them in their retirement clubs.

What of the schools? Islamists are at the door and put pressure on the poor teachers... no swimming pool for girls, no "sex" ed. (We have religion, they say, we don't need that. We don't talk about that.) Biology, history... the teachers often break down, torn between fear and the desire to "pull" these kids towards emancipation and knowledge. I know this well, because it has happened in my family, and it ends with depression and heart attacks.

I'm tired of reading everywhere about the great fears of Muslims who are discriminated against, when fanatics and mafiosi force their "law" in the "lost territories of the Republic".

Note: The Lost Territories of the Republic is the title of a book by Emmanuel Brenner (a pseudonym) that came out in 2002. It describes the breakdown of law and order in large areas of France where even the police dare not go. The following is drawn from a review of the book at JCPA:

The testimonies indicate the serious plight of French democracy. Many teachers close their eyes to the violence, intimidation, and racism. Others describe the perpetrators as "hooligans" or "hoodlums," in denial of the fact that there are elements in the French Muslim community as well as foreign television stations that systematically incite against others. Other teachers try to maintain "social peace" by appeasing the bullies and withholding sympathy from their victims.

The schools' attitudes broadly reflect those of the left-wing government and the previous political position of President Jacques Chirac. During three years of major anti-Semitic incidents, he denied that there was anti-Semitism in France. Only after yet another arson attempt against a Jewish institution in November 2003 did Chirac decide to change his stance.

The cases described are not limited to Jewish victims. Some Christian pupils are so intimidated by the Muslim majority in their classes that they have considered converting to Islam. Teachers are harassed as well. Some Muslim pupils expressed their joy about 11 September, and Bin Laden is a hero to them. It would be a mistake to think that the hatred focuses exclusively on Jews and Americans; the Muslims' main disgust is for the French and French society.

You can read another very interesting review of the book at The Social Contract.

I found the photo of a Muslim butcher shop above at a website called Chris Kutschera.

As I post, a brief just appeared at François Desouche about the torture and murder of a retired couple, both 76, in the department of Oise. They were found on Friday afternoon (January 29) in a pool of blood inside the apartment where they had lived for more than 20 years. The wife was bound in the kitchen, her husband was in the living-room. The exact circumstances of their death are not known, but some evidence points to a robbery that went wrong (sic!). Friends became worried when they could not reach them, and called the gendarmes.

The "sic!" is due to the ridiculous euphemism so often used in crimes such as these: a robbery gone wrong, or a burglary gone wrong, etc... In fact it was a torture and murder that went very well.

Without more information we can only speculate on the perpetrators. It could have been anybody, any group, any age. But this does not stop FDS readers from indulging in some sardonic speculation on how the press will name the perps once they are caught:

- Norwegian bastards
- Eskimo filth
- Auvergnat bastards
- Japanese scumbags
- Viking trash
- No. It must have been Swedes. Dirty Swedes...
- What did we ever do to the Swedes for them to treat us like this?

etc...

It is true that the Western media will do almost anything not to name Muslims or blacks as criminals until it can no longer be avoided. Instead with a strange mixture of brazenness and cowardice they choose some unlikely ethnic group, usually white. This happens in France where initial crime reports often assign French names like Pierre or Stéphane to the alleged criminals. Only later do we learn it was really Mohammed or Rachid or Youssef...

Immigration Turmoil

Last December, Le Monde published some immigration statistics that have been discussed at many websites. The following is a condensation of the original article:

Discretely, but surely, the government has been amnestying undocumented aliens. Though it increases the signs of "firmness", such as the latest expulsion of Afghanis on December 15, the figures gathered by Le Monde from the Ministry of Immigration reveal that more than 20,000 foreigners were legalized in 2009. This figure is equivalent to, if not higher than, the number of expulsions. Minister of Immigration Eric Besson refuses nonetheless to issue a precise and global statistic on this question.

The article points out that Besson has willingly issued data on the total number of voluntary and forced repatriations in 2008 - 29,796 - of whom 19,724 were forced, but still refuses to discuss amnesties. Also, in 2008, 2800 undocumented workers were granted a residency card, but these represent only a very small number of residency cards issued, the greatest number being those justified by "exceptional admissions", or "humanitarian reasons," i.e., family reunification. It was in 2006 that Interior Minister Sarkozy abrogated the then-existing law that granted automatic amnesty only after 10 years of residency in France. He left the decision-making process up to the prefectures, which meant that henceforth, official data would be difficult to obtain.

