Who Said This in 1991?

"Our problem is one of overdose. Perhaps it is true that there are more foreigners, but they aren't the same ones and that's the difference. Having Spaniards, Poles, and Portuguese working here poses fewer problems than having Muslims and blacks."

The quote was spotted at François Desouche, in a side column devoted to notable quotes. For the answer to the question, click here.

The Great Non-Debate on National Identity

One of the biggest stories in France these past several days has been the much-touted (by the Establishment) and much-ridiculed (by the Right) "debate on national identity" launched by the Sarkozy regime. The amount of material is staggering, and I can only present a small sampling. Here is one of the first articles on this topic from Le Point dated October 26:

Eric Besson, Minister of Immigration, announced on Sunday the launching of a vast debate on national identity with the "vital forces" of the country, thus re-opening on the front pages one of the central themes of Nicolas Sarkozy's presidential campaign. "I want to launch a great debate on the values of national identity, on what it means to be French today," declared the Minister of Immigration and National Identity. "I will launch it with parliamentarians, deputies and senators, and with European deputies."

This debate will last two and a half months and end with a "great closing discussion" late in January. The minister will ask "prefects and sub-prefects to organize meetings with the vital forces of the Nation on the theme of what it means to be French, what the values are that bind us together, what the nature is of the ties that make us French and of which we should be proud. We must reaffirm the values of national identity and pride in being French," he said. "I think for example that it would be good - in the United States it's banal, but in France it's still a bit complicated - for all young Frenchmen to have at least one opportunity a year to sing the Marseillaise," he explained.

Note: I have no idea what he means by the above reference to the U.S. But as for singing the Marseillaise, we know it is frequently booed by both foreigners and natives alike at soccer matches. In America, I remember clearly when the Star-Spangled Banner was booed by black students in the school assemblies. Today in America very few people can sing the anthem, and nobody knows the words.

The article goes on to disclose that for Eric Besson the burqa should be banned because it is not a part of French identity. Not surprisingly he never says that Islam should be banned. However he does indicate that the Front National should disappear:

"We never should have abandoned to the Front National a certain number of values that are a part of the republican patrimony (...) I think that the political death of the Front National would be the best news for all of us." (...)

However, an article at Le Salon Beige quotes another article from Polemia on the true nature of this pseudo-debate. No one will be surprised:

The debate on national identity launched by Eric Besson, on orders from Nicolas Sarkozy, is not only a strategy for taking votes away from the Front National, but it is especially an operation of propaganda on métissage. The minister said it himself:

"The mission I have received from the president says: 'Our nation is of mixed blood. Immigration constitutes a source of permanent enrichment of our national identity'. We have a president who is saying: 'I am a person of mixed blood at the head of a nation of mixed blood'."

Polemia clarifies further:

There we have a constant in Nicolas Sarkozy's beliefs. His second wife Cécilia was proud of saying she "did not have one drop of French blood". In his campaign publication from July 2006, Sarkozy wrote:

"I think that the French are awaiting the France of the future. It will be a France where the expression 'ethnic Frenchman' ('Français de souche') has disappeared."

In the same vein, Nicolas Sarkozy declared on December 17, 2008, at the Ecole Polytechnique, the temple of republican merit: "The objective is to meet the challenge of 'métissage'. (...) It is not a choice, it is an obligation."

Note: The above was the notorious speech in which Sarkozy literally threatened his subjects that there would be dire consequences if they did not engage in cross-breeding, miscegenation, mixing blood, or whatever term you prefer for "métissage".

Polemia goes on:

Prime Minister François Fillon was not to be left out: at Reunion Island on July 9, 2009, he spoke of a "united France, a multicolored France, that has never had any flag other than the tricolor (sic!) (...) A France that pursues its centuries-old work of cross-breeding." As for Jean-François Copé, leader of the UMP deputies in the National Assembly, he had declared to Le Monde before the launching of the debate: "Stop forcing our children to believe that our ancestors were all Gallic."

Le Salon Beige closes its article:

For Polemia, this great debate is a way of burying the identity of France: her ethnic groups, her Catholic faith, her history, her culture, her language. Nicolas Sarkozy should be cautious. It was he who declared in Ryad, Saudi Arabia on January 14, 2008:

"My dear friends of Saudi Arabia, this is not about trying to impose a unique example of civilization (...) That would be denying identities. (...) Nothing is more dangerous than a wounded identity, a humiliated identity."

Note: Sarkozy, like the Left in general, has created an inextricable web of lies and misunderstood notions like "race" and "racism", and as they always do, they pretend to be "patriots" just before an election (some regional elections are coming up, or have already transpired). The agenda, as Polemia and every informed conservative knows, is first, to win votes, second to destroy what remains of a national identity - on orders from Brussels, if not the devil...

An important point, often overlooked, is that through the years, African leaders have bitterly criticized the white man for carving up Africa without regard to ethnic identities. In other words, the Africans themselves WANT their separate identities. They do not WANT to be mixed. But when it comes to invading a European society like France with its gigantic welfare State and its self-hating rhetoric, THEN they come in droves. Strange, isn't it?

I still cannot grasp if the French people - in their MAJORITY - realize this, or if they are sucked into it, or if they are merely bored or confused and want to be left alone... Any thoughts?

At any rate, Eric Besson, amidst much hoopla, created a website for those interested in voicing their opinions on this topic. But be advised that if your point of view smacks of the Right, you may be censored, as Le Salon Beige readers found out:

- Yes! They finally posted my comment (after seven attempts!!!) but they cut out the middle. What should I do?? Send the second half seven times?

- At Monsieur Besson's site, they want anonymous bleaters, symbols of the official thought that has turned most Frenchies into left-wingers and imbeciles.

- It is necessary to bring this censorship to public attention. I also posted my participation and it was never published. It was very correctly worded, but it did go back to fundamentals...

- I too was censored. This site must be boycotted since it is propaganda that recalls the darkest days of France. Here is what I said:

"National identity has been sacrificed, not by the most moral of the ruling elite, but by the most 'arriviste', on the altar of money and globalization. France today is weakened and in debt. She no longer has the means to be humanist. She can only be naive and sink further and further. How far down? There has never been a civilization disappear and then be reborn. We have lost our national identity and we will never be able to retrieve it."

There are other comments. And Bernard Antony, whose blog I frequently consult, was censored when he posted the contents of one of his older blog entries. The entry, to be sure, is very long, and recounts the history of France and the genesis and development of her culture and civilization. Here is just a tiny passage:

(...) In the course of these last fifty years, French identity has been the object of a conjuncture of factors relating to evolution and changes such that the possibility of a radical change of identity, even of an end to an identity by means of the process of genocide through substitution, must be considered.

No wonder it wasn't posted.

French readers can consult this entry at Le Salon Beige for more comments on the thwarted attempts to post patriotic messages, and for a link to Besson's website where some well-known French politicians leave their contributions.

