A Brief Respite

There will be fewer posts over the next five days. Enjoy the Fourth (even if it's not your holiday).

Mavens of France-Echos might like to know that the website is taking a two-month vacation, having published thousands of articles, and needing time to gather strength for the next phase of battle.

Ethnic Division of Labor

This article from Novopress, by Fabrice Robert, recalls to mind the statements of Alain Finkielkraut last year in his Haaretz interview, when he said the French team had been "black, blanc, beur" (black, white, Arab) and that now it was "black, black, black" and the laughing stock of Europe, since France displays a nearly all-black team as a symbol of diversity.

Raymond Domenech became coach of the French team in 2004.

Franck Ribéry is a ch'ti. I had never seen this word before. It designates someone from the northern regions of France (Nord-Pas-de-Calais) whose origins are "picard". It also designates the dialect spoken by the "picards".

Louis Schweitzer was born in 1942 into a Protestant Alsatian family. He is the grand-nephew of both Albert Schweitzer and conductor Charles Munch, and the cousin of Jean-Paul Sartre. He has held various ministerial positions in leftist governments, but when the left lost the legislative elections in 1986, he became a high-ranking manager at Renault. Later in 1992 he became CEO of the company which he left in 2005. He is a socialist-oriented activist in cultural affairs as president of HALDE and president of the Friends of Branly Museum.

The photo is from the team's website.

The composition of the French soccer team has aroused an incalculable number of debates and questions. Since he couldn't win games, the team's recruiter made up for it by beating a new record: he has recruited the lowest number of white players in the entire history of French soccer. Raymond Domenech is in some ways the Louis Schweitzer of French soccer. By dint of wanting to fight against all discrimination, he has lowered the value of anyone who even resembles - close-up or at a distance - an ethnic Frenchman. And with the pretext of wanting to represent the diversity of France, he has, in the end, replaced one kind of ethnic homogeneity with another.

A little more effort and there will soon be no white players left. Except perhaps for Franck Ribéry, who seems to fulfill the new hiring requirements. Before walking out onto the field, Ribéry never forgets to say his Koranic prayer, reading from his joined hands, and then rubbing his face, as any well-advised Muslim would. Last week's news coverage devoted to his family was very moving. With Hizihia, his daughter and Mohammed, his brother-in-law, Franck Ribéry surely represents today's France (or at least the France that we have been promised).

At this rate, any white non-Muslim soccer player who trains in France will soon be able to contact HALDE (High Authority in the Struggle against Discriminations and for Equality).

If we really try hard, we may be able to swallow the notion that these players feel totally French. But what is one to make of the auctioning, initiated by Patrick Vieira, of sneakers signed by the soccer players? Especially when it is learned that the total amount raised will be given to Diambars, an association dedicated to the training of African children for professional soccer. Not satisfied with supporting a nearly African team, the French fans are now supposed to support projects in Africa? Is it unseemly to ask the players on the French team to help finance projects in France? There is no want of possibilities. For example, the homeless who might be able to watch the games other than in their gloomy shelters.

Finally, if everyone had a lot to say about this black French team being trained by a white man, few people have noted the following: all the African teams present at the World Cup are also trained by a white man. Ivory Coast (Henri Michel), Angola (Luis Goncalves Oliviera), Ghana (Ratomir Dujkovic), Togo (Kodjovi Mawuena). Not to mention the teams from Tunisia (Roger Lemerre) and Saudi Arabia (Marcos Paqueta).

After the International Division of Labor (IDT), is the world of soccer about to create a new concept: an Ethnic Division of Labor (EDT)?

Destroying Christianity

From Vox Galliae comes the report of still another assault on Christian churches:

Notre-Dame de Fatima Catholic School and Chapel in Montpellier were destroyed by fire during the night of June 23-24. Arsonists entered the building, and set the fire that ravaged a large section of the school. The fire was set in the sacristy and the refectory. The cafeteria and the chapel (top photo) were completely burned. The classrooms were not spared since all the electrical wiring melted, the walls are damaged and everything inside the classrooms is no longer useable.

The obvious traces of the starting points of the two fires in two distinct locales have led investigators and firefighters to conclude that without any doubt it was a case of arson. And in both cases, liturgical objects were also set aflame pointing to the anti-religious motive of the act.

The school year was over but the 70 pupils were preparing, on Saturday afternoon, for their traditional year-end festivities. All the materials for the stands, for the children's costumes, the ornaments for the Mass, all the food for the 200 people expected were placed inside the school. Whatever was not destroyed by the fire is not useable. This criminal act has forced the school's director to cancel the festivities and to thus deprive the school of much needed revenue.

For more than 15 years this non-subsidized school, funded exclusively by parents and donations, has been educating, from pre-school through fifth grade, pupils whose academic excellence has been recognized throughout Montpellier and the entire region.

Although covered by adequate insurance, the school now faces a perilous financial situation. In order to cover the costs of safeguarding what remains of the school and paying the summer salaries, it is in urgent need of 9000 euros. An appeal for donations has been launched.

A communiqué from abbé Vernoy (FSSPX) (1), regarding the arson has been issued:

"Once again Christianphobia enflames our region.

With the recent eruption of hateful remarks by certain public figures, we have, as a result, had to regularly endure films and other artistic productions of a violent anti-Christian nature. All of which results in muted contempt, vexations and growing threats against the Catholic religion and Christians in general.

After numerous sacrilegious acts and desecrations of all sorts, to this day unpunished, we find today that arson is encouraged against the sacred sites at La Paillade, at Sête, and now at Montpellier.

As we are confronted with what appears to be an grave racist crime, we wish to expresss all our compassion to those in charge of this chapel and this school, ravaged by hatred of Christ and of the Catholic religion.

We expect the authorities to protect us and to take more seriously all these crimes perpetrated in our region against Christians. We demand that the criminals be hunted down and given their just punishments.

(1) FSSPX refers to the Fraternité Sacerdotale Saint Pie X, a religious community without vows, founded in 1970 by Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre following the decisions of the Vatican II Council with which he strongly disagreed.

Update - The Belfort Mosque

On May 24, 2006 Galliawatch published an article on the proposed mosque in the historic city of Belfort. At the time there was a movement afoot to prevent the construction of what many consider to be an eyesore and an affront to the Christian traditions of the city. Love's labors lost. As you can see from the top photo, the mosque was approved. The other photo shows the exact location of the new structure, projected to be of huge proportions - 1900 square meters. Some have said that it will be like a "large wart on the terrain near the citadel of Vauban that overlooks Belfort."

The first stone was laid on Saturday by the left-wing mayor of the city, Jean-Pierre Chevènement, a critique of whom was also published by Galliawatch in May.

Information and photos from Vox Galliae.

Echos From France-Echos

In the cartoon, the angry lady says to the magistrate, "But I have the right to love whomever I choose!". To which he replies, "Naughty, naughty. You can't do that in France anymore. We are going to re-educate your racist thinking!"

The case of the hairdresser accused of racism (see the article below), has aroused a flood of reactions from France-Echos readers. Though the website no longer allows comments, they sometimes publish e-mails they receive from their loyal readers. Here are some extended excerpts. The prophecy refers to Alain Finkielkraut's observation that "anti-racism is the communism of the 21st century."

These remarks are from zek1917:

Finkielkraut's prophecy has almost literally come true. We already have workshops in psychiatric re-education. This is unheard of. The very mark of the worst totalitarian regimes. But the ideology of obligatory racial mixing in the name of some absolute Good is so strong that no voice dares to rise up and say that such attacks on personal freedom are infinitely more scandalous than the fact that someone didn't want to hire a black or an Arab. Since this whole enterprise - just like communism - is directed against human nature itself, things won't stop there. They will be barred from certain professions, which is perfectly logical: either our racist hairdresser won't hire blacks, and it's discrimination. Or she does hire blacks, and it's hatred. In case the psychiatric re-education fails, this person will be deprived of most of her civil rights: she will not have the right to rent an apartment or to own a business, etc... The next thing will be physical attacks on racists...