Family reunification is the most frequently used grounds for legalization, lest a rejection cause a "disproportionate attack" on the applicant's "right to respect for his private and family life":

For ten years the number of residency cards granted for family reasons has not ceased to grow, from 3,314 in 1999 to 22,195 in 2006 (...) In 2008 it was still at 15,858. By the end of September 2009, it was already 10,917. Even though the prefects insist that they decide on a "case by case" basis, legalization is still a way of avoiding excessive tensions aroused by the government's stated objective of 27,000 repatriations annually.

Note: In other words, to avoid trouble, the prefects grant amnesty.

The number of undocumented aliens is estimated to be between 200,000 and 400,000. Last november 22, Martine Aubry, first secretary of the Socialist Party called for a "broad amnesty." Sarkozy and his party denounced the idea as passé and argued that such a move would only help human smugglers bring more unfortunate people into the country nourished by the dream of being legalized,

But even if the government refuses to admit it, it pusues a policy of steady legalization, as have all French governments since 1972, when automatic amnesty was stopped and replaced by a policy that aims to "control migratory waves."

Note: Statistics are always dull and inconclusive. Yet, many French websites took notice of Le Monde's article. The interesting thing is that Le Monde printed it, and that it makes undeniable references to hidden statistics, and to the pressures on government officials, such as prefects, to grant amnesty without too much delay. It means that even the official organs of news are aware that undesirable, non-assimilable foreigners are slipping into France by whatever open or half-open doors beckon to them, and that the government is in denial, buying time...

On a related note, there was an incident recently involving the arrival on the island of Corsica of 123 illegal aliens who said they were Syrian Kurds. The group, which included many women and children, was discovered Monday (January 18) on a beach near Bonifacio at the extreme southern end of Corsica, not far from Sardinia. They were first transferred to a gymnasium in Bonifacio. Expulsion papers were issued by the prefect of Corsica, and the foreigners were then transferred to various holding centers scattered throughout France. However, Minister of Immigration Eric Besson did an about-face (not his first, surely not his last), when he announced that all 123 illegals had been released from custody. Le Figaro dated January 22 gives some background information. I had to greatly condense the article:

The transfer to holding centers of the 123 migrants angered and worried the (pro-immigration) associations, including the United Nations Commission on Refugees (HCR), that demanded France guarantee these refugees access to legal procedures on asylum rights, and the chance to appeal in the event of a negative decision.

When an illegal alien is placed in a holding center he is issued an expulsion warning that he has 48 hours to contest. He can then file a request for asylum within five days to which the French Bureau of Protection of Refugees (OFPRA) must respond within 96 hours. If the decision is negative there can be no appeal. According to the HCR, the deadlines were too short considering that the holding period began in Corsica and not in the holding centers.

The pro-immigration associations denounce "a growing intolerance ("crispation") of this government with regard to all things foreign..."

Twenty-four hours after their arrival, the 57 men, 29 women, and 38 children were sent to five different centers in Nîmes, Marseilles, Lyons, Rennes and Toulouse. The swiftness of these transfers angered the associations. "We cannot see how their cases were examined individually as Minister of Immigration Eric Besson had announced," declared Amnesty International.

Since they had no papers, their nationality could not be definitively established. Most said they were Kurds from Syria, some said they were from the Maghreb. They could have left Syria by truck, arrived in Tunisia, and then boarded a Russian cargo ship that dropped them off. According to the State prosecutor, France was not their destination. Rather they were seeking work in Norway and Sweden, having paid their human smugglers 2500 to 10,000 euros for the trip. Still the circumstances of their arrival are not clear...

It is the first time that Corsica has been confronted with a massive arrival of illegals on its shores. Eric Besson is going to propose that the European Union hold a summit on the illegal immigration crisis.

H/T: François Desouche, comment nº 20.

Note: The above article from Le Figaro generated 646 comments. I have not had time to read them.

Since the EU has similar goals to the UN, Besson's request for a summit can be regarded as pure sham. It is because of EU policies that things like this (and much worse) happen in the first place. At any rate, all 123 persons were released within TWO days. Le Figaro again reports, and again I had to condense:

Judges in the cities where the refugees were being held, pending expulsion, overturned the procedures used by the prefect of Corse-du-Sud (Southern Corsica), pointing to deprivation of freedom and violation of international agreements. They immediately ordered the release of the refugees. On Monday morning (January 25) Eric Besson announced the nullification of all expulsion orders issued at Bonifacio on Friday.

The refugees will be free pending examination by OFPRA (see above). At least 61 of the 81 adult Kurds have already requested the status of refugee. They will be lodged temporarily "in shelters run by the State in partnership with the Red Cross", said Eric Besson.