The collage at the top is a parody of Sarkozy's presidential campaign poster. "La France d'après" (the France of the future, or the France afterwards) is portrayed as a crime-ridden Islamized country, unrecognizable to those who remember "la France d'avant" (France before). It cannot be stressed too much that Nicolas Sarkozy WARNED his subjects of his policies before the election. Only at the last minute did he allow himself to be seen next to Jean-Marie Le Pen, thus triggering a spate of useless enthusiasm on how he was espousing nationalism, patriotism and pride in country. When Sarkozy boasts about having told the truth, he is NOT lying... Most French nationalist blogs were not in the least bit fooled by his last-minute posture of patriotism. This posture has served him well - he wins his elections, and prevents the Front National from winning anything.

Below, Minister of National Identity, Eric Besson.

A New Alliance

On October 23 in Budapest an agreement was signed between several nationalist parties from different European countries. They include the Front National from France, the British National Party, the Hungarian Jobbik, the Fiamma Tricolore from Italy and the National Demokraterna from Sweden.

They guiding principles of this new alliance are listed in a post at Yves Daoudal. I find them too vague almost to the point of being obscure, and not conducive to concrete action, but it may be too soon to tell. Nor am I sufficiently informed as to the genesis and purpose of this alliance or how it hopes to accomplish its goals:

As representatives of movements and national parties in Europe, we demand:

1. The creation of a Europe of free, equal and independent nations in the framework of a confederation of sovereign States, that will refrain from making decisions on issues justifiably dealt with by the States themselves;

2. The rejection of any attempt to create a European Super-State;

3. The promotion of freedom, dignity and equality of rights of all citizens and opposition to all forms of totalitarianism;

4. The primacy of direct voting by the peoples or their elected representatives on decisions of any administrative or bureaucratic organism;

5. Genuine protection of Europe from new threats of terrorism as well as from political, economic, financial or religious imperialism;

6. The resolution in humane and peaceful conditions of the problem of immigration, notably through an international cooperation that aims to promote the development and self-sufficiency of third world countries;

7. Strong policies in favor of families, with the goals of reducing Europe's demographic deficit and promoting the traditional values in the society;

8. The preservation of the diversity in Europe that is the result of a variety of original identities, traditions, languages and cultures;

9. A common struggle of the peoples of Europe against social dumping and the destructive effects of globalization.

Note: Wikipedia has a brief definition of social dumping.

As I acquire more information on this alliance I'll pass it on. This post was the first I heard of it.

Victims of Communism Remembered

If you find yourself in Paris tomorrow Saturday at 6:00 p.m. in the afternoon, you may want to participate in a demonstration commemorating the fall of the Berlin Wall and honoring all those who have perished at the hands of Communism - countless millions. Bernard Antony's Christian association, Chrétienté-Solidarité, has organized this gathering, not only to pay tribute to the legions of lives lost over the past 90 years, but to denounce as well the resurfacing, in various guises, of an ideology that won't die and that has as one of its goals the destruction of Christianity. Here is one of several announcements at his blog:

(...) The Berlin Wall did not fall for everyone. France is the only Western country where the showing of the film Katyn was widely restricted. It is in France that HALDE, the new Cheka in the service of so-called anti-racism and the ideology of gender, operates, endowed with means and tremendous powers. It is also in the French Republic that the party in power - the president's UMP party - signed a shameful agreement with the Chinese Communist Party.

We will demonstrate against that also, side by side with all the speakers and representatives of countries that have been victimized by Communism!

Saturday, November 7, from 6:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m.
Place du Président Edouard Herriot
Paris 7ème (next to the National Assembly)

Note: In addition to the announcements about tomorrow's gathering, Bernard Antony has devoted eight posts to a retrospective of Communism, with special emphasis on how France and Frenchmen were involved, either heroically or as collaborators of the Soviet regime.

Fort Hood

You have no doubt heard about the mass murder (actually a terrorist attack) at Fort Hood, Texas. The killer was a Muslim named Malik Nadal Hasan. Since there will be a deluge of information both on television and the Internet, I will not talk about this horrible, though predictable, event. I recommend you read Lawrence Auster, here and here, and follow his links, especially those to Jihad Watch.

There's also an exceedingly long post at Hot Air that gives a detailed account of what happened starting with the very first reports. The name of the killer varies. Sometimes he is Nidal, sometimes Nadal.

Paul Belien: Europe Is Annexed By Brussels

Here are excerpts from Paul Belien's latest article on the events taking place in Europe:

On November 3rd 2009, at 3 pm local time, the Czech Republic ceased to exist as a sovereign state when Vaclav Klaus, its president, put his signature under the Treaty of Lisbon. The Czech Republic was the last of the 27 member states of the European Union to ratify the treaty which turns the EU into a genuine state to which it members states are subservient. (...)

The pressure on Klaus had been tremendous. Because the treaty could not come into force until the Czech ratification, the EU authorities and the political establishment of the 26 other member states had been tightening the screws on Prague. In early October, the Czech cabinet, under pressure from Berlin and Paris, had met in an emergency session to consider how to complete ratification in the event of Klaus’s continued intransigence. They even considered impeaching the president.

Bernard Kouchner, the French Foreign Minister, was very blunt on 15 October: he threatened that “a single man is not allowed to oppose the will of 500 million Europeans.” The “500 million Europeans” referred to the citizens of the 27 member states of the European Union, the “single man” to Vaclav Klaus. Kouchner’s declaration, however, was as deceptive and mendacious as the entire ratification process of the Lisbon Treaty had been throughout the EU. 500 million people had deliberately not been asked for their opinion of the treaty because the European political establishment feared they would vote it down. (...)

Now, with Mr. Klaus’s signature, the game has drawn to its close and a treaty, so despised by the people that it was never put to them, has turned 500 million Europeans into citizens of a genuine supranational European State which is empowered to act as a State vis-à-vis other States and its own citizens. The EU will have its own President, Foreign Minister, diplomatic corps and Public Prosecutor. Henceforward, the only remaining sovereign power of any significance in Europe is Russia. Apart from Switzerland, Norway and Iceland, the EU leviathan has a grip on every other nation, whose national parliaments are, in accordance with the Lisbon Treaty, obliged to “contribute actively to the good functioning of the Union,” i.e. further primarily the interests of the new Union, rather than those of their own people. (...)

Read the whole article.

Klaus Signs

Here are two very short, but inadequate, versions of Vaclav Klaus speaking after signing the Treaty. Possibly in the future, there will be better versions, but I don't see why they would be necessary. We know what happened, and how and why it happened. See my next post for an excellent essay by Paul Belien of The Brussels Journal on what this really means for Europe (and for America, if anyone in America is really interested, other than the few with some curiosity and insights.)

Both videos are larger than I would have liked, but I wasn't able to customize the dimensions.

This version of Vaclav Klaus after the signing the Lisbon Treaty, sent by a reader, has poor sound quality (on my computer). At the website where it appears there is a transcript in English of the audio portion, in the event you cannot hear it well. The pro-Lisbon point of view is featured here.




Here is another version of the same event, with greater emphasis on Klaus' brief speech to the press. However the audio portion is lost midway through, though the subtitles are OK.