Another aspect of physical assaults: institutionalized rape. In today's logic, if a white woman refuses the advances of a black man, it can only be because of racism. What could it be otherwise? A woman could never prove her case unless she had evidence of 1) being married 2) being chaste or 3) that she had already slept with a black man. If it's not correct to hire whomever one chooses, or to sell one's property to whomever one chooses, why should one be allowed to sleep with whomever one chooses? I don't wish to sound like a typical terrified white guy. We're not at that point yet. But why not?... Because the seizure by the State of our private life has only just begun. But our collectivists have many plans for us...

And the feminists don't give a rat's tail...about the real fate of women; feminists have never had the courage to attack Islam head on. They are much more concerned about the promotion of some female lawyer than they are about women being considered as "game" in some places, after a certain hour of the day...

Alain said the following:

At the risk of surprising you, I consider racism as normal, healthy and beneficial. I am an average person, like the prosecutor...Racism comes from the self-preservation instinct that enjoins the individual, unconsciously, to beware of the unknown. Thus it is a defensive measure and beneficial! A pity that has never been stated openly...To pass a law forbidding it is quite simply an aberration, like a law that forbids the love of music or poetry, or the song of the birds...

Eric had much to say. These are a few passages:

When you talk about racial crimes, you talk about people who beat up North Africans just because they're North Africans, people who paint yellow stars on Jewish storefronts, people who incite hatred of blacks, people who claim the superiority of one race over another, people who call others "dirty whites" or "dirty blacks or God knows what.

In the case of the hairdresser there was none of that. She merely admitted, after being harassed and set up by an impromptu trap designed to provoke, that her customers preferred to be served by employees of the same ethnicity and culture as they. Are you going to accuse the man who sells shish kebab of favoring Turks and Muslims, or the French tourist of preferring not to mingle with rowdy Germans... are you going to accuse a matrimonial agency of publishing ads where people state their preference for a black wife or a Jewish husband, are you going to accuse a priest who refuses to marry non-Christians? If you follow through on the reasoning of SOS-Racism and this prosecutor, the answer is yes...

We have gone from real racism, that of the Nazis and of anti-Arab violence, the racism that considered the Other as inferior and thus an object of violence, racism that incited hatred and wars, to a sort of religion based on obligatory cultural and ethnic mongrelization, and to severely imposed affirmative action. It is no longer racism that is being fought against, but the perfectly normal feeling of identity that we experience with our own kind and not with others...

This case of the hairdresser defies belief, like the story of the deli owner accused of racism because he did not hire Muslims who would not touch pork. This is sheer Kafka, it's Big Brother, it's pure collective suicide of our intelligence and of our freedoms. We are at the antipodes of justice and human rights...

Cultural mongrelization has become the new State religion. They force the earliest art on you and you can no longer call it primitive, they tell you that rap is as good as Debussy, and now they forbid you from hiring a person who would result in your losing customers. No more freedom to discriminate, to love, or even to think! Your friends and your colleagues are chosen for you, even if it's harmful to you. No novelist could have imagined such an insane scenario, as far as I know, and yet reality is stranger than fiction.

Finally from S. P.:

No material evidence regarding the job ad or the job applicants gives the slightest credibility to an act of discrimination, even if the intent was there. In French law actions are judged, not intentions. To say, for example, during the hearing and during the interrogation that followed the events, "It would have been a problem for my rural customers. I feel better with people of my own color. Perhaps I did not go about it in the right way when I refused this applicant," in no way constitutes a discriminatory act. I, too, feel better with certain ethnic groups than with others! And again, such declarations during an interrogation do not constitute a crime, even if they would in other circumstances.

The argument of the plaintiff and especially of the State magistrates are nonsense, not only for the reasons you discussed at your website, but also from a strictly legal point of view. From everything I was able to read about this case, they fabricated a "trial of intent", and the hairdresser did not materially commit any crime punishable by French law. If anyone needs a "lesson in citizenship", and in this case it would be a lesson in law, it's the magistrates!

Azouz Begag - Man With the Forceps

The preceding post on ANPE has led me to review some older articles that I never got around to posting. They center on the personage of Azouz Begag who was named Minister of Equal Opportunity, in June of last year, by Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin. He has been one of the driving forces behind the practice of "testing", the word the French have chosen to designate a kind of entrapment: in response to a help-wanted ad, a Muslim or a black "agent" is sent to apply for the job, and if he or she is turned down, that is proof of discrimination. "Testing" is a government approved practice.

According to one article from June 2, 2005 in Occidentalis, Begag claims to be opposed to affirmative action, but says that recruiting must be adapted to favor visible minorities and recruiting campaigns should seek out young immigrants of Maghrebine or African origins.

Another entry from Occidentalis July 27, 2005, tells of Begag's plans for ending discrimination at discotheques and cites an article from Le Parisien (date not given), that describes how the police would track down potential racists:

You are a young person with sun-tanned skin and you have been turned away at the door of a discotheque. Instead of responding with an act of violence (...) you dial 17.

A mechanism, still in the experimental stage, will allow the policeman who answers the call to record the message; a patrol is immediately dispatched to the site. Or, if necessary, the owner of the disco will have to explain his actions over the phone.

If the same discotheque is repeatedly cited, the prefect will be alerted and may order the closing of the establishment.

A lengthy article from AIPJ (International Action for Justice) that is not dated, but seems to be from the very end of 2005 or the beginning of 2006, prints the two pictures above. They are images of an article that appeared in the October-December 2005 issue of Respect, a magazine of which I know nothing, except that it appears to be pro-Islam and pro-immigration. In this article, Begag makes strong and offensive statements (highlighted in green) about affirmative action. When people began complaining about his comments, the magazine was pulled from the shelves. One of the contributors at Occidentalis managed to find a copy and scanned the offensive comments . The copies apparently were then transmitted to the AIPJ website (where you can view them in a larger format). AIPJ called for his removal from office. These are the words that aroused the wrath of the patriots followed by excerpts from AIPJ's article:

(...) "We must cross the boundaries of Paris. We must go out there, where the indigenous people are, the descendants of Vercingetorix and break down their doors if they refuse to open. We must go there with forceps. Wherever diversity does not exist there must be an invasion of locusts, in the competitions for public service jobs, in the national police. Everywhere, and we must do it so that it can never be reversed."

The AIPJ calls for the resignation of the Minister délégué of Equal Opportunity, Azouz Begag, following his inadmissible remarks made in the racially subversive publication, Respect Magazine, #8, October-December 2005.

But this is not the first faux pas for this individual who dishonors France and the Republic by his remarks. On September 7, 2005, during an interview on Europe 1 with Jean-Pierre Elkabbach, he was asked about the problem of polygamy and the difficulties involved in re-locating the multiple wives of Malians after their apartment building burned down. The minister retorted:

"For these Malians who have been here for twenty or thirty years, arrangements with the French Republic can be made" (...)

A few days later, another outrageous statement printed by Le Monde informs us that Mr. Begag would like to change the law so that businesses can implement an ethnic and cultural tally of their hired workers.

This desire to institute quotas for identified minorities leads to the development of separate communities, a practice that is contrary to the ideals of the French Republic, but apparently no one in the government is offended by it.

On September 18, during the telecast of Riposte on France 5, our ineffable minister again slips off the road, when he declares that in the future he wants to forbid, in public debates, themes such as Islam, immigration and illegals, demonstrating total disdain for the democratic right to freedom of expression.

On October 31, 2005, he makes a marvelous Freudian slip during the broadcast of Mots Croisés with Yves Calvi on France 2, a slip that reveals what this Islamo-Fascist disguised as a republican is really thinking:

"So things aren't going well? My role is exactly this - to stay and continue to fight so that the France I love, the France I want to destroy ... defend, the France that struggles against discrimination, allowing each one to find his place, is respected."

Note: In French the two verbs are "descendre" (to bring down, destroy) and "défendre" (to defend), so the slip was easy to make, considering his state of mind.