Recriminations were hurled back and forth between Besson and the pro-immigration groups, angered at the transfer to holding centers, with Besson insisting that it was not logistically possible to process the cases of the foreigners in a few hours, and that in any case, it was "irresponsible and demagogic to assume that the status of refugee can be instantaneously granted to any foreigner arriving in France, until it is known where he comes from, who he is, and why he is being persecuted."

However, witnesses from Bonifacio contend that there was a local solution to the problem, that judges had been alerted who were willing to spend the night at the southern tip of the island, as were defense attorneys.

A high-level official confided that it was "mainly for reasons of public security that the decision was made to transfer the migrants to the continent. Everyone felt that the presence of 123 migrants was likely to anger the local population, possibly even to arouse violence."

H/T: François Desouche

The photo below shows the gymnasium in Bonifacio where they were first sent.

The map at the top shows the main routes taken by illegals trying to enter Western Europe and the UK. Illegal immigration is therefore very well organized, both by human smugglers and by the associations and larger entities such as the EU and the UN. Soon it will probably be decreed that there is no such thing as an illegal person, something that has already been decreed by several city councils in the United States.

From a very quick glance at the message boards it looks as if the French are angered at the way in which the original expulsion orders were simply overridden. The prefect of Corsica did the right thing, but international policies take precedence. A small example of what lack of national sovereignty can lead to...

A Matter of Urbanism

This article from Novopress is a good example of the cynical nonchalance with which Sarkozy's UMP party regards the Islamic presence in France, and minarets in this particular case. The title of the Novopress article is: "For UMP, a church steeple or a minaret, it's kif-kif". But in the long term it is not kif-kif. There is no such thing as 50-50 when you are dealing with Islam. And of course the UMP knows this:

Frédéric Lefebvre, spokesman for UMP, hence representative of the official policies of the presidential party, does not want a referendum in France, such as the example the Swiss set, for or against the building of minarets. "The question (...) is not to voice an opinion for or against minarets in France," he affirms at the UMP website. Then explaining further: "It would be stupid to be hostile to it considering that there are minarets in our country. The problem is rather to ensure the best possible conditions for a fitting practice of one's beliefs."

Nevertheless, Frédéric Lefebvre calls for vigilance against any form of proselytism. "We will not yield to provocation. France has been built on a long history ('sur toute une histoire'). And as far as I know, French Muslims do not reject the presence of church steeples in France," added Lefebvre, who has been Nicolas Sarkozy's close collaborator for fifteen years, as his assistant in Parliament, his chief of staff and his communications adviser.

In light of this brilliant analysis, Frédéric Lefebvre feels that the decision of such and such a city to agree to the erection of a minaret stems from "simple rules of urbanism." And to illustrate this: a French flag floating before a minaret...

Note: The above translation combines two related articles on the same Novopress web page. Also on that web page is this quote from the chairman of the UMP party Xavier Bertrand. He uses words that Nicolas Sarkozy has used many many times:

"I prefer that there be official, recognized places of worship, in order to have an Islam of France, rather than the practice of a religion in secret places."

Note: If France is built on her "history" and if clandestine worship is worse than official worship, then it follows that France should follow her own laws. The law of 1905 bans the building of religious edifices with public funds. Most, if not all, of the mosques in France today were built with taxpayer money. Why not say so openly, and admit openly that to simply do away with the law of 1905 would be much more honest than to attempt to skirt it clandestinely...

To put it more bluntly: Say openly that to destroy France openly, in an officially recognized way, is preferable to destroying her clandestinely... But of course, they DO say it openly when they hammer away that all religions are equal, and threaten that France must become a racially mixed country or else...

Note: I am not certain of the source of the photo, or if it is PhotoShopped. The flag appears to be at half-staff (appropriate in a macabre way).

Returning for just a moment to the Swiss vote, here are some statistics on the "yawning gap between politicians and people". The link arrived in my mailbox during the holidays. Some of you may find it of interest, as well as the huge number of articles at both The LibertyPhile and LibertyPhile Research on related topics, with countless links to source articles, and many statistics.

Besson Does an About-Face

Will the real Eric Besson please stand up!

« La France n’est ni un peuple, ni une langue, ni un territoire, ni une religion, c’est un conglomérat de peuples qui veulent vivre ensemble.

Il n’y a pas de Français de souche, il n’y a qu’une France de métissage »

In a highly controversial speech delivered on January 5 to the immigrant population of La Courneuve, Minister of Immigration and National Identity Eric Besson uttered the above statements, which translate:

"France is not a people, or a language, or a territory, or a religion, it is a conglomerate of peoples who want to live together. There is no ethnic Frenchman, there is only an ethnically mixed France."