Delusion and Indifference

From July 1 to December 31, 2008, France presided over the European Union. Nicolas Sarkozy has never stopped boasting of the role he played during that period as a mover and shaker of Europe's destiny. And while economics, fiscal reform, the need to tighten the belt, and unemployment were hot topics, one story that did not surface, except in spurts here and there, and unofficial comments, was the gigantic sum of money spent by the French government to host the much-touted French presidency. Here is a summary from Marianne2, dated Tuesday October 27:

(...) The Accounts Court has just turned in an extremely critical report on the cost of the French presidency of the EU. French taxpayers have had to foot the bill of over 170 million euro, most of it connected to special events, a bill that turns out to be double the budget required by Slovenia and even Portugal, during their presidencies. And more than triple what France had spent during her preceding presidency, in 2000 (56.9 million euro). Yes, it is less than the 180 million spent by Angela Merkel one year earlier, but we must remember that Germany has 20 million more inhabitants than France, and that the German presidency did not take place during an economic crisis.

The head of the Accounts Court, Philippe Séguin, stresses the "intensity of the programming": 800 events in six months, most of them organized "on the spur of the moment", hence the "compromises made with the rules on competitive bidding did not allow for an efficient use of public money."

Note: Apparently, during such an event, if there is a need to build something or provide some service, the host country is supposed to ask for bidders, and choose the candidates that offer the best for the least amount of money. Very much the way a homeowner will interview several plumbers before deciding which one to hire.

The article then relates the cost of the four-hour meeting of the Mediterranean Union (long one of Sarkozy's pet projects: an economic and cultural association between Arab/North African/Muslim countries, Turkey, and France), and reveals how the long-standing friendship between Accounts Court magistrate Philippe Séguin and members of the UMP party did not prevent the magistrate from doing his duty. He found that the four-hour meeting "was added suddenly and late in the schedule" and that "due to the arbitrariness of the methods used and the short notice of the event, they were able to convene without first asking for bidders." Eventually, Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner had to intervene to force the government accountant to pay the twelve million euro bill for the brief summit meeting.

These were truly sumptuary expenses: the creation at the Grand Palais, site of the summit, of 30 cabins for interpreters and a press headquarters capable of holding 1900 authorized journalists, a room for the final declarations, a listening room, eight press conference rooms, offices for the heads of delegations, eight "salons" for bilateral talks with a connecting shower room, 32 interpreters' cabins, air conditioning of an immense area capable of holding 3000 persons. The ensemble made necessary the creation of a floor elevated 1.20 meters, the building of staircases, and prestigious decoration. The job mobilized more than 500 workers, of whom 300 had to work through the night. So says the report issued by the Accounts Court. Among these expenses the infamous shower, installed in the presidential offices, that cost upwards of 245,572 euro. For a site that was used four hours - the shower having been dismantled without EVER being used...

And here is the most scandalous thing - all this gear was tossed out as soon as the summit was over. And it all happened, stresses Philippe Séguin, "while the Grand Palais itself was in the midst of being remodeled." Twelve million euro for a few hours. (...)

The reader who tipped me off about this story linked to another version at Veilleur, where the following tidbits regale us:

The Accounts Court declared: "By its magnitude, the irregular nature of the procedures followed, and the massive impact on public finances, this summit (i.e., the Mediterranean Union) constitutes a type of record." Just the dinner served on July 13, to 43 heads of State, cost more than a million euro! (...) When you read the details, it is shocking: 400,464 euro for furniture, including flat screens, 194,977 euro for flower pots, 91,456 euro for carpets. The installation, cleaning and dismantling cost 4,383,614 euro.

The above figure of 4,383,614 can be added to the total of twelve million euro quoted above, for a grand total of roughly sixteen million euro, just for the one four-hour summit.

(On a different note, same general topic, an article at Impots-Utiles informs us that Sarkozy had a coffee-maker installed in his private jet for 25,000 euro. As a coffee lover myself, I sympathize completely... My own coffee pot cost about $40.00, but then, I do not have access to public money.)

Note: Leaders of Third World countries have been known to be lavish spenders. But Sarkozy has nothing to learn from them. He seems to be obsessed by the fear of not "keeping up appearances", and his idea of how things should look (as a reflection of himself of course) smacks of delusion. Does anyone really care about all these rooms and cabins and showers? Why so many showers? Do these leaders bathe in the middle of the day? Why so many interpreters? The Mediterranean Union (a fictional, Sarkozy-generated enterprise at best) consists of various dialects of Arabic and French (or so I thought).

I would add one more thought. Even though he seems to suffer from delusions of grandeur, he also suffers from complete indifference to anything that does not bring him the instant gratification he craves. He is willing to recklessly spend other people's money, and then throw everything out, as if it didn't matter one iota. A monarch would construct something grandiose, but PERMANENT, to be a testament to his power. But Sarkozy only cares about the moment as a child only cares about a new toy for a few days. Hence the strange title of the post. I couldn't decide if his delusions outweighed his total indifference, or vice versa.

Cartoon above by Louison. Cartoon below from Veilleur.

Lisbon Treaty Official

This short notice, followed by an addendum, was posted yesterday at Yves Daoudal's blog:

"The Lisbon Treaty, in its ensemble, is not in contradiction with the Czech Constitutional order," declared the president of the Czech Constitutional Court, Pavel Rychetsky, rendering the Court's verdict (no surprise, unfortunately) on the appeals filed by a group of senators.

Addendum:

This afternoon, Vaclav Klaus signed the treaty. He declared: "I expected this decision of the Constitutional court and I will respect it, even though I fundamentally disapprove of it. With the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty, the Czech Republic ceases to be a sovereign State."

Shortly thereafter, Sweden, the country that currently presides over the Europe Union, declared that the Treaty would officially go into effect on December 1.

Note: Recently I posted about the denaturing of November 11 in France. Some readers declared that it was not worth fighting such a war that would eventually lead to WWII and from there to the EU. Reading the above and the preceding article by Paul Belien, I think I have to agree. Of course, no one knew that at the time. It has not been given to us to predict the course of human events, only to make decisions in terms of what we already know. But still, as a rhetorical question: "Should we have sacrificed ourselves in that war?" the answer appears to be "no".

Other readers in the past have suggested that the underlying purpose of WWI was to demonize Germany and to aid and abet the establishment of the USSR. While I don't entirely agree with that point of view, I think it has more merit now than I did back then. The establishment of the USSR, its subsequent "demise" (only of the outer structure, not the inner convictions) has led to a new, possibly much more insidiously violent USSR, known as the EU. If so many wanted the USSR, it is not all that surprising that there is so little popular resistance to Brussels. Resistance has been heroic, but spotty, sporadic and ultimately inconsequential.

An enormous part of humanity simply does not want freedom or personal responsibility.

The Long Arm of Brussels

You may be aware that Paul Belien of The Brussels Journal now writes also for the Hudson Institute, "a non-profit, non-partisan policy organization" in New York. This can only benefit (and possibly demoralize) the people who will be reading Paul and thus learning some exceedingly unpleasant truths about the situation in Europe. Despite the grimness of his mission, we all wish Paul great success at the Institute, and hope that his words have a genuine impact on his readers. Here are excerpts from his article dated October 26. The article also appears at The Brussels Journal:

If all goes as planned, the 27 member states of the European Union will soon have a common hate crime legislation, which will turn disapproval for Islamic practices or homosexual lifestyles into crimes. Europe’s Christian churches are trying to stop the plan of the European political establishment, but it is not clear if they will be successful.