The article from AIPJ goes on to discuss Begag's affiliation with Dieudonné and his support for the "Euro-Palestine" movement. Again , Begag is quoted:

"In general, in these ghettoes, they realized that if they wanted to be heard by the local or national political authorities, regarding the building of a mosque, or whatever, they had to form lobby groups, they had to constitute a political force and consequently, they had to adopt a separate group attitude, because that is what has weight. It's American-style pragmatism transplanted to France."

The article concludes with a critique of the movie, Camping Out At The Farm, scripted by Begag:

It's the story of a gang of "young" delinquents sent to a village to repair a church, cultivate the land, and clean the farmhouses. But they begin to pray in the church and since they are Muslims that inevitably provokes tension (...), and to smoke pot, to refuse to do the work in the fields and finally to attack the farmer's daughter. Their attitude does not endear them to the local villagers, who are depicted in the film as narrow-minded incorrigible racists. As you can see, it's a masterpiece of French cinema.

Galliawatch has already published two articles on Azouz Begag, one on his background, and the other on his stunning literary achievements.

Update: March 2007 - The link to AIPJ provided above is no longer working.

Lessons in Citizenship

ANPE (National Agency for Employment) is a government run entity that purports to find the right person for the right job. Founded in July 1967, it serves as a database for both job-seekers and employers. Two stories involving ANPE have recently been talked about at the French websites. The first one goes back a few months.

Back in January of this year, a delicatessen owner and caterer named Guy Lefèvre was accused of discriminatory hiring practices when he refused to hire a Muslim who would not touch pork meat. Lefèvre was given a two-month suspended sentence, fined 500 euros, and ordered to pay 4,000 euros in damages to the French Muslim.

Lefèvre's son made the following statement: "My father was looking for kitchen help for his deli. ANPE sent us 30 applicants. Several of them asked if they would have to touch pork. Obviously they would. My father called back ANPE to ask that they include this job specification in their ad. And that's when the whole thing turned vicious." And so Guy Lefèvre found himself before the court of Compiègne for discrimination.

Later during the night of February 22-23, Guy Lefèvre was beaten unconscious at his home by five migrant workers and rushed to the hospital. Two of the five were given 10-month prison terms, one received a 5-month sentence. Two minors were sent to juvenile court.

Guy Lefèvre has appealed the Compiègne verdict, and his case will be judged on October 4, 2006, by the Appeals Court of Amiens.

Now a second story has made headlines, also involving ANPE. This article is from Vox Galliae:

A fine of 3000 euros, 1000 of them suspended, and the obligation to take "lessons in citizenship" have been imposed on the manager of a beauty salon for discrimination against a young black woman seeking a job.

Once again, in this case, as in the case of the delicatessen owner from Oise, it is ANPE who suspected racial discrimination after the manager refused to hire a young Haitian girl, preferring instead to hire a "white woman". ANPE then notified the employment inspector.

During the trial, outrageous things appear to have been said, such as the remarks of prosecutor Martine Lambrechts who declared she was "almost ashamed". "I represent society, the average citizen (...) and I see that the average citizen is always racist."

Stéphane Fouéré, the manager's attorney took issue with these accusations of racism hurled against his client, saying that she just wanted "to work with people she and her customers of Châteaubriant felt close to.

The defiant ones are now sent by bureaucrats to workshops for a "re-education in the matter of citizenship" . How long before it's the gulag?

More on Verdun

Some patriots are deeply offended by the new Verdun Memorial, of which I spoke in a previous post. This message, signed by one "JMG" came earlier today from Via-Resistancia, a Google group. The Meskine affair refers to the arrest a few days ago of Dhaou Meskine, general secretary of the Council of Imams of France, on charges of financing terrorism. The CFCM and HALDE alluded to in the article are government agencies, the former is the French Council on the Muslim Religion, the latter the High Authority Against Discrimination and for Equality:

This truly very sad day will witness the memory of the valiant French soldiers sullied and mocked by this abject inauguration of a "memorial to Muslims" who supposedly died for France...not just because classifying these dead according to their religion is shabby on the part of a Republic that still dares to call itself "secular", which it hasn't been since the plans of Chevènement were implemented by the team of Chirac-Sarkozy, plans that included elevating the CFCM to the level of a religious power group and HALDE to the level of political police, but to speak of "Muslims who died for France" is a profound historical lie.

That there was a marginal number of colonized Muslims who were forced to fight in the European wars that France, a colonial empire, was involved in, goes without saying, but to turn that into a generalization is to knowingly lie, to manipulate the historical facts for convenient propaganda purposes.

...the lie surrounding this memorial was revealed by the Minister of Veterans (Hamlaoui Mekachera) himself, who correctly designated it as a "homage to all the combatants, religious or not, fallen on the field of honor during the Great War". Still it was dedicated to the native riflemen of North Africa, most of whom were not even Muslims!

But, the fact remains, that in this era of Islamization of Europe and of the active collaboration of our elite with the Muslim occupier, Jacques Chirac - who has claimed that Europe has Muslim roots - and the media (worthy successors to Radio Paris), could not let the opportunity slip by without adding another layer of allegiance to our new masters. Especially since the Meskine affair has tarnished somewhat the beautiful Trojan horse image of a "moderate Islam in France"...

Honoring Verdun's Muslim Soldiers

On June 25, 2006, Jacques Chirac is scheduled to inaugurate a memorial to the Muslim soldiers who died at Verdun in the First World War. The first stone was laid back in March at Douaumont, near Verdun during a ceremony presided over by Hamlaoui Mekachera, the Algerian born Minister of Veterans. Seventy-thousand Muslim soldiers died for France during the war. Were it not for the current state of affairs in France and in Europe, the memorial might appear completely justified. But Muslims are invading and lording it over France, and Chirac has been bending over backwards to give them whatever they ask for. Consequently a memorial erected in these circumstances appears a capitulation, rather than a generous gesture. And France, once again, must display repentance for her past omissions.

An article dated March 23 at a Muslim website provides the photo of Moroccan riflemen and gives this information:

The decision to erect such a monument was made by the High Council on Muslim Memory last November 18. This will make it possible to pay homage to the Muslim soldiers fallen for France between 1914 and 1918, emphasized Mr. Mekachera...

In the national cemetery of Douaumont lie 15,000 identified soldiers, Christians, Jews and Muslims, who died during the battle of Verdun, while the ossuary near-by houses the remains of 130,000 unidentified soldiers.

"There were, on the site of Douaumont, a Jewish memorial and a Christian memorial. We needed a memorial for the third religion of the Book, in order to fully represent the sphere of the combatant," explained Mr. Mekachera.

The execution of this memorial, at a cost of 500,000 euros, will be entirely financed by the State, primarily by the Minister of Defense, he pointed out.

The monument, about a hundred square meters in size, will be built on a 4000 square meter terrain, in the Muslim sector of the cemetery that houses 592 tombs of Algerian, Moroccan and Tunisian soldiers killed at Verdun...

Inspired by Arab-Muslim art, the memorial will include, in the center of an esplanade, a dome supported by columns, that will house the Muslim stele facing the ossuary, explained the minister.

It will be covered with Meuse stone, the material used in the construction of the other buildings at the site.

The memorial is to be inaugurated by President Jacques Chirac in June on the occasion of the 90th anniversary of the battle of Verdun (February-November 1916).

Note: A strong denunciation of the memorial appears in my post entitled "More On Verdun."

Judging By the Cover...

More than one website has noted that this is next week's cover of The Economist, a British weekly, devoted primarily to business. It will be interesting to see how they treat the subject, since the weekly, as e-tribesman has pointed out, is left-leaning. The cover says, "Myth or Reality?" and the degree to which the reality is acknowledged will determine the worth of the article. Likewise, if they make light of the presence of Islam, saying that it's a scare tactic of the right-wing, we will be able to cross The Economist off our list of useful publications.

It is not likely I will have time to read it, though I will try. If anyone does take the trouble to read it, let us know what you think.