I reported on his statements here. He made similar statements in his debate with Marine Le Pen on January 14.

His statements, though exceptionally blunt, were in keeping with the Sarkozy doctrine of métissage, a doctrine that aims to change the face of France from that of a white European nation with a Christian foundation, and a Greek cultural heritage, into an Arabic/Islamic/African salmagundi without discernible and protective borders, and without a dominant white European culture.

Now Eric Besson has retracted, or rather revised, his statements. Here is an article from L'Express, linked by François Desouche:

In a communiqué, Minister of Immigration and National Identity Eric Besson declares that the French nation is made up of one people alone and a Republic indivisible and that he was misunderstood when he portrayed it on January 5 as a "conglomerate of peoples."

He explained on Friday (January 22) that he wanted to dissipate any misunderstanding, in view of the fact that his words resulted in his being called an "immigrationist" by the president of the Front National Jean-Marie Le Pen.

Note: There's a contradiction here. Shouldn't he be GLAD to have attracted criticism from JMLP? Why does he not just say, "Yes! I am an immigrationist! And proud of it!"

During a debate in the suburb of Seine-Saint-Denis, on national identity, a topic that has aroused lively debate in France, Eric Besson had declared that France was a "conglomerate of peoples who want to live together." On Friday he explained that "this schematic shortcut could have been wrongly interpreted as being my definition of the French nation".

The minister emphasized that during this debate he was talking about "France before it was called France, the France of the scattered tribes described by Julius Caesar in his Commentaries on the Gallic Wars."

"I had in mind the words of Mirabeau on what was not yet France (an 'aggregate of disunited peoples'). And I spoke of a 'conglomerate of peoples'", he added.

Eric Besson made a reference to his book Pour la Nation (For the Nation), in which he defends the idea of a Nation created by a strong State, where origins have been transcended, and bound together since 1539 by the French language.

The French nation is "one people alone, one language, one territory, values and institutions: the Republic", he stated with assurance.

Nice try, but it's too late.

Not only has Eric Besson made a complete volte-face, it could be argued that he very subtly did NOT really change anything of what he had said before. No where did he actually condone or praise the France that existed BEFORE the Republic. No where did he in any way say or imply that non-assimilable immigrants should not be allowed into the country. He is now saying that France is (present tense) "one people alone", but who are they? He could be talking about anybody, Celts, Burgundians, Alsatians, naturalized Poles, Swedes or Italians who emigrated into France, naturalized Maghrebins, sub-Saharan Africans, or Hottentots who emigrated to France, all of whom will meld as if by magic into one people. And of course no word about Christianity or Islam. Whatever he claims now, his original statement was about a racially mixed Republic, and his retraction is about the Republic, albeit in gentler terms.

To try to make us believe that on January 5 he was actually talking about the Gaul that Caesar conquered is laughable. Why would he talk about that to immigrants who complain bitterly about French xenophobia? Gaul consisted of groups that were not yet united into a nation called France. But they were white Europeans of Indo-European origins. They were already linked by a heritage, however vague. And how would his audience have known what he was talking about anyway? Or cared? What connection is there really between Caesar's Gaul and Sarkozy's France, in terms of racial composition, civilizational goals and internal compatibility? It was difficult enough for the French kings to consolidate the various white European groups into the Kingdom of France. It is now virtually impossible to incorporate groups hostile by virtue of culture, race and religion into the decadent Republic.

In his revised statement he speaks of common "values". What are they? Catholicism and Islam? Pedagogical rigor and socialized education? Traditional families and gay marriage?

Besson must have received a lot of angry letters and e-mails to engage in this kind of damage control.

Regarding Mirabeau, I have not had time to research his comment on an "aggregate."

Finally, what is this book called Pour la Nation? According to les Manants du Roi, it is plagiarized from an earlier work with the same title by Attorney Jean-Marc Varaut.

Yes, we are dreaming. Besson the Mediocre could not do otherwise than to enclose France in an organized institution: the Republic... What could be more normal than a book by this minister that is nothing more than a mediocre act of plagiarism cut from the book Pour la Nation by Jean-Marc Varaut. This ought to result in a law suit...

Note: I have not read either book.