Last April, the European Parliament approved the European Union’s Equal Treatment Directive. A directive is the name given to an EU law. As directives overrule national legislation, they need the approval of the European Council of Ministers before coming into effect. Next month, the Council will decide on the directive, which places the 27 EU member states under a common anti-discrimination legislation. The directive’s definition of discriminatory harassment is so broad that every objection to Muslim or homosexual practices will be considered unlawful.

On April 2, the European Parliament passed the “directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation,” 363 votes to 226. The directive applies to social protection and health care, social benefits, education and access to goods and services, including housing. American citizens and companies doing business in Europe are also required to adhere to it.

Originally intended to serve as an equal treatment directive for the disabled by prohibiting discrimination when accessing “goods and services, including housing,” activist European politicians and governments had the directive’s scope expanded to include discrimination on the basis of religion, age and sexual orientation. (...)

Harassment, as vaguely defined in the directive, allows an individual to accuse someone of discrimination merely for expressing something the individual allegedly perceives as creating an “offensive environment.” The definition is so broad that anyone who feels intimidated or offended can easily bring legal action against those whom he feels are responsible. Moreover, the directive shifts the burden of proof onto the accused, who has to prove the negative, i.e. demonstrate that he or she did not create an environment which intimidated or offended the complainant. If the accused fails to do so, he or she can be sentenced to paying an unlimited amount of compensation for “harassment.”

Read more.

H/T: Lawrence Auster

Technical Problems

Some of you may be having trouble viewing videos at GalliaWatch and at other Google websites. For some of us, the video of Anne Lauvergeon (with English subtitles), on the AREVA hiring practices, is not viewable here, or at François Desouche, or even at YouTube. Another video at my post entitled "Taking Over Paris Streets" is also not working (nor is it viewable at YouTube).

When this started earlier in the day, I was sure it was censorship, and I wrote a long post on censorship, but removed it almost at once, when I learned from a reader that it appeared to be a Google problem. As far as I can tell from the Google Forum it IS a technical problem, but one that goes back many months, affects many browsers, and many people. So far there has been no reply from Google tech support.

Some videos, not others, are not working. An error message appears: "An error occurred, please try again later."

The French version of Lauvergeon's video is available. If I have some time I'll post it with my translation. It's only 26 seconds long.

You should be aware that the François Desouche website is being harrassed by "agents" from another website called Le Post, which in turn is part of Le Monde. FDS is being accused of working for the Front National, of being racist, sexist, homophobic, etc... This is what led me to fear censorship. But, as I said, the problem seems to be more widespread than that, though I must admit I'm not entirely convinced of anything right now.

In the past Google has always resolved the problems that affected me because they affected millions of others as well. I can only wait and see.

UMP's Great Leap Forward

Sarkozy never disappoints, as he promised he never would. After denaturing Armistice Day and delivering to the farmers a speech that he had already, word for word, delivered a few months previously (I may find time to post on that); after condoning a pedophile and spending 245,572 euro to have a shower installed for his personal use (I will try to post on THAT - maybe he was trying to cleanse himself after supporting Frédéric Mitterrand, but as Lady Macbeth learned, etc...), we now learn that he has hooked up his UMP party with the Chinese Communists. Well, why not... No better example of greed, repressed love of money, and grand theft than the Communists (I don't know about their showers). The left-wing Marianne2 reports, tongue-in-cheek:

"The winds from the East will prevail over the winds from the West!" Mao Zedong was accustomed to saying. By becoming the brother-party of the Chinese Communists, UMP has finally fulfilled the predictions of the Great Helmsman! On the occasion of a visit to China, Xavier Bertrand (General Secretary of the UMP party), signed an agreement "for a better understanding, better knowledge, and many more exchanges" between the two parties. It's a way of compensating for the incident following the meeting between Nicolas Sarkozy and the Dalai Lama at the beginning of the year and a strong message to the UMP dissident Lionnel Luca, a supporter of the illegitimate theocracy of Tibet, now a recluse on the Riviera!

Note: A cursory check at Luca's website indicates that he has taken leave of the UMP party because of the signing of this new agreement. He had also voiced strong disapproval of the executions of three Tibetans who participated in anti-Chinese demonstrations in March 2008. However, on other matters, he seems to be very much in tune with Sarkozy.

A reminder that China angrily upbraided Sarkozy for his visit with the Dalai Lama, and threatened to boycott French businesses.

Who would have thought? We had to make sure it wasn't a hoax. No, it's rock-solid. The UMP is indeed joining in matrimony with the last remaining totalitarian party in the world (along with the North Korean Communist Party), the party that led the cultural revolution and caused the deaths of hundreds of millions of Chinese.

The Village Idiot (I assume they mean Xavier Bertrand) who had this stroke of genius, was quite happy to have beaten the Sinophile Jean-Pierre Raffarin (vice-president of UMP) to the draw, and has provided us with some details on the historic agreement. Every other year, he promised, there will be an event that places "a particular emphasis" on this accord. You can well imagine the dilemma they'll face: What to choose? A military parade signed Serge Dassault? A long march by the cashiers of Carrefour? A parade of majorettes led by Carla Bruni?

One thing is clear: the general secretary of UMP was also there to draw inspiration from the Chinese Communists. He visited the school for managers of the party that has 76 million members in order to learn about modern modern methods for recruiting political workers. "Red wine is the drink of the Red Guard", sang Nino Ferrer in the 1970's.

The pastiche of Xavier Bertrand on the Chinese flag is also from Marianne.

The New November 11

The two principal architects of the European Union, as everyone knows, are France and Germany. Not too long ago I posted an historical retrospective on the creation and evolution of the EU, from its beginnings during the Second World War, when it was a seemingly necessary measure to end the bloodshed that was decimating Europe, through its current incarnation as a nation-destroying, multi-ethnic, open-borders, anti-Christian behemoth, run by deeply entrenched ideologues who have no intention of giving up their sinecures, just because some unenlightened European philistines don't want Brussels interfering in their lives.

Today, Providence has brought together two leaders, Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy, who are themselves the incarnation of the EU's ideals. Snug as two bugs in a rug, they join in holy matrimony to lead their subjects into some "brave new world" that isn't brave, isn't new, and isn't a world in any cultural or coherent sense. Neither country has as one of its strengths a political party dedicated to tradition, to the work ethic, to the Christian moral order, to national pride, to preserving the uniqueness of the ancient cultures that comprise the French or German identities. This, despite the names "conservative", "right-wing", "Christian-Democrat", etc... and other misleading labels that often adorn the letterheads of political groups.

Now, true to his vow to re-make France in his own image, Sarkozy will, by presidential fiat (there is no evidence yet that France's Parliament has been consulted on this, even less evidence that France's Parliament counts for anything anymore) denature November 11, Armistice Day, by turning it into a day honoring Franco-German friendship. A gesture of pure theatrics? A gesture of arrogance? A congenital indifference to the past?

These and similar questions come up every time Nicolas Sarkozy decides to re-program the mindset of the people, either through admonitions and threats, or through measures that aggrandize Europe at the expense of France.