Redefining Festivals

The second cultural item is from Guillaume Faye, a provocative writer and and critic of current conditions in the Western world. One of his books published in 1998 is entitled Archéofuturisme, in which he expounds his belief that the West is headed for total catastrophe on a cultural, demographic, economic and environmental level, and that it is just as well. For after the present-day horrors are swallowed up in this inevitable collapse, the European nations will have to return to the "archaic" in order to build their future. By "archaic" he is referring to a body of immutable customs that prevailed in Europe before the French Revolution: family structures, assigned roles for the sexes, transmission of ethnic traditions, organized priestly functions, prestige of the warrior class, emphasis on the community rather than the individual, defining any group as a community with an historic destiny and not as a synchronized mass of individual atoms. At the same time he believes in the scientific and technological advances that are inevitable. This very sophisticated future must have the "archaic" as its foundation. Gone will be the egalitarianism that is destroying Europe. I must admit that most of what he says is way above my head, and I only hope I haven't warped his meaning too much in this summary. The following excerpt from Archéofuturisme is quite understandable.

Staying within the old tradition of circus games, the system has developed, in addition to sports, the habit of festivals: Gaypride, Technopride, Festival of Music, etc...

There is nothing spontaneous about them. They do not emanate from the popular traditions of civil society, like the fairs, carnivals, solstices, processions and balls that are scattered all over Europe, such as the Palio in Sienna or the Bierfest in Munich.

They are knowingly organized and financed by the State, artificially, like unstructured explosions of hubris that take the place of a collective drug.

They are meaningless; in no way do they represent the expression of popular joy.

Furthermore, these fake festivals must be systematically protected by the police and end in rioting.

Montherlant's Solstice

Two very brief cultural posts at Novopress caught my eye. This one is by Henry de Montherlant. Henry Marie Joseph Frédéric Expedite Millon de Montherlant was born in 1895 into a family of petit nobility. He aspired to become a writer early on and was greatly influenced by Quo Vadis given to him by his mother. The themes of Ancient Rome, friendship and suicide stayed with him throughout his life. He traveled frequently to Mediterranean lands, and respected the classical ideals. A patriot who opposed the colonization by France of Algeria, he wrote of the excesses of the colonizers. He also made attempts, through his writings, to convince French leaders they should stem the growing power of the Nazis. When this did not occur, he wrote denunciations of France's weaknesses and said France had gotten what she deserved, though he praised the courage of the soldiers. He covered up his homosexuality, but it was obvious, from his novels about women, that he was incapable of affection for them. Partially blind following an accident, he committed suicide in 1972 at his home in Paris, rather than face total blindness. He was admitted to the Académie Française in 1960. He wrote an essay entitled Summer Solstice, but I am not sure if this excerpt comes from that work.

Summer solstice, an ambiguous moment, marked by a kind of lie. How it troubles me, irritates me, pleases me.

For a few more months yet, the year will appear to be darting towards its zenith of warmth and splendor. And yet, it's all over: the days have begun to get shorter. The Sun is declining, the Sun is dying.

The victory of the solar wheel is not only the victory of the Sun, or the victory of Paganism. It is the victory of the solar principle, which is that everything turns ("the wheel turns", say the people). On this day I see the triumph of the principle with which I am imbibed, that I have praised, and that I feel, with an extreme consciousness, is governing my life.

Alternation. Everything is subject to alternation. He who understands this has understood everything. The Greeks are full of this.

It's Official - All Art Was Created Equal

Originally conceived about eight years ago, the new Quai Branly Museum has just been inaugurated. At a cost of 233 million euros, it is Chirac's "baby". A devoted fan of anything that isn't Western, Jacques Chirac has clearly stated his guiding philosophy in the speech quoted below. Apparently the city of Paris has closed or is re-cycling the old Musée de l'Homme, an anthropological museum once located near the Palais de Chaillot across from the Eiffel Tower. The works in the older museum were moved to Branly.

An article from the Nouvel Observateur, discussing the new museum, is here abridged:

On Tuesday June 20, Jacques Chirac inaugurated "his" museum on Quai Branly. A museum dedicated to the earliest art forms, its goal is to restore to non-Western civilizations their rightful place in the history of art and humanity. Arriving a little before 10:00 a.m., the President began visiting the museum's almost 300,000 works. Present also at the inauguration were Secretary General of the UN, Kofi Annan, Guatemalan Nobel prize winner and champion of Indians Rigobertu Menchu, Prime Minister of the Canadian territory of Nunavut Paul Okalik, Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, several ministers from the ministries of Culture, Education and Tourism, and former Prime Ministers Lionel Jospin and Jean-Pierre Raffarin...

A place for "recognition of cultural diversity", the museum possesses in its vaults some 300,000 works that will be exhibited by turns in the contemporary building designed by Jean Nouvel. The French architect, who also designed the Institute of the Arab World and the Cartier Foundation for Contemporary Art, this time has created a concave glass vessel flanked by large colored cubes...Brightly lit and without walls, the interior is a vast platform, above which are the mezzanines where the art, protected by a forest of glass dividers, can be viewed. Almost 10,000 musical instruments are shown in a glass tower. Dogon sculptures, D'mba masks from Africa, bison skins decorated by the Indians of North America, Malagasy textiles and pre-Columbian statuettes from Mexico, stand side by side with more recent works. Aborigines from Australia decorated the rooms and part of the façade...

"The museum on Quai Branly is the museum that will inspire you to take the globe you keep on your desk, and to spin it around," declared museum president Stéphane Martin last week.

Displayed with the same care as the Mona Lisa or the Venus de Milo, the works will be accorded a type of recognition.

"A museum of this type can help to put in their rightful place the cultures that have for too long been considered as minor, as marginal", explains Martin. "By treating these sculptures with the same respect that one grants to the art of the Renaissance, we are restoring to them their place in the Pantheon of humanity."

Museum of the earliest art, of primitive art, of art from distant lands, museum of the Other...Various names were considered by the founders before settling on the one denoting the location of the museum...Will the Quai Branly Museum one day be re-baptized "the Jacques Chirac Museum"? The man in question is no doubt already dreaming of it. "I don't know if it would be a good idea," he said, "but it would be a great honor for me."

Vox Galliae posted excerpts from the speech Chirac delivered at the inauguration:

"At the heart of our effort, there is the refusal of ethnocentrism, of that unreasonable and unacceptable pretension of the West that it and it alone bears the destiny of humanity. There is the rejection of that false evolutionism that claims that certain people have remained frozen in an earlier stage of human evolution, that their so-called "primitive" cultures are of value only to ethnologists, or at best, sources of inspiration for the Western artist.

"Those are absurd and shocking prejudices. For, there is no more a hierarchy between arts and cultures than there is a hierarchy between peoples. It is this conviction above all, that of the equal dignity of world cultures, that is the foundation of the Quai Branly Museum.

There you have it, clear as a bell, the underlying motivation of the Chiracs, Bushes, Blairs, Zapateros, etc... of the Western world. Chirac has stated as unambiguously as possible his contempt for the culture he was elected to defend.

Update, October 12, 2007: Reviewing Chirac's words above, perhaps he is expressing a determined naïveté and a contempt, not so much for Western art, as for those who see in it an apex of civilization. In a civilizational crisis such as the one France, and the West, are suffering, this resolute naïveté is a crutch, the only solution possible for those who cannot bring themselves to acknowledge differences, and different levels of accomplishment.

Courting The Arab Vote

This article from Le Monde illustrates the lengths to which the Front National is going to win the Arab vote. Marine Le Pen, daughter of Jean-Marie and heir to her father's leadership at the FN, spoke on Beur FM radio on June 6 (a reminder that "beur" refers to North African Arabs). A so-called extreme right-wing magazine named Minute, recently did a three-page spread on this event, painting in rosy terms the efforts of Marine to reach out to the immigrants, and postulating that Arabs are victims of hatred, just like the "Gaulois". Minute postulates also that the only two people (other than a Muslim or black candidate) with any chance at all for winning the Arab vote are socialist Ségolène Royal and...Jean-Marie Le Pen.

At this point let me intervene with my own clarification. Minute, a right-wing publication is making a moral equivalence between the "oppression" suffered by the Arabs and the "oppression" suffered by ethnic Frenchmen. Minute is saying, "Dear Arabs, we understand how you feel. We're going through the same thing ourselves. So let's join forces".