Haiti - Certain Realities (and Fantasies) Emerge

Lawrence Auster has posted a blog article by Melanie Phillips on the disaster in Haiti. Here are some excerpts:

The unfolding mega-disaster in Haiti has exposed in the most sickening form the utter uselessness of the UN. Of course, it must be acknowledged that the UN is itself one of the victims of this tragedy, with more than 100 of its staff said to have been killed in the earthquake and its aftermath. And yes, the wholesale destruction of Haiti's already fragile infrastructure means that the difficulties in getting supplies to the people are exceptional.

Nevertheless, the key problem appears to be a total absence of leadership, so that no-one is taking control of the situation. Haiti's own government is unable to do this; until yesterday, America was taking a back seat waiting upon the UN to do the business. But the UN has conspicuously failed to do so. As a result, while the countries of the developed world have been pouring in aid and supplies, this has been piling up while the people of Haiti are dying from injury, disease and lack of water. And now that the US has finally lost patience and piled in troops to deliver supplies to the people, there are predictable cries from the French--and doubtless other knee-jerk America-bashers--that America is 'occupying' Haiti. Such is the derangement of the anti-America obsession. (...)

In Haiti, however, there has been one foreign nation that has conspicuously broken free of this paralysis and has had no difficulty in setting up emergency aid for the Haitian victims. That country is Israel. Within hours of the earthquake striking, the Israeli media was reporting that Israel was assembling a team of no fewer than 220 emergency aid personnel to fly to the stricken country. (...)

There follows an interesting discussion on how we can sometimes help people in the wrong way and do them in, and do ourselves in at the same time.

You can view a must-see video on the Israeli presence in Haiti and the harrowing desperation of the victims who survived (only to find themselves dying for lack of aid in a hospital), at Covenant Zone, where both Charles Henry and Truepeers have articles on Haiti. Note that some of the radio clips Charles posted may not be available. Possibly you can try later (or maybe it's my computer)

To access all of CZ's articles on Haiti, click the label at the end of the post.

While you are at CZ, check out the entire homepage - there are many articles of interest on Geert Wilders, and Ezra Levant.

For my part, I came upon this brief post at a Belgian website. It was also linked at Ethnocide, a site devoted to preserving the ethnic identities of white Europeans.

Excerpt from an article by Belgian-Congolese journalist Albert Kisonga Mazakala:

"Haiti was the first black country, if not the only black country, to be liberated from the chains of slavery thanks to the military genius of its leader Toussaint Louverture, 219 years ago. And yet, far from allowing the development of their country, the freedom of the Haitians has served no purpose, one could say, except to give birth to tyrannical regimes able only to impoverish their people and increase the wealth of the leaders. The situation in Haiti is in every way comparable to that of most black African countries, including, obviously, in terms of its racial make-up. Hence, the painful question that everyone is asking in a whisper but which everyone is thinking: could it be that blacks are incompetent? To dare ask the question publicly will probably earn me the remonstrances of many of my black brothers, considering the extreme sensitivity that we generally display. But in truth, we realize, after a half-century of independence of African nations, how accurate the maxim of Leopold Senghor was when he said: 'Emotion is Negro, Reason is Greek.'"

I think Senghor made a very wise statement. Without in any way denigrating or belittling black people he did point out that there are major differences between peoples, and far from being a cause for international witch hunts against those that point out such truths, it is simply a statement of a reality. It is this reality of our differences that makes life diverse and fascinating. We complement each other; we are not the same.

On the uselessness of the UN and the predictable but pointless recriminations of the French, Rue 89 is not too far from the analysis of Melanie Phillips:

(...) Nature abhors a void. The United States filled the emptiness (left by the U.N.) and in particular took control of the airport, the umbilical cord for vital aid to the victims. But all it took was one French airplane forced by American air traffic controllers to turn back to the Dominican Republic for recriminations to be heard, as well as accusations of "re-colonization" of the island. (...)

This American activism, backed by considerable means and a considerable media coverage, is viewed badly in Paris. First, because Nicolas Sarkozy is irritated by anything relating to the American president, and also because France, by reason of her history and Francophone concerns, feels that a position of French leadership is legitimate. Not only is France just one aid provider among others, but her planes are at the mercy of Yankee air control! (...)

This affair is but one sign of the absence of legitimate organization of international coordination in times of crisis. The United Nations have been de-legitimized, emptied out of their means, and can no longer fulfill this mission. The U.N. is nonetheless the only organization that could play this role.

The European Union is once again "not at home", as we are tempted to say, even if the 27 countries promised 200 million euros for Haiti. You can dream about an E.U. ready with the collective means to intervene "American style" in an urgent situation such as this one, but it doesn't look as if it will be for a long while, given the shambles of the new institutions that are already in competition with the rotating national presidencies: in this case it is Spain.