But, at this point, does it really matter? How many really care about WWI any more? Many believe that WWI was a total waste of blood and treasure, resulting only in the collapse of Austro-Hungarian Empire, the depletion of young healthy males, the rise of the Soviet Union, and the pretext for the rise of Adolph Hitler. Better to forget it than commemorate it. At any rate, it was not a war to end all wars, au contraire, it was the start of the disintegration of nationhood. Better to forget it. The men who went off to fight were saps, those who deserted were smart. Better to forget it.

Whatever one's feelings about WWI, the Armistice will no longer be commemorated. Will it even be taught in schools? The following is an article, dated October 28, from the pen of Jean Quatremer, a pro-Europe journalist whose blog appears at the left-wing publication Libération:

For a longtime Nicolas Sarkozy has been hoping to make a grand gesture to Germany, equivalent to the one made by his predecessor, François Mitterrand, when he took chancellor Helmut Kohl by the hand during the commemoration of the Battle of Verdun in 1984. Now it's a done deal. Today on the eve of the European Council set for Thursday night and Friday in Brussels, and just before the dinner for the French leader and the German chancellor who was recently re-elected, Elysée Palace has announced that November 11 will remain a holiday, but it will no longer celebrate the Armistice of 1918:



"After the death of the last 'poilu', Lazare Ponticelli who died at the age of 110 on March 12, 2008, Nicolas Sarkozy wishes that November 11 become a day of Franco-German reconciliation, in order to build a shared future."

November 11 is not celebrated in Germany and it is not a holiday for the institutions of the EU, any more than May 8 (the date of the 1945 German surrender). Germany has never understood why this anniversary continues to be celebrated, since it marks the end of a European civil war that set the stage for another, that of 1939-1945. May 8 ought to be abolished and replaced by May 9, the date of Robert Schuman's declaration launching the construction of the European Community, and the date that has become the European holiday (EU institutions are closed on May 9).

For French readers, Quatremer has more on the Franco-German pre-nuptials here.

At Le Salon Beige they remind us that November 11 has religious significance as well:

November 11 is, above all, the feast of Saint Martin, the apostle of the Gauls. More than 3600 churches are dedicated to Saint Martin. And there are all the places, hamlets, abbeys, fountains, and bridges named after this very popular saint. Throughout the world, a considerable number of places make reference to Saint Martin of Tours.

There follows a lovely description in French of the life of Saint Martin, but I'm settling for this short passage from Wikipedia:

St. Martin's Day (or Martinstag or Martinmas) is November 11, the feast day of Martin of Tours, who started out as a Roman soldier. He was baptized as an adult and became a monk. It is understood that he was a kind man who led a quiet and simple life. The most famous legend of his life is that he once cut his cloak in half to share with a beggar during a snowstorm, to save the beggar from dying of the cold. That night he dreamed that Jesus was wearing the half-cloak Martin had given away. Martin heard Jesus say to the angels: "Here is Martin, the Roman soldier who is not baptised; he has clothed me." (Sulpicius)

In 2007 François Desouche posted this fascinating albeit upsetting video of battle scenes of WWI. The singer is Marc Ogeret. The author of the anti-war lyrics is unknown. They were set to a waltz entitled Bonsoir m'amour, and the French military authorities at the time offered a small fortune for information on the author. Here is just the refrain that is repeated three times:

Farewell to life, farewell to love,
Farewell to all women.
This infamous war is over for us, forever
Here at Craonne on the plateau
We leave our bodies
For we are all doomed
We are the sacrificed ones!

The rest of the song is a cry of despair on the inhuman conditions, the hopes betrayed and the luxury in which the rich live, while the men lie dying.

The lyrics are posted at a website called Du Temps des Cerises aux Feuilles Mortes, devoted to songs of the period from the end of the Second Empire to the 1950's. Some French readers may find it of interest.

Chanson de Craonne
Uploaded by Horadrim. -

The WWI battles that took place in Craonne, more specifically on the road called Le Chemin des Dames, in northern France, are discussed at Wikipedia. The Second Battle of the Aisne, April 16 and April 25, 1917, commemorated in this video, culminated in 270,000 French deaths and 163,000 German deaths. General Nivelle had to be replaced by General Philippe Pétain, later infamous for his supposed collaboration with the Nazis - another controversial accusation. Pétain managed to bring about improved conditions for the men.

Watching the video confirms the brutality of the war, and makes Nicolas Sarkozy's gesture of obliterating November 11 as a French national holiday all the more disloyal, even if it is true that the Germans suffered as well, even if it was brother against brother, as so many have claimed. Let the Germans commemorate in their own way and the French in theirs.

I wrote about this topic last November, when Sarkozy used November 11 to honor and exonerate the deserters of the war. Click the labels below for more posts on WWI and the "poilus" (French soldiers).

A Tale of Two... Three... Four Cities

Violence in Fréjus: Fire and Blood

There have been two nights of violence in the southern city of Fréjus (photo above). Numerous sources give accounts of the outbreak. First, Novopress:

For forty-eight hours, Fréjus has seen fire and blood after the death in an accident last Sunday of Mohamed el-Matari, a motorcyclist who was trying to avoid a police check (he was riding a 250 cm3 without a license plate). Very soon riots broke out in Fréjus and Saint-Raphaël. Some one hundred forty police, riot police and gendarmes were mobilized.

Multiethnic gangs repeatedly threw stones and Molotov cocktails at the police and firemen in the Gabelle ghetto in Fréjus. The deceased man's family challenges the official version of an accident. Regarding Mohamed el-Matari's attempted flight, one Abdelhaoui is quoted by Le Parisien on October 27 as saying: "You must understand. If Mohamed ran off like that, it is because with everything we've seen in the ghettos, ever since we were children, we're afraid of the police."

Burnt cars, beatings, drug trafficking... Is it the police who create fear in the explosive ghettos?

Regarding the second night of violence, Le Point reports:

Monday night into Tuesday was once again shaken by violence in Fréjus and Saint-Raphaël. (...) Groups of youths were dispersed by tear gas and by the arrival of a helicopter from the Gendarmerie equipped with an anti-riot projector and an infrared thermal camera capable of guiding the actions of the troops on the ground, according to the prefecture. Three cars were burned in the Gabelle ghetto and two others in Agachon (Saint-Raphaël). Two youths in possession of white spirit were arrested around 10:30 p.m.

Below, a photo of a sympathy march in Fréjus. "May God bless Mohamed" says the second line of the banner.


H/T: François Desouche


Violence in Le Havre: "Nothing Stops Them"

Here is an article from the local publication Paris-Normandie, dated October 26:

"You have to see them tear down the street at 100 km/hour, at the wheel of cars or at the handlebars of quads and motorcycles, honking to violate all rules of the road. You wonder why there aren't more accidents. They drive like madmen."

"They" refers to the young people that the inhabitants of the triangle formed by the neighborhoods of Aplemont, Frileuse and Sainte-Cécile can no longer put up with. The residents have had enough and want everyone to know it. But there is no way that they can say it openly, for fear of reprisals. Pretty houses, impeccable gardens, most have lived in this residential area for ten, even twenty years. They know how to preserve the village spirit. And yet behind this outwardly calm atmosphere lies a real malaise. The neighborhood has lost its quality of life. "We no longer feel safe in our homes. Their behavior on the roads is not the worst thing. Break-ins are on the rise as well as uncivil conduct. The deterioration began about two years ago, but it worsened this summer. We often hear about the bad neighborhoods of Le Havre, but no one can imagine what we put up with here."