Now back to Le Monde's article. It points out that Minute failed to mention a 35-minute listener call-in segment, during which FN operatives pretending to be Arabs called in with assurances that they would vote for Marine (or Jean-Marie - I'm still not certain which one will actually be on the ticket). At any rate, here is the article.

A Front National leader who addresses Frenchmen of North African origin is unusual. So it was not surprising that the speech delivered by Marine Le Pen, vice-president of the party, on Beur FM radio on June 6, was widely discussed in extreme right-wing circles.

Minute's June 14 edition devotes three pages to her as well as its cover where you can read, "One million votes are the stakes. Who will get the "beur" vote?"

"Marine Le Pen was more than just well received", boasted the extreme right-wing weekly that sees in all of this a vindication of Le Pen's opposition to American intervention in Iraq.

Minute develops the notion that the voters of "immigrant origin" who are "eager to be assimilated" are less and less willing to put up with the "incivilities" of which they, like the "Gaulois", are the "prime target". These voters want only a "return to law and order", an area where the left and the Interior Minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, have presumably "failed".

According to Minute: "The beur votes that went to Chirac in 2002 have little chance of being given to Nicolas Sarkozy in 2007. Nor will they go to Philippe de Villiers, who has been conducting a shocking pro-Israel campaign. Who's left? A hypothetical "third-world" candidate; the socialist candidate Ségolène Royal and only Royal; and Jean-Marie Le Pen."

In short, for this right-wing weekly, the radio show "Forum debate", hosted by Ahmed El Keiy, on Beur FM, in which Ms. Le Pen participated, is proof that the barriers between the FN and the beurs are coming down.

What Minute failed to mention, however, is that the leadership and the militants of the FN greatly contributed to the "warm welcome" accorded Ms. Le Pen. They did this by taking advantage of the 35-minute listener call-in when questions, that have not been fielded in advance, are asked of the guest. So it was that everyone was surprised to hear a certain "Louis from Toulouse" speak of co-development between France and Africa as a way to stop the "influx of migrants". "Louis seems to be having trouble", said a surprised El Keiy, as the caller hesitatingly posed his question. "Yes, he's very shy", replied Ms. Le Pen struggling to contain her laughter, for she had in fact recognized Louis from Toulouse as being none other than Louis Aliot, general secretary of the FN.

Mr. El Keiy, on two occasions, had fun unmasking the imposters: "I like your accent, Mustapha, but you need to work on it a little", he retorted to one of them who had just stated that he would vote for "Madame Li Pen". And to a certain Mourad from Paris who claimed he'd had enough of being attacked by his cousins in the subway, El Keiy shot back, "Your talk would qualify you as a member of the FN".

But these intruders did not succeed in eclipsing the calls from authentic Frenchmen of foreign origin. A few showed interest in the new muse of the FN. Most, however, spoke of the racism of which they are victims. Still others were concerned about relations between the FN and Algeria, in the event it should come to that.

Except for one listener, who threatened to use "a strategic strike, for the next two hundred years, on anyone who tried to exert pressure on Muslims", the tone of the discussion remained courteous. Even when one female listener, conjuring up the tale of "Little Red-Riding Hood", wondered if Beur FM, by inviting Ms. Le Pen, wasn't allowing the "wolf" of the FN to go "in hot pursuit after the beurs". "It would be naïve of me to think otherwise, but we're out in the open about it", responded Mr. El Keiy, who wants his radio show to remain pluralistic.

My only thought is that if the Arab vote is so important, if the Arabs have infiltrated the media to such an extent, then they will never be expelled. They are here to stay. They are in fact needed and wanted by everyone except Philippe de Villiers, who has as much chance of reaching the second round as I do of winning the World Cup single-handedly.

And Now the Mayor of Raincy...

Another mayor has come under fire for saying the "wrong" thing. Eric Raoult, mayor of the town of Raincy in Seine-Saint-Denis, and deputy of the UMP party in the National Assembly, has dared to criticize the vulgar attire of young French teen and pre-teen girls. In a circular distributed to high schools, and published by a blogger named leconservateur, Raoult expresses his displeasure at the lack of decency in these young girls.

"Especially on the young girls", these outfits are "sometimes very minimal and at the limit of decency". They may even at times be "provocative", continues the deputy-mayor in his letter, a copy of which was obtained by Agence France Presse.

"It isn't provocation to tell the truth", he said, adding that these young girls, who wear "their pants cut low at the waist so that their pierced navels and a bit of pubic hairs are visible...would not be allowed in a night club like that".

At this point leconservateur makes his own comments:

I would think nothing of getting called an old fogey if I say that I agree with this mayor. The streets of Paris are currently a festival of vulgarity - and it isn't even provocative, unless you consider a wh*** to be seductive. Fortunately the western part of Paris still swarms with girls who make up in elegance for what they lack in skirt length.

The "problem" concerns mainly the very young, whose often unbelievable attire makes one wonder...What kind of parents let their kids go out like that?? When you think that in some progressive families they give their girls a thong and a guide to easy abortion for 14 year olds. Great way to raise a well-balanced daughter.

As for me, I would like a return to school uniforms. All other things being equal, plunging necklines and thongs can only do harm to the school environment.

It's interesting to note that the reactions of high-school groups and parents' associations (carefully selected by AFP to reflect its own thinking) are clearly hostile to the mayor and pathetic, even stupid, some going so far as to bring up the issue of the Islamic burkha, as if there were no middle ground between the thong and the burkha! The reactions of these student organizations show a clear absence of objectivity and thoughtfulness in their ranks. And some people want these groups to co-administer the school system.

This again proves the crying need for adults to re-invest in the high-schools in order to restore order, in all meanings of the word...

All of the above was published in a post at one of my most useful sources: Vox Galliae. It aroused an unexpectedly hostile reaction from readers who claimed he was advocating the burkha, who said they liked sexually liberated girls, or who said in substance it was nobody's business what the girls wore. A few comments were deleted, and Vox Galliae had to enable comment moderation, something it rarely, if ever, resorts to. That such sensible comments from Mayor Raoult and from leconservateur aroused indignation is another sign of the seemingly unstoppable decay of French society. While we have the same problem here (the sights you see in town make you wish you had a gun), it is painful to realize that French girls no longer dress well. Besides great food, beautifully cut clothes were a French trademark, and almost every girl and every woman had a sense of style. Even if they were poor, they knew how to dress well with what they had. Here is leconservateur's response to his critics:

To state it simply, I'm accused of being a dhimmi who bends "unconsciously" to the Islamic prohibitions in matter of attire, just because I support the notion that young girls should not walk around in outfits unsuitable to the school environment.

But who is the dupe of the Islamists? The one who, in accord with his own values, makes a choice, or the one who defends wearing a thong to school just to get even with Islamists? Must we all walk around in a leopard-print thong, or drive while drunk, or wear t-shirts that insult Christ in order to affirm our non-dhimmitude?

In the most hostile reactions, I perceive the barely veiled shadow - if I may say so, of fanatical secularists - as one commenter admitted. Those who use Islamism and the newly popularized concept of dhimmitude to defend their puny Western symbols of "progress" (thongs at school, abortions en masse, ubiquitous pornography, etc...), those individuals are as much our enemy as the Islamists.

I predict a return to school uniforms in the next 50 years, for various reasons: the need to restore order in a school system that is deteriorating, the problem of rushing out to spend money on clothes, the display of inequalities through one's manner of dress at school - with a little help from the peddlers of clothing, and finally the question of decency. And the howls of the progressives will not be able to change anything.

As for dhimmitude, some people should take a tranquilizer and stop seeing Bin Laden everywhere. The Nazis were the first ones to fight against dependency on tobacco, but that's no reason for us to start smoking like smokestacks.

Additional note: France-Echos has responded angrily to Mayor Raoult. A contributor named Camille notes that Eric Raoult was a guest recently on a TV show where he advocated school uniforms, defending his position by saying: "In Palestine, it was the first thing Yasser Arafat implemented."