The "battle for reconstruction" is very likely to encounter the same free-for-all. Nicolas Sarkozy, in his eternal posturing as planetary savior, was the first to introduce the idea of an international conference for the reconstruction of Haiti. But it will take place in Canada, which is closer and more implicated...

The readers' comments are largely, though not exclusively, against America, perceived as throwing its weight around and seeking to dominate everything. One reader taking a completely different approach, says that you cannot compare the two countries (France and the U.S.) in terms of size and capacities, only to find himself accused by another reader of being a "cynic". But the most striking accusation against America is from a reader who cites Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. He claims that both leftist leaders state "clearly that it is a pre-planned military occupation." The reader provides a link, but I must admit I have not read it...

However, a quick web search indicates that the Left in general believes we were behind the quake. Here is a video that many of you have probably seen, in which we learn that Chavez accuses the U.S. of employing tectonic weapons capable of inducing earthquakes and other disasters usually thought-of as "natural". This accusation is also a warning to the world that we intend to use tectonic weapons on Iran.



The tectonic weapon in question is called HAARP (High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program). Those interested can view this complacent English-language video at YouTube, where there are other videos that speculate on HAARP. Draw your own conclusions. To me, this is anti-American paranoia, but of course, I am prejudiced...

There is also an article (written from a left-wing perspective) at Online Journal that discusses many of these HAARP issues.

One last thought: how ironic that the two greatest promoters of the anti-racism doctrine, the United Nations and the European Union, were helpless when it came to actually putting their money where their mouth usually is. It was still up to those countries with a semblance of sovereignty and national pride, countries often accused of racism by the anti-racist zealots, to rush to the aid of the devastated island. Will this be the end of the U.N.? Could the horror in Haiti have at least one positive outcome?

Photo above of an overloaded ferry leaving Port-au-Prince from CNN. As is the heart-breaking photo below of a music book found in the rubble of Jacmel. Read about what happened in Jacmel here.

Clovis Slowly Disappears

Here is a brief article from Le Salon Beige on a change in the curriculum of 8th graders in France. While this change has aroused anger and consternation among some, others insist that it is not the disaster one may think:

The Official Instructions for the teaching of History and Geography indicate the following:

In the domain of History, the Merovingian period is completely ignored both in 7th and 8th grades. Clovis is gone with it! The baptism of Clovis is gone and will not be mentioned officially at any time in middle school! On the other hand, they will study the India of the Gupta and the China of the Han Dynasty, as well as the empires of Ghana or Mali or the empires of Songhaï or Monomotapa.

Note: The above named topics (with links to Wikipedia) may be of great interest, and worth studying. The question is not if they are worthy of study, but whether or not something more urgent is being sacrificed in their favor.

As for Geography, you would think you're in a Nicolas Hulot TV show, or in a Life and Earth Science class (...) where durable development is also part of the program (See note).

During this period of so-called debate on national identity, we should not be surprised that children no longer know who Clovis and Charlemagne are.

Note: Nicolas Hulot is a writer, ecologist, and activist who urged politicians, including Sarkozy, to make environmental issues a government priority.

French schools teach what they call Life and Earth Sciences or SVT. Originally called Biology, the new terminology went into effect in 1994, and now includes Geology. The objectives of SVT are: 1) to teach biology and geology 2) to teach health related issues, such as infectious diseases, contraception, sexuality 3) to teach about the environment and the impact of humans on it, and biodiversity.

SVT is taught both in middle schools and high schools with different priorities at each level. (Source: Wikipedia)

A very long discussion ensues at Le Salon Beige on the watering down of the curriculum, the fears that the Merovingian chapter of French history (which IS still taught at the elementary level) will disappear entirely, the competition between public schools and private schools with some accusations hurled at Le Salon Beige for being elitist in its preference for unsubsidized education, the fact that teachers can sometimes teach outside of the Official Instructions (others say one cannot do this), and much else, and the French readers may find it of interest.

In addition to this curriculum modification, it was announced last November by Minister of Education Luc Chatel that History and Geography would be eliminated as requirements in the final year of the Scientific curriculum in high schools. The news aroused a great deal of discussion with most denouncing the measure as one more nail in the coffin of national education. Some said it didn't matter since History was so poorly taught anyway that it was just as well. Others said that the Science teachers had wanted the change so that students could devote their entire senior year to their major, without the interference of History. More than 50% of high school students are in the Scientific curriculum. (Source: Le Salon Beige)

It is clear that these two changes have one thing in common - the gradual decline in the teaching of History. Therefore, one cannot help but wonder if it isn't all part of the government's long-term strategy to cut the French people off from their past, from their heritage, in order to re-make them according to a new mold and to give them a new... "national identity".