Among themselves the residents paint a somber portait of the situation. "Every week we see the list of burglaries get longer." Some have lived through the trauma four times. "We quickly returned from our vacation only a week after we had left to find our house had been invaded." Fear eventually gripped the neighborhood. Almost all the houses have alarms, and iron bars protect garage doors. Residents keep their keys on them to ensure all entryways are locked. "We aren't at ease when we leave for work in the morning. Our front door could be broken into when we return. Even during the day, nothing stops them."

Note: This is all too familiar to Americans. We went through this long ago, throughout the 60s and 70's in the big cities, and then in the suburbs and rural areas. The French are now paying the price for decades of immigration.

In France, as here, the authorities make light of the situation, as the last part of the article illustrates:

The city authorities are not unaware of the problem. "We mustn't minimize the problem, but what is happening is not comparable to other more sensitive neighborhoods. It is normal, for those who have lived in greater peace, to become emotionally agitated by new phenomena," acknowledges Bertrand Binctin, the city official in charge of security. But he warns of the danger of irresponsible judgments. "The latest newcomers have become a scapegoat. These families are not necessarily responsible for the reported crimes", he says to tone down the effect, and he points to the efforts of the neighborhood police.

But will this police presence be enough to reassure the residents? Even though they would hate to do it, some are considering moving out.

Note: As we know here, this is how neighborhoods and entire cities go "down the tubes." People, justifiably afraid, leave. More and more thugs move in. And in short order, a once civilized existence is gone.

H/T: Le Salon Beige


60 Gangs in Paris

The following article from Novopress does not give information that is really new, but it is still worth repeating:

The Paris prefecture has created a law-enforcement section whose purpose is to fight the multiethnic gangs that proliferate in the capital. These gangs are responsible for assaults, murders (at least three, and ten wounded in 2009), drug trafficking and anti-white racism, as was the case during the latest Techno Parade.

The result of an inquiry shows that 60 gangs operate within the boundaries of Paris. René Bailly, head of intelligence for the Paris prefecture, estimates that the "primary motivation (of the gangs) is confrontation for the sake of confrontation". Around 1300 persons, accused of being gang members, have been arrested since the beginning of 2009. More than fifty percent of the time, a weapon is used by these multicultural groups. Three quarters of the gang members implicated in these crimes were minors. Notable also is the emergence of gangs of girls. When the uprooted populations become transformed into enraged gangs, it is the French who pay.


Tours - Being Blond Is Not Good

A post at François Desouche reveals the disintegration of tranquility in the city of Tours. Tours, as you may know, is (was?) a lovely city in the heart of the château country along the Loire River. How long before the châteaux themselves become the target of vandals? The post is a condensation of a series of articles at La Nouvelle République where readers send in their complaints:

First Marie-Claire writes: "I've been living here since 1973, and yes, it was much better before. The situation has been deteriorating for twenty years. (...) Come here after 6:00 p.m., come here over the week-end when you have to listen to the racket made by small motorcycles or quads. It's not for us to play at being gendarmes, or so we're told whenever we complain. It isn't yet Chicago, but it will be soon..."

Another reader who calls herself "a mother afraid for her son" narrates for us the daily life of an 18-year-old: "He cannot go out with his girlfriend without being hit by a volley of stones, insults, kicks in the back that make him fall of his motor bike. His motor bike was stolen from its parking place one Sunday afternoon (it's how he gets to work)...

We asked for a surveillance camera and some lighting because the entryway is deserted and dark, but nothing has been done as of now.

When he walks his dog at 11:00 p.m., the youths who squat in the entryway block the doors in such a way that he cannot get back in! These youths use the lobby of the building as a garbage dump and nonchalantly smoke their reefers. Many people watch, but no one dares say anything for fear of finding their car burnt! The police intervened. They began making rounds, so the youths changed their schedule and squat later.

It's a cosmopolitan group, of course, but they don't accept 'the Gauls or blonds'. It is no longer good to be a Frenchman in this neighborhood. I myself have been insulted. They are on 'their territory' as they say. Even some pizza shops in Tours are no longer willing to deliver." (...)

The mayor's assistant Gérard Gernot has said that the need for security in Tours "makes the prefect, who comes from the Parisian region, smile." To which a resident, Joël Guillemain retorts: "The voters who are victims of insults will certainly appreciate the sense of relativity of their elected official. Of course, things are always worse somewhere else, but that is precisely why we must look at what has happened to those big cities to learn how to proceed so that it doesn't happen here.

"Moreover, to say repeatedly that these problems are the work of a minority, and then to be incapable of neutralizing that minority, says a lot about the impotence of our society. Without demonizing an entire neighborhood, it's really too easy for these politicians who live in comfort in their peaceful neighborhoods to minimize these incidents."

Note: Several readers at François Desouche point out that these residents who complain elected a Socialist mayor, and therefore should not be surprised at the outcome. But an UMP mayor would be no better. As for a Front National mayor, there is little chance of that happening.

In the cartoon below, as her bag is stolen, the woman shouts: "Help! Help!" To which her husband replies: "Be quiet, you're playing into the hands of the Right!"

More On AREVA

Update: November 1 - If you cannot view this video, please see explanation here. The French version is viewable at François Desouche, linked below.

The preceding post dealt with the remarks of Anne Lauvergeon, chairman of the board of AREVA. The brief video (above) shows her making the remarks that have caused such a stir at the French websites. AREVA issued a communiqué, posted at François Desouche, stating that her words had been taken out of context, and attempted to explain the reasons for the hiring practices:

(...) AREVA recruited 15,500 persons in 2008, and is recruiting about 10,000 in 2009. The conviction of the company is that it must reflect, through its diversity, the society of which it is a part. This policy does not exclude any category of individuals.

In 2006, the company signed an agreement in favor of equal opportunity with the European Metallurgy Foundation. This agreement prioritizes professional equality as a right and professional ethnic intermingling ("mixité") as a factor of collective enrichment, social cohesion and economic efficiency.

In France, even though young women only represent, on average, 17% of the totality of engineers, at AREVA they represent around 35% of those hired. Moreover, the company has decided, as one of its objectives, that at least 20% of its executive committees will consist of women.

Note: AREVA's explanation leaves no doubt that the EU's policies dictate the hiring practices. Furthermore, the totalitarian nature of the EU's policies are clear. Professional equality is a "right", ethnic mixtures are a factor of "collective enrichment", etc... Having enjoyed several decades of freedom, the West is back in the world of KGB-style human engineering. They do say that nature hates a void...

Not surprisingly, Le Figaro labels the groups rising in protest against AREVA as "extreme Right-wing":

The extreme Right has targeted the president of AREVA, Anne Lauvergeon, for having condoned the fact that those hired are not limited to "white males". At the same time, the nuclear giant denounces the "rush to judgment".