Camille calls him the dhimmi mayor-deputy and scoffs at the idea of drawing inspiration from Palestinian educational methods.

Personally, I think this is all ridiculous. It is perfectly legitimate to criticize vulgar dress and habits, but there is no call for invoking Yasser Arafat or Islam as a means of backing up the arguments. Both the mayor and his critics are using Islam as a means of justifying arguments that have no need for such "props". Girls should dress stylishly and decently. Yes, they should be free to pick out their own clothes, but only if they are mature enough to know the difference between class and brass. If they are idiots, someone has to stop them from buying whorish clothes, someone like...their mother. Uniforms are a good idea, but it has to be enforced. In my city, the school district at one point mandated uniforms, but no one obeyed. I think now it's up to the individual school.

Taking it all a step further, separating boys and girls is a good idea, mainly because boys are getting shoved under the rug by the weight of feminism, that pushes for all kinds of privileges for the girls. Boys are much better off without girls, although many would disagree. At least separation should be an option. Now, Muslims might agree with me. But I'm not talking to Muslims or about Muslims. I'm talking to the French and to Americans. If I said, "See. The Muslims separate them, so should we," I would really be defeating my own argument, since my argument has as its basis a desire to restore WESTERN values in both girls and boys.

Sarkozy's Law - Another View

The same reader who requested information about Sarkozy's immigration law has provided a link to an excellent English-language article that gives a more optimistic point of view. I think most French patriots feel the law does not go nearly far enough for several reasons: It does not plug up immigration, but modifies somewhat its dynamics, it does not expel anybody, it has too many loop-holes that immigrants are deft at exploiting, it does not address the issue of Islam and its effects on French society, but simply specifies which Muslims can enter, and which ones cannot, it has a French-language requirement but the socialists (especially in education) will probably fight that tooth and nail.

Imagine how the American education establishment would react if we forced Mexicans to learn English and abolished ESOL (English as a second language). ESOL and similar programs have helped Mexicans keep their language while learning a rather inadequate type of English. In the end, they speak neither language well. ESOL has also created a large and powerful education lobby.

At any rate, we have to wait and see how the new French law is implemented and BY WHOM it is implemented, since Chirac will be in retirement, possibly in Morocco (my own opinion). Enforcement is now the important thing, but I still feel that all immigration should stop. Why should skilled North Africans or West Africans be given plum positions in France to the detriment of French citizens? And aren't these skilled workers more needed in their own country?

I disagree with the author of this article on one point: he compares Abdoulaye Wade, President of Senegal to Vicente Fox, President of Mexico. As far as I know Wade is against the emigration of the best and the brightest from Senegal and seems to favor a "Senegal for the Senegalese" position, while Fox advocates the maximum possible immigration of Mexicans to what he feels are territories rightly belonging to Mexico, i.e., the American Southwest. But I know I oversimplify...

Here are the opening paragraphs. Read the whole article here:

There's a great number of happy people in France today as a result of the news that the upper house of the French parliament has passed a tough new immigration bill. The bill was passed by an overwhelming number of votes weeks after it was adopted by members of the lower chamber of parliament.

The French immigration reform bill makes it more difficult for unskilled immigrants to settle in France, which in the past has created discord among French citizens who work menial jobs. The new bill, expected to be signed into law very soon, adds a number of tough measures to France's immigration policy.

Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, who drafted the bill, says it will bring France into line with other countries. Critics on the far-left, using the same verbal attacks as US leftists against anti-illegal immigration proponents, say the law is racist and accuse Sarkozy of pandering to the far-right, although the majority of French citizens are far from being right-wing and, according to polls, they overwhelmingly support the tough immigration legislation.

Sarkozy's Really Tough New Law

A reader has requested information on the new immigration law passed by the French senate on June 17. Known as "Sarkozy's Law", it purports to toughen France's ridiculously suicidal immigration policies that have contributed to the decline of French civilization over the past three decades.

The patriotic websites I frequent have not had all that much to say. I went to Yahoo where I found several repetitive articles on the passage of the law.

The first thing to note is that the final draft was a "humanized" version of the original, owing to the efforts of the combined left-wing parties to kill or or dilute as much of the bill as they could.

Yahoo does not go into great detail, but here are a few pertinent facts:

1) The bill purports to implement "selective" immigration as opposed to unchecked immigration.

2) The bill abrogates the automatic granting of legal status to clandestines who have been on French soil for ten years, BUT they may still gain legal status since their cases will now be examined one at a time. (Can you imagine the bureaucratic nightmare?)

3) Family reunification will be granted depending on the financial ability of the head of household to pay for the family's expenses and housing.

4) The spouse of a French national wishing to obtain a ten-year residency card, must now wait three years instead of two for the request to be granted.

Now, thanks to the efforts of the French socialists and communists:

1) The parent of an immigrant child who is sick and being treated in France, may receive authorization to stay in France for a maximum of 6 months. (And what will they do if the kid isn't cured after six months?)

2) Workers from underdeveloped countries will be able to place their savings in a "blocked" account. The amount saved will be deducted from the person's taxable income and will not be released until the person in question proves he can invest the money in an underdeveloped country. (I will believe this when I see it!)

Here is what one socialist said: "In this hateful law, one must make some gestures, here and there. One must...light the flame of humanity. We don't wish to be associated with this measure".

Finally, skilled workers will be recruited pending a "partnership agreement" with the poorest countries. (I presume this is to stem the "brain drain" out of African countries to France. But where does that leave "selective" immigration? Are these brighter skilled workers denied the right to emigrate, or are they expected to return to Africa, and what if they refuse?)

So much for the law. I will certainly update this event, as I learn more.

There is another almost comical proposal by Sarkozy where he proposes to pay people to go back home. France-Echos posted an article which I am here summarizing:

Nicolas Sarkozy is requesting that the various prefects systematically offer a "reward" of 7000 euros per couple to return to their homeland. In addition he is offering 2000 euros per child, for the first three children, and 1000 euros for each additional child. So, a family with five kids would receive 15,000 euros to go home.

But not to worry! If they refuse to go they can still stay in France if the prefect says it's OK...

The article rightly points out that the family could go home and have a very pleasant inexpensive vacation, and then return to France!

Xavier Lemoine - Update

The fallout is beginning to rain down on Xavier Lemoine, the mayor of the town of Montfermeil in Seine-Saint-Denis. He is beginning to pay for his remarks (quoted by Galliawatch in a recent article) on the subject of the Islamization of France. He is also, it would appear, beginning to back off and to claim he was misquoted. This is exactly what happened last year to Alain Finkielkraut, who spoke openly to Haaretz and who ended up apologizing like a dithering fool on French television. (Galliawatch intends to publish both the Haaretz interview and the apology, in English, very soon. They are still worth reading.)

The first part of this post is based on an article in Novopress. A reminder that MRAP (Movement against racism and for friendship among peoples), is a Mulsim organization that seeks to prosecute those that dare speak out against Islam. Their methods are those of the witch hunt and their influence in French society continues to grow. Like other Muslim organizations, MRAP originally was a Jewish group dedicated to the protection of the Jewish community after the Second World War. It has, from early on, been closely allied with extreme left-wing politics.

MRAP announced on Thursday that it intends to prosecute the mayor of Montfermeil (Seine-Saint-Denis), Xavier Lemoine, as a result of his remarks to the Israeli paper Haaretz. When asked about the conflicts provoked by by certain Muslims on French soil, he declared: "It's them or us. If they win, we're dead. I am Catholic, French, and proud of it, and I have no intention of living like a dhimmi (a non-Muslim who benefits from special status in Muslim countries) in my own country".

(He now says) "Those were fragments disconnected from the whole context", he said in self-defense.

Novopress concludes with this statement:

It is clear that at the present time, when ethnic tensions are at their height, when social cleavages are increasingly laden with consequences, when senseless violence, filmed in order to gloat and boast over it, is growing exponentially, the priority of virtuous leagues such as MRAP is still the fight against freedom of expression, and the tracking down of dissident remarks that do not conform to the official point of view, a point of view voluntarily blinded and masochistic.