The Baptism of Clovis
National Gallery of Art, Washington
Artist: Anonymous, referred to as The Master of Saint Giles

There aren't many songs about Clovis. Are there any? This old song by Leny Escudero was popular when I first went to France in the 1960's. He doesn't have much of a voice, and the video shows the singer over-emoting, though I can't be sure, never having seen him. And the Clovis in the song is not the King we would like to see return to the curriculum, but at least he returns...

Long ago
After many sleepless nights
He left to seek other Sundays
But frost came and clung to his branches
And because his days are dwindling,
Clovis has returned.

He brings nothing
Worth losing or keeping
The morning star
Belongs to anyone
He neither won nor lost
But there is the Camargue
Shivering in his rags
Clovis has returned.

He walks hugging the wall
The gray December wall
Frightened, he is not sure
If they will take him back
But they recognize him
Already they rush to him
A hand takes hold of his
Clovis has returned.

Today is Christmas
Clovis, you are one of us
I thank Christmas
It's sweet to be back with you
We thought you were lost
Listen to them laugh
They are happy to say
Clovis has returned.

He lowered his head
To hide a tear
But it's good to cry
When your soul is full of warmth
His feels he's in heaven
Friendship is good
That night a man fell
asleep happy.



For the French lyrics click here.

Confrontation: Besson and Marine Le Pen

Last week (January 14) there was a much-publicized debate between Minister of Immigration and National Identity Eric Besson and the vice-president of the Front National Marine Le Pen. Many looked forward to a slam dunk from one or the other, but according to most reports the great debate did not take place, primarily because of the way the topic of national identity was skirted by Besson and Marine Le Pen's reluctance to offer an effective response to his anti-French statements (see my recent post). Moreover, they hurled insults at each other, the most striking one being his crack that she had become a "dinosaur". There are many accounts of this debate, and there are of course videos that take a great deal of time to translate. So, here is an adaptation of an article from Polemia:

The great debate did indeed take place but... it ended up being only about immigration.

Marine Le Pen emphasized the magnitude of the 200,000 annual entries into France, and the 110,000 naturalizations, the economic and social disadvantages for the French and the injustice of affirmative action. Eric Besson defended the government's policies of expelling illegals (12 Afghanis), "regulating" the influx, and "selective" immigration.

This would have been fine 20 or 25 years ago.

Above all, the real question: What does it mean to be French? was not debated, even though the answer determines which immigrants should be accepted and which rejected.

When the government launched the debate on French identity, it had one objective: to force acceptance of the idea that there is no policy possible other than the government's, i.e., that France is a nation of mixed blood, and must continue welcoming immigrants who "enrich the country" but who have to be better "organized."

And on this point, Eric Besson had great latitude. Under the falsely critical eye of Arlette Chabot (the moderator of the debate) he had 50 minutes, with no opposition, to develop his conception of French identity. He repeated the formula he had used on January 5: "France is not a people, or a language, or a territory, or a religion, it is a conglomerate of peoples who want to live together. There is no ethnic Frenchman. There is only an ethnically mixed France" ("une France du métissage").

At no point in the discussion did Marine Le Pen deny his allegations. She gave him a free rein, and chose to avoid a confrontation on the essential question. She even backed off when Arlette Chabot attempted to utter the words of General de Gaulle: "We are, after all, a European people of the white race, of Greek and Latin culture and of the Christian religion." Marine Le Pen, horrified, clearly refused to concur with this definition. Is the tyranny of anti-racism then so powerful that at the mere mention of what de Gaulle said, the daughter of Jean-Marie Le Pen runs for cover?

The only higher value Marine Le Pen defended was the Republic. She was probably right to do so when she opposed affirmative action, for nothing is more contrary to the notions of equality and republican merit than this American concept. (SIC!) But to regard the Republic as the only marker of French identity is to rally behind official thought. And it is a theme on which the Front National is, rightly or wrongly, barely audible or credible.

Note: I disagree with Polemia's assertion that affirmative action is "American". It is profoundly anti-American, and its opponents have been saying so since the idea was first introduced decades ago. It has caused irreparable damage to the workplace and to the education system, by granting high grades, diplomas, scholarships, jobs and influential positions in the policy-making sectors to people whose skin or sexual orientation or gender happen to conform to the norms established by the Left. Besides being the most outlandish bribe in history, Obama's Nobel Prize was a good example of a gift given to someone on the basis of race, not merit. The notion of affirmative action demands a belief in the equality of outcomes, not in the equality of chances. America is oriented more towards freedom; France, on the other hand cherishes "égalité", at the price of freedom. But now, France has to deal with the social and cultural consequences of meting out equality to those whose merit has not been proven.