The Bloc Identitaire, a group of 2000 members, intends to file a lawsuit as a result of Lauvergeon's remarks. (...) Fabrice Robert, president of the Bloc Identitaire, denounces the "anti-white remarks" and affirms that Lauvergeon's declaration "casts doubts over all those hired by AREVA". He has promised to sue. He is joined in his protest by the Parti de la France, founded by Carl Lang, formerly of the Front National.

"This is a rush to judgment. The company's policies, on the contrary, are to see to it that the company reflects the diversity of society," said an indignant Jacques-Emmanuel Saulnier, spokesman for AREVA. He justified Madame Lauvergeon's position by pointing out that 80% of the salaried employees at AREVA were men.

Note: A reminder that the Bloc Identitaire is a youth movement dedicated at once to regional loyalties and a federated Europe. The movement stands in opposition to "métissage" (miscegenation), to the Islamization of France and to American "imperialism". It has branches throughout France, and has recently declared itself a political party.

For its part, the Bloc Identitaire is launching a white male movement. Novopress reports:

(...) To be frank, her remarks are disgusting. Anne Lauvergeon who earns more than half a million euro a year is willing to send to the ranks of the unemployed thousands of individuals whose only defect is that they are men, white men! (...)

The Bloc Identitaire is now calling for the launching of a "White Male Collective" (...) It urges all "white males" in this country to call AREVA and demand an explanation for the president's irresponsible slip-up.

From this point on, the article gives phone numbers and e-mail addresses of those highly placed white men who work at AREVA. The purpose is to learn if these men fear for their jobs (Of course, they do not precisely because they are prominent figures in the company.) Some French readers may be interested in contacting AREVA, though I doubt you will get much satisfaction.

The Bloc Identitaire is calling for an unprecedented mobilization for this operation. We cannot accept the very rich and the very powerful walking all over the backs of the people.

Note: The Bloc has modified somewhat the nature of the problem in the above sentence. It has turned it into a class issue where the rich exploit the poor. I don't think this is quite accurate. The issue is the attempt to destroy an entire culture through coercive racist and sexist policies that are churned out by Brussels and channeled into the various countries at ALL levels.

At least the article closes with an accurate cri de coeur:

We are fed up to here with anti-white racism!

Anything But White Males

Here is the story of another very influential and wealthy Frenchwoman, who is working against the traditional white society. The article by Louis Chagnon is posted at Bernard Antony's blog. (Areva is a major nuclear and mining industry):

Anne Lauvergeon, president of Areva, distinguished herself during the Women's Forum Global Meeting on October 15 - 17 in Deauville. For the occasion, 1200 women from the world of business and politics gathered for a few days of "discussions and reflections" around the theme: "Tomorrow!" Judge for yourselves the level of thinking of Madame Lauvergeon, who said of the hiring process: "All things being equal, well, sorry, we would choose, uh, the woman, or we would choose the person who, uh, is anything but a white male, to speak frankly."

So tomorrow holds no future for white males, according to Anne Lauvergeon. Those are sexist and racist remarks from the mouth of a "great French industry leader", remarks that should be condemned by the Rocard-Gayssot law (against racist speech, holocaust denial, etc...)! And so, according to her, no "white male" would ever again be hired by Areva! Through her words, she brings discredit to her own company. We would advise all "white males" who work for Areva, or who hope to work for Areva to take their case to HALDE at the slightest hint of sexist or racist discrimination that emerges from the hiring policies of Madame Lauvergeon.

It is sad, but also fascinating, to examine the suicidal tendencies that are cropping up in our society nowadays. We assume that Madame Lauvergeon reproaches her father for being a "white male". As for her son, another horrible "white male", she has just doomed him to unemployment, unless her words only apply to lackeys, from whom she excludes herself and her relatives! We should like to point out that racism and sexism are perfectly acceptable when they are used in a context of anti-white racism, since no so-called anti-racist lobby has ever raised the slightest word of protest against such remarks.

When racism and imbecility, which go well together, come out of the mouth of a "great female executive" it is serious enough, but when this executive is at the head of such a sensitive enterprise as nuclear energy, it becomes unquestionably a problem of national and international security. This is why Anne Lauvergeon must no longer exercise her function as head of Areva, and as a further precaution, we demand the nationalization of Areva, considering that the chairmanship of the French nuclear enterprise must not fall into the hands of just anybody.

In a sequel to the above, Bernard Antony, as head of the anti-anti-white racism organization AGRIF, announces his intent to file a lawsuit against Madame Anne Lauvergeon for her "astounding sexist and racist remarks" relevant to her hiring policy at Areva.

Don't hold your breath...

We all wish him a resounding success, of course. If he fails, or if the case is thrown out of court, it will be very interesting to hear the court's reasoning on the issue, since Lauvergeon has made explicit remarks that are theoretically illegal by French law. But the court will very likely do what it has done before.

Some of you may remember a similar case at l'Oréal in 2008, when the CEO of the cosmetics giant, Jean-Paul Agon, admitted that a job seeker with a foreign name had more of a chance of being hired than a person with a French-sounding name. Then, as now, AGRIF sued. The case against l'Oréal was thrown out of court on grounds that, by showing favoritism towards those who are ordinarily victims of illegal discrimination, Agon was merely attempting to re-establish a balance that was compromised.

Shortly before the judgment was rendered by the court, Yves Daoudal expressed the opinion that it would probably fail simply because affirmative action (what the French call "positive discrimination") is the OFFICIAL IDEOLOGY, by way of Brussels' directives, which in turn, dictate French laws. Therefore, to condemn l'Oréal is to condemn French (i.e., European) law.

After the judgment, Daoudal wrote:

(...) This judgment, that is radically opposed to the rule of law, presages the next European directive on the subject, and is in accordance with what has already come to be called "balancing", most notably with regard to facilitating the building of mosques in order to "balance" the Muslim religion with the Catholic religion.

And this anti-French and anti-Christian ideology encounters no opposition. Not only is AGRIF kicked out, but it must pay a fine of 2500 euro in damages and interest to the CEO of l'Oréal for frivolous lawsuits...

The mosaic below is from the Wikipedia article on Rule of Law, which also provides this food for thought:

Generally speaking, law is a body of rules prescribed by the state subject to sanctions or consequences. The predominant view is that the concept of "rule of law" per se says nothing about the "justness" of the laws themselves, but simply how the legal system operates. As a consequence of this, a very undemocratic nation or one without respect for human rights can exist with a "rule of law" — a situation which may be occurring in several modern dictatorships. The "rule of law" or Rechtsstaat may be a necessary condition for democracy, but it is not a sufficient condition.

"We Are Transforming France..."

In December 2006, I posted an article on Houria Bouteldja, a young Algerian woman who regularly goes on verbal rampages against the French people, French civilization and white European culture in general. These rampages are frequently seen on television where her appearances are an occasion for national collective self-flagellation while seated in front of the tube. She is currently spokesperson for Les Indigènes de la République, an association of activist North Africans, blacks and Muslims who fight against racial inequality (actually, they fight against white culture). In 2006 she said:

"I believe it is necessary to denationalize the history of France...French identity is built around Christianity and Europeanism, that is, the fact of having white skin...French identity is being white and Christian... We Arabs, blacks and Muslims will always be outsiders...this Franco-centric identity must burst and bring into it everything that isn't white or Christian..."