My comment to Novopress. Spare us. Did you really think MRAP would be concerned about social disintegration and violence and innocent people falsely charged, and all that jazz?

Finally from the website of Jean-Marie Le Pen comes this excerpt from a longer article (Mouloud Aounit is the head of MRAP):

It is now Xavier Lemoine's turn...to be attacked by MRAP for an interview published on June 9 by...Haaretz. While the offices of Mouloud Aounit announced they would be prosecuting this elected official who "persists in advocating an anti-immigrant and racist hatred", Mr. Lemoine, like Mr. Finkielkraut, claims that the Israeli paper, in fact, gave its readers "excerpts, fragments of the conversation totally disconnected from the whole context", from a "discussion that lasted two hours". "I am not about to stop examining certain questions that need to be asked", he pointed out, assuring everyone that he had not meant to implicate all Muslims, but only a "minority".

Apparently, it's a sizeable "minority" in his town...

Piglet At War With The Turks

One of Winston Churchill's many famous quotes is the one about pigs (and I must paraphrase): "I like pigs. Dogs look up to you. Cats look down on you. But pigs treat you as equals."

The Muslim world would punish him for such thoughts, and the Western lands Churchill so ardently defended no longer agree with him (do they even remember Churchill?), for all over Europe and Britain, a seemingly endless epidemic of capitulation to the Muslims on the issue of pig images and pork meat and even piggy banks has become a favorite pastime. This article from Occidentalis tells of the banishment from Turkish television of dear Winnie the Pooh and his friend Piglet.

Of course, Turkey can do as it pleases, so long as it remains in Asia. But imagine how things will be if Turkey enters the EU and has more votes than any other country in the European Parliament. What will NOT be banned?

Turkish public television, the TRT, which is controlled by the conservative Islamic government, has prohibited the showing of Walt Disney's famous animated film, "Winnie the Pooh", on the pretext that the hero is a piglet. Several other animations showing pigs on the screen have been denied the green light from the TRT, affirms the daily paper Cumhuriyet.

Originally, the TV channel was going to cut out the scenes showing Piglet, but had to give that up owing to the frequency of the appearances of the little pink character, one of Winnie's faithful friends.

Employees at TRT have recently complained about the growing government intervention in the public channel. They have also denounced the naming of individuals close to the ruling party to key positions at the network that manages several TV and radio stations. The pig is considered impure to the Muslims and Islam forbids the eating of pork meat.

These facts would seem to be not very serious, except that those who would impose on us this Islamic Trojan horse always stress the secularism and the moderation of the party of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the AKP, party of Justice and Development.

This story is more troubling than it first appears because, not only is the pig impure and forbidden as food for the Muslims, but it also is used to designate Jews and Christians!

So, is Erdogan's party "moderate"? There seems to be one more fly in the ointment, to add to the many others, doesn't there?

A reader's comment to this article points out that this is far from the first time the pig has been an issue with Western dhimmi leaders. She is kind enough to provide links to several articles. Regarding the offensive piggy banks:

British banks are banning piggy banks because they may offend some Muslims.

Halifax and NatWest banks have led the move to scrap the time-honoured symbol of saving from being given to children or used in their advertising, the Daily Express/Daily Star group reports here.

Muslims do not eat pork, as Islamic culture deems the pig to be an impure animal.

Salim Mulla, secretary of the Lancashire Council of Mosques, backed the bank move.

"This is a sensitive issue and I think the banks are simply being courteous to their customers," he said.

However, the move brought accusations of political correctness gone mad from critics.

"The next thing we will be banning Christmas trees and cribs and the logical result of that process is a bland uniformity," the Dean of Blackburn, Reverend Christopher Armstrong, said.

"We should learn to celebrate our difference, not be fearful of them."

Khalid Mahmoud, the Labour MP for a Birmingham seat and one of four Muslim MPs in Britain, also criticised the piggy-bank ban.

"We live in a multicultural society and the traditions and symbols of one community should not be obliterated just to accommodate another," Mr Mahmoud said.

"I doubt many Muslims would be seriously offended by piggy banks."

Regarding toy pigs, there was this article in the Sun:

NOVELTY pig calendars and toys have been banned from a council office — in case they offend Muslim staff.

Workers in the benefits department at Dudley Council, West Midlands, were told to remove or cover up all pig-related items, including toys, porcelain figures, calendars and even a tissue box featuring Winnie the Pooh and Piglet.

Bosses acted after a Muslim complained about pig-shaped stress relievers delivered to the council in the run-up to the Islamic festival of Ramadan.

Muslims are barred from eating pork in the Koran and consider pigs unclean.

Councillor Mahbubur Rahman, a practising Muslim, backed the ban. He said: “It’s a tolerance of people’s beliefs.”

Regarding stories about pigs, this is from the BBC:

A West Yorkshire head teacher has banned books containing stories about pigs from the classroom in case they offend Muslim children.

The literature has been removed from classes for under-sevens at Park Road Junior Infant and Nursery School in Batley.

Head Barbara Harris said the books would remain in the school library for children to read.

Sixty per cent of the school's pupils are of Pakistani or Indian origin and 99% of these pupils are Muslims.

Mrs Harris said in a statement: "Recently I have been aware of an occasion where young Muslim children in class were read stories about pigs.

"We try to be sensitive to the fact that for Muslims talk of pigs is offensive."

The head teacher sent a memo to staff saying fiction books containing stories about pigs should be removed from early years and key stage one classrooms.

Mrs Harris added: "The books remain in the school library and there is nothing to stop our younger children having stories such as 'The Three Little Pigs' in small groups."

Last, but not least, click here for a rundown from Daniel Pipes on the pork problem and other similar matters.

Petition Against Islamization

This petition to Nicolas Sarkozy emanates from Philippe de Villiers' website where it can be found in pdf format. At the bottom it says that the petitions will be handed to the Interior Minister on July 14, 2006. The signer fills in pertinent information, and then either mails it or faxes it to the address and number indicated. I don't know at what point the Interior Minister became the Minister of Religions as well.

To the Minister of the Interior and of Religions,

Your audacious wager on an Islam of France has proven itself to be a calamity that places the future of France in grave danger.

There will never be an Islam of France, but there will be, there already is, a France of Islam.

Before my eyes, every day, I can attest: it is not Islam that is adapting to France, it is France that is adapting to Islam. Unless the Muslims of France come to forget the Koran and to renounce both its spirit and letter, Islam will continue to impose itself on them as a norm superior to all other forms of the Common Good.

Islam cannot, will not, integrate itself; it wants to integrate the others.

There are Muslims in France. They are free to practice their religion. But it is out of the question to accord to Islam a public statute. The French Republic "does not recognize or subsidize any cult". How can you grant to one religion what you refuse others?

With Philippe de Villiers, I therefore request, Mr. Minister of the Interior and of Religions, to implement immediately the necessary actions to stop the progressive Islamization of France.

And to take without delay the following measures:

- Impose firmly respect for the laws of the Republic concerning forced marriages, polygamy, and equal rights for women.

- Dissolve immediately the French Council of the Muslim Cult that transforms Islam into a state religion

- Stop all ethnic, religious or gender-based segregation in public places. These are a new form of French racial segregation.

- Stop immediately all forms of public financing of Islam and notably the construction of mosques and the education of imams.

- Guarantee the safety of the French people, who face extremely serious situations at our national airports.

June 16-18, 1940

A website devoted to French history, Herodote, provides the material for this post. Subscription is required.

On June 16, 1940, Prime Minister Paul Reynaud turned the controls of the French government over to Philippe Petain (84 years old), the war hero of Verdun, and a military father-figure to many soldiers and veterans. When the German offensive began in the spring Reynaud tried to avert disaster by calling on Pétain to be vice-president of the Council of Ministers and on Maxime Weygand (71 years old) to be commander of the French forces, replacing Gamelin, who had proven himself incapable. Reynaud also met with Churchill and both leaders agreed not to make a separate peace or an armistice with Hitler.