Thus, Marine Le Pen acknowledges the evils of affirmative action, but not the evils of the type of immigration that made affirmative action inevitable.

Back to the article. Here are some of the things Eric Besson said to Marine Le Pen:

"You are young, but you are a dinosaur."

Another account of the proceedings at the website Boursier quoted him as saying:

"You are young, and physically attractive and I have the feeling I'm looking at someone from a world that has disappeared. When I listen to you, I see the old politics..."

He reproached her for turning the people against each other and against foreigners. He found her to be "puffed up" and "presumptive", while she found him "impolite"...

When confronted with Eric Besson, Marine Le Pen tried to demonstrate that he was not only under pressure from business leaders to support immigration, but that he was applying anti-French affirmative action. She reminded him that 580,000 foreigners had entered France in the past three years: "Every three years the equivalent of the city of Lille comes into our country". She also denounced the increase in demands from ethnic communities, pointing to the school cafeterias where pork meat is no longer served and to the giant mosques demanded by certain religious groups.

Eric Besson interrupted her to say: "Unless you can frighten people, you have nothing to say."

Marine Le Pen cited the example of l'Oréal that received recompense from the State for having practiced affirmative action, calling it "anti-French racism, anti-republican and anti-constitutional".

They continued hurling insults at each other. At the end, Marine Le Pen waved a Front National voting ballot, demanding to know how much the fact of being French weighed. When he did not appear to understand, she explained: "It weighs one gram, a voting ballot, and it is what you intend to take away from the French people, the only privilege remaining to them."

Besson responded: "I thought you were strong, Madame, but tonight you got it all wrong."

Note: Marine Le Pen was referring to the government's desire to grant to foreigners the right to vote.

Wherever it was reported on, the debate generated a huge reader response. In some ways the reader response was more interesting than the debate itself. If Marine lost, you cannot convince the following readers of Le Figaro:

- I have just watched the debate again. Most of the time she was realistic with concrete examples, while the other was unworthy of his position and sought to destabilize her with vulgar off-topic remarks. Stunning victory for Marine. BRAVO.

- I have watched the debate for a second time and have changed my mind. Marine did very well, she resisted the attacks from her opponent and was able to say truths that are often hidden from the French. Besson tried dishonestly to unnerve her several times. He lied and tried aggressively and heavy handedly to change the subject. I had found him dominating when I watched it live, but in the end he is much worse that he had seemed (...)

But the downside of the debate, as Polemia pointed out, is the true political position of the Front National itself. If the FN is not opposed to the idea of a France that is mixed (métissée), then I suppose it doesn't matter very much how well Marine does in a debate. It has often been feared and noted by identitarians and regionalists that the FN regards métissage and Islamization as givens, and seeks only to stem immigration, not to strive for a restoration (perhaps they regard it as illusory?) of the original French identities.

Here is a two-minute clip showing her in good form, citing the immigration figures, the case of l'Oréal, and repeating several times that the affirmative action practiced by the cosmetics firm was "scandaleux."

Geert Wilders' Trial Begins

Today was the first day of Geert Wilders' trial. Read the account at Atlas Shrugs.

Both Atlas Shrugs and Bivouac-Id have this short video with English subtitles:



Atlas Shrugs also offers a longer video (in Dutch, with a translation into English) of Wilders making his opening remarks. He closed his speech with these words:

This trial is obviously about the freedom of speech. But this trial is also about the process of establishing the truth. Are the statements that I have made and the comparisons that I have taken, as cited in the summons, true? If something is true then can it still be punishable? This is why I urge you to not only submit to my request to hear witnesses and experts on the subject of freedom of speech. But I ask you explicitly to honour my request to hear witnesses and experts on the subject of Islam. I refer not only to Mister Jansen and Mister Admiraal, but also to the witness/experts from Israel, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Without these witnesses, I cannot defend myself properly and, in my opinion, this would not be an fair trial.

You can review here the procedures for contacting the Dutch tribunal as part of SITA's international effort to support Geert.

While you are visiting Atlas Shrugs you might be interested in photos of the rally held in front of the UN protesting the murders of Christian Copts in Egypt. It's good to know there are still decent people willing to rally for civilized causes.