In a subsequent post dated August 2007 I spoke of another television appearance during which she coined the term "souchien" to designate an ethnic Frenchman, with "souche" being the French word for "root". However her term had a double meaning: "souchien" also means "sub dog", i.e. lower than a dog (where "sous" means "sub" and "chien" means dog). This was the true intent of the insulting term which is now often used ironically or sarcastically at the French websites.

I was sure I would not be writing about her again, as I considered her to be psychotic. In the videos available of Ms. Bouteldja, she speaks like one possessed, her words spewing forth from her raging over-wrought mind like so many bullets aimed at the helpless, compliant whites sitting opposite her.

Despite my vow to avoid this woman, I came upon the following diatribe at the website Les Indigènes de la République. Addressed to Elisabeth Badinter (1), it is another Bouteldja rant, except, as one French blogger, Gérard Pince, has pointed out, her words, vindictive though they may be, are also unhappily all too true. She begins with cutting remarks about Badinter's belief in the notion that France is a melting pot, that Badinter's desire to ban the burka is a joke, that whether or not Badinter likes it she is slowly metamorphosing into an Afro-Arab, that Badinter's demand that those who do not love France should leave is also a joke, etc... In other words, for Bouteldja, it is not just an issue of integrating blacks and North Africans into France, but more significantly of integrating Frenchmen into the immigrant culture. Here are some excerpts:

(...) Not to mention the specific laws passed to stop us from anchoring ourselves here, and special ministers just for us. Little by little Elisabeth is metamorphosing from within. Sure, she resists. Her immune system is working well, sometimes it really works overtime. Her weapons? Words. Words that wage war on us. Words that label us, pigeonhole us, freeze us. Words to stifle us, prevent us from breathing: diversity, integration, visible minorities, black, beurs, moderate Islam, lost territories of the Republic... And yet we breathe and our breath is ARABIC, AFRICAN, MUSLIM. It is from the BANLIEUE (2).

As she learned at school, Elisabeth is convinced that France is a melting pot of integration and that France, knowing how to integrate, is integrating us as surely as Monsieur Jourdain (3) made prose without knowing it.

And the gal is right! The boa has swallowed us up. Those who, at least once in their life, have been ashamed of their parents, their accent, their manners will have no trouble understanding me. (...)

But fortunately, the reverse is also true. As painful as it may be to those who are super-sensitive about the French flag and those who sing the praises of eternal Gallic France: WE ARE TRANSFORMING FRANCE. In other words, France too, is integrating INTO US. Yes, it takes time, but there is no need for a conspiracy fomented by the Arab-Negroid-Berber masses, or for a plot hatched by bearded men with knives between their teeth. France will never again be as she was in the films of Fernandel. Our mere existence, combined with a relative demographic weight (1 for 6), is Africanizing, Arabizing, Berberizing, Creolizing, Islamizing, and darkening the eldest daughter of the Church, formerly immaculately white, as surely as the wash and backwash of the waves polishes and re-polishes blocks of granite claimed to be eternal. (4)

However, there is a limit we have not yet dared to go beyond: that of assuming this situation to be an irreversible fact and to have the audacity to demand the right to actively participate in the future of this country and in the construction of its identity. Worse still, we have not dared to go after Power. Or at least to take the part of power that is due us and to render homage to those who teach us that "to exist, is to exist politically." (5) (...)

Notes:
(1) Elisabeth Badinter (left) is a Socialist author of numerous works of history and the condition of women. She is the wife of French attorney Robert Badinter, who served as Minister of Justice under Mitterrand, and who was responsible for the law against capital punishment. Elisabeth Badinter is the daughter of the late Marcel Bleustein-Blanchet, one of France's most prominent businessmen, and founder of Publicis, a giant advertising and communications company. She is also heiress to the company's fortune, owns about 10% of the stock and is chairman of the board of directors. A very rich Socialist indeed. Like the company she inherited, she is a multiculturalist and promoter of "diversity". She did say that Muslim women who wear the burka might consider going to Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan where they would feel more at home, but she has not advocated the closing of borders or any form of repatriation (that I know of).

(2) "Beur" refers to a North African. "Banlieue" refers to the suburbs. I preferred to retain the French terms in this article.

(3) Monsieur Jourdain is the main character in Molière's Bourgeois Gentilhomme. An arriviste without culture, he learns to his surprise that when he speaks it is "prose". Thus, according to Bouteldja, Elisabeth Badinter will one day learn to her surprise that she is an Arab without knowing it. (Those who dislike her would say she already is one, since her Socialist policies were responsible for the opening of the borders in the first place).

(4) The total population of France (including overseas departments) is given as 65,073,482. Is Bouteldja saying that there is one non-European for every 6 Europeans, or that one in six inhabitants of France is non-European? In the latter case, it means that one sixth of the population is Arab-African-Maghrebin, or very roughly, 10,845,000 persons.

(5) The author of the quote is one Abdelmalek Sayed, of whom I know nothing. The quote apparently comes from a book in which he insists that immigrants must be placed in positions of political power.

As I indicated above, Gérard Pince, an economist and founder of the Free World Academy has written his opinion of Houria Bouteldja's diatribe. He starts with an ironic description of the comforts of home:

I hope you are doing as I am doing. Cozily wrapped in a robe with a big woolen bonnet and warm slippers, I refuse to turn on the heat before November 15. They can always increase the price of gas. My lamb stew is simmering on the wood fire. With a great bottle of Juliénas, a delicious dinner awaits me!

He then tells how he managed to obtain a bottle of Corton, vintage 1955, for only 17 euro because the label was damaged. He hopes we all had the pleasure of hearing the unspeakable Bernard-Henri Lévy rage against the justice system for daring to pursue a rapist-pedophile. (Well, I DID report on Polanski, but omitted the profound words of BHL, feeling certain that we are all better off for not having to listen to that bloviator). He notes that rather than vaccinate the people against a flu of no importance, the government is instead giving booster shots on Nazism, and wonders why other genocides (Armenian, Ukrainian, Cambodian, or Rwandan ) are never mentioned.

He moves on to the situation in France:

Meanwhile the ship of the majority party is sinking inexorably. All the polls prove it, at least for those who still know how to count. If the presidential elections were to take place today, Nicolas Sarkozy would be roundly defeated. It's perfectly clear: he is under the evil influence of Madame Veto (i.e., Carla Bruni-Sarkozy). Everybody knows it, nobody dares say anything. So, we have to prepare for a return to power of the Left, since there is no other alternative. (If you still have doubts, review the astounding interview with Le Pen).

Note: He provides a link to the most recent Le Pen interview in which the leader of the Front National claims Islam is not incompatible with the principles of the French Republic. See my post.

Anyway, the way we're going, it won't change a thing. We will crash into the wall a little sooner, but with our eyes open.

Leaving the last word to Houria Bouteldja, he then closes with these words of thanks:

Thank you, Houria. This wonderful frankness does you honor, and above all thank you for confirming my demographic figures. I have more respect for an enemy that advances in full view than for all the phony idiots who pretend to fight Islamism and who spend the better part of their time stabbing us in the back.

You can review Gérard Pince's demographic predictions here.