However events overcame Reynaud. Both Weygand and Pétain felt that a German victory was inevitable and that an armistice was the only honorable solution, since, unlike a surrender, it would not entail total occupation of the territory or a handing over of weapons and fleets to the enemy, but rather a kind of polite agreement to stop fighting until a peace treaty could be worked out. Efforts by Churchill to merge France and England into one country failed, as those favorable to an armisitice became a majority in the new government. Reynaud, indecisive and (they say) pressured by his female companion Countess Hélène de Portes who was close to Pétain, resigned.

This was not acceptable to Interior Minister Georges Mandel or to Under-Secretary of Defense, Brigadier General Charles de Gaulle. For them this was a new type of war. The adversaries were not two peoples as in 1870 or in 1914-1918, but rather the Western democracies on the one hand and totalitarian regimes, unencumbered by any concern for fair-play and with which it was impossible to compromise, on the other (Nazi Germany, but also the communist USSR and fascist Italy).

On June 17, 1940, Philippe Pétain addressed his people on the radio and temporarily at least assuaged their fears. This is how he reassured them:

Frenchmen, having been called upon by the President of the Republic, I today assume the leadership of the government of France. Certain of the affection of our admirable army that has fought with a heroism worthy of its long military traditions against an enemy that is superior in number and in weapons, certain that by its magnificent resistance it fulfilled its duties to its allies, certain of the support of veterans that I am proud to have commanded, I give to France the gift of my person in order to alleviate her suffering.

In these painful hours, my thoughts go out to the unfortunate refugees who, in an extreme penury, are furrowing our roads. I express to them my compassion and my concern. It is with a heavy heart that I say to you today that the fighting must stop.

I spoke last night with the enemy and asked him if he is ready to seek with us, soldier to soldier, after the honorable fight, the means to put an end to the hostilities. May all Frenchmen rally to the government over which I preside during this difficult ordeal and calm their anxieties, so that they can better listen only to the faith they have in the destiny of the fatherland.

Charles de Gaulle had been sent on mission to England where he met with Churchill and planned the merger between the two countries mentioned above. When he returned to France with the good news of the merger, he was completely caught off guard by the news of Pétain's armistice. With money given to him by Reynaud, he at once returned to England and prepared to give the speech that would later become legendary. The BBC would not allow him to use their facilities on June 17; rather, he had to wait until June 18 - the anniversary of Waterloo. While Pétain's speech had reached and comforted millions, de Gaulle's address went almost unnoticed, as the wretched refugees trudged along the country roads and French soldiers struggled with conflicting orders. This official version differs from the broadcast version, and neither version contains the famous line, "France has lost the battle, but France has not lost the war", which appeared somehow on signs in London. The speech was first heard at 10:00 p.m. on June 18, 1940.

The leaders who have been at the head of the French army for many years have formed a government. This government, claiming the defeat of the French army, has met with the enemy in order to put an end to the combat.

It is true that we were overwhelmed by the strength of technical power, both on land and in the air, of the enemy. More than their numbers, it has been the tanks, the planes and the tactics of the Germans that have forced our retreat. It has been the tanks, the planes and the tactics of the Germans that took our leaders by surprise and led them to where they are today. But has the last word been said? Should we give up hope? Is the defeat definitive? No! Believe me, I am speaking knowingly and I say to you that nothing is lost for France. The same means that defeated us can one day help us achieve victory.

For France is not alone! Not alone! Not alone! She has a vast empire behind her. She can make a blockade with the British Empire that rules the seas. Like England, she can utilize without limits the immense industrial capabilities of the United States.

This war is not limited to the unfortunate territory of our own country. This war will not be decided by the battle of France. This is a world war. All the errors, all the delays, all the suffering cannot change the fact that there are, in this universe, all the means necessary to one day crush our enemies. Struck down as we are today by technical forces, we will, in the future, conquer our enemy by an even superior technical force. The fate of the world depends on it.

I, General de Gaulle, from London, call upon the French officers and soldiers who are now on British territory or who would come here, with or without their weapons; I call upon engineers and specialized workers from the weapons industry who are on British territory or who would come here, to please contact me.

Whatever happens, the flame of French resistance must not be extinguished and will not be extinguished.

Tomorrow, as today, I will speak on the radio from London.

Time For A Change

With regret I'm removing the wonderful photo of the flower that has introduced this website since early February. If I can find a way of incorporating it into the background, I will do so. So, at least for a while, Galliawatch will start with the most recent post. If I come upon something else that I like enough to keep for a while, then I may have second thoughts about all of this.

Poland - A Lone Rider?

This short article in Salon Beige is a reminder of the stranglehold the European Union is attempting (and succeeding) to impose on what used to be sovereign states. Brave Poland is resisting, and will no doubt be punished for its impertinance.

A resolution stigmatizing homophobia was passed on Thursday (June 15, 2006), by the European Parliament in Strasburg by a vote of 361 for, 161 against and 39 abstentions. The Polish vote was massively hostile to the text since, of the 43 present, 36 voted against and 6 (all socialists) voted for the resolution. The Polish resistance was not enough to kill the text that devotes a long paragraph (#4) to Poland, citing "religious tribunals such as Radio Maryja" and denouncing the Polish government's participation in the "League of Families", "whose leaders incite to hatred and violence".

Bogdan Pek, (of the Independence/Democracy party) angrily rose up against the stigmatization of his country for political purposes. The unavowed purpose of this text, supported by the environmentalists, the liberals and the socialists, according to Pek, is to pillory a country where "the right is in power". The non-aligned deputy Maciej Marian Giertych declared that the socialists "had joined up with the post-communists to create a ruckus surrounding this debate". He then added:

"In Poland, we are against the promotion of immoral attitudes".

Obviously, this will be a big problem for the majority of Euro-deputies.

Here are excerpts from the English version of the text in question. The last paragraph is about Poland. The text also refers to anti-gypsyism, a new one for me.

A. whereas racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, homophobia and anti-gypsyism are motivated by irrational reasons and are sometimes linked to social marginalisation, exclusion and unemployment, as well as by a refusal to conceive diversity in our societies as a source of richness,

B. whereas several Member States have experienced violent events and/or killings motivated by racist, xenophobic and anti-Semitic hatred, while other direct and indirect forms of racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism and homophobia persist inside and outside the EU,

C. whereas the Russian authorities have banned the march for equality and tolerance for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people planned for 27 May 2006 in Moscow in violation of the right of peaceful assembly and demonstration guaranteed by the ECHR, in a situation where political and religious authorities were involved in denigration and incited and participated in the violent events that subsequently occurred,

D. whereas political figures at European, national and regional level have a responsibility to set a good example by promoting tolerance, understanding, respect and peaceful coexistence,

E. whereas some political parties, including those in power in a number of countries or well represented at local level, have deliberately placed issues of racial, ethnic, national, religious and gay intolerance at the heart of their agenda, allowing political leaders to use language that incites racial and other forms of hatred and stokes extremism in society,

F. whereas calls for open violence of a homophobic nature have come from a member of a Polish governing party in relation to the plans to hold a gay rights march in Warsaw...

4. Is seriously concerned about the general rise in racist, xenophobic, anti-Semitic and homophobic intolerance in Poland, partly fuelled by religious platforms such as Radio Maryja, which has also been criticised by the Vatican for its anti-Semitic discourse; believes that the EU should take appropriate measures to express its concerns and notably to address the issue of the participation in the government of the League of Polish Families, whose leaders incite people to hatred and violence; reminds Poland of its commitments and obligations under the Treaties, in particular Article 6 of the EU Treaty, and the possible sanctions in the event of non-compliance; urges the Polish government in this context to reconsider the abolition of the Office of the Plenipotentiary for Equal Status; requests the Observatory on Racism and Xenophobia to conduct an inquiry into the emerging climate of racist, xenophobic and homophobic intolerance in Poland and the Commission to verify if the actions and declarations of the Polish Minister of Education are in conformity with Article 6 of the EU Treaty...

The entire text can be found here.