Message From The Vatican

Many websites posted the news that a condemnation of Islam has been issued by Monsignor Georg Gänswein, the personal secretary of Pope Benedict XVI. This is the closest the Vatican has come yet to denouncing the presence of Islam on European soil and to warning Europeans of the consequences of political correctness.

The following version of the story is from Eucharistie Miséricordieuse:

In an interview with Süddeutsche Zeitung, Mgr. Georg Gänswein warns Europe of the danger of ignoring, out of ingenuousness, the attempt to Islamize Europe.

"From my point of view, the comments on Islam made by Benedict XVI in Ratisbonne were prophetic." (...)

"The attempt to Islamize the West cannot be denied," Mgr. Georg affirmed to the magazine, "and the danger that derives from it for Europe's identity must not be ignored on the pretext of being falsely kind and understanding. Catholicism sees this and says it clearly."

In Italy it is often forgotten that the prelate has been a professor in the pontifical universities, and that his thinking faithfully reflects the ideas of Benedict XVI.

"The speech in Ratisbonne ought to aid in combating a certain ingenuousness." Monsignor Gänswein underscores that "one" Islam does not exist, nor does "an important and restraining authority for all Muslims". Grouped together under the idea of Islam, there are many currents, mutually contradictory, extending even to the extremists who base their actions on the Koran and enter the fight armed." In any case, the Holy See is addressing the problem through its analyses, and trying to maintain continuous contact and talks through the Pontifical Council for inter-religious dialogue.

During a visit by the Holy Father to his native land in September 2006, he had commented on the relationship of Islam to violence and to reason. This speech had triggered hostile reactions.

Georg Gänswein works and lives permanently beside Pope Benedict XVI. He shares with him and five other collaborators, including four Italian nuns, a large apartment at the Vatican.

We can only hope that more such declarations will follow. The Pope's stand is of vital importance, even if one is not Catholic.

Michel Serrault Dies

The much admired and versatile actor, Michel Serrault has died after a long illness. Those interested can read the NY Times article from AP:

PARIS (AP) -- French actor Michel Serrault, whose hit performance as a transvestite in the film and stage versions of "La cage aux folles" (The Birdcage) catapulted him to international stardom, has died. He was 79.

Serrault died Sunday of cancer in his home in the northwestern city of Honfleur, said his priest, the Rev. Alain Maillard de La Morandais.

Serrault appeared in more than 130 films during a career that spanned half a century. After debuting as a comic actor, Serrault became one of France's most versatile stars, playing a serial killer, a grizzled farmer, a crooked banker and accused rapist.

"I'm against those who only want to entertain," Serrault said in 2002. "I am very happy with all the roles I've played, and I take responsibility for them all."

French President Nicolas Sarkozy paid homage to Serrault's "impressive filmography," calling the actor a "monument of the world of the theater, the cinema and the television."

French Culture Minister Christine Albanel called Serrault "a greatly popular actor, capable of affecting all sorts of audiences" and a man "of true generosity."

Read the whole article here.

Though it's off the topic of France, no one who went to the movies regularly in the '50's, '60's and beyond can forget the tremendous impact of the films of Ingmar Bergman. The legendary Swedish director died at age 89. The NYT has 3 pages of biography.

Germany Asks Questions

Jean-Christophe Mounicq, a major participant in the Blue Revolution, has posted, in French, an article from the German Berliner-Zeitung expressing Germany's shock and displeasure at Nicolas Sarkozy's decision to provide Libya with a nuclear reactor of its own:

Chest puffed out, a determined look on their faces, Muammar Qadhafi and Nicolas Sarkozy engage in high level politics. France is bringing Libya back into the circle of respectable nations, helping a repentant thug to rearm, and promises him a nuclear reactor. In exchange, Libya must prevent African migrants from entering Europe and fight terrorism, Qadhafi's former specialty. Finally, the two parties delight in seeing the Libyan oil reserves open up.

But the two men see even further than that. Sarkozy is seeking allies for his projected Mediterranean Union. A concept whose objective is to reenforce the ties between Turkey and Europe, all the while refusing Turkey status as a member of the EU. Qadhafi, for his part, never stops toying with the idea of a United States of Africa, his long time dream.

Nothing is more flattering for the megalomania of Qadhafi than the perspective of playing a leading role in this new (Mediterranean Union). Is not Libya, like ancient Carthage, halfway between West and East, between North and South, at the center of the world, so to speak?

Can we trust him?

The negotiations that preceded the liberation of the Bulgarian nurses ought to impel us to even greater mistrust. Nothing forbids trade with Libya, or normalizing relations, or fostering the opening up of the country. But at this stage, nuclear reactors and weapons are not indicated merchandise - even if they are the favorite toys of self-important men.

The photo shows Bernard Kouchner, an unidentified woman, Nicolas Sarkozy, and Qadhafi at the moment of the agreement on the nuclear reactor. Kouchner has also been busy lately shaking hands with members of Hezbollah in Beirut.

Understanding Sarkozy - Off Topic

Off topic, because these thoughts are entirely subjective and not based on a text from the French websites.

My musings, subject to constant modification, on Nicolas Sarkozy, were to be appended to the preceding article on Eurafrica, but I decided to write a separate post. Trying to plummet the depths of the character of someone I don't know at all, about whom I read some articles in the press, is unquestionably not fair, but when the future of a country is at stake, it is hard to resist the temptation.

The essential question, for now, is whether he is a man of principles or an opportunist seizing upon the trends of the times.

I think I was wrong about him. I had consistently held the opinion that he would "pretend to be conservative", that he would pay lip service to certain traditions, but that he was really at bottom an opportunist, unable to manage the tests and trials confronting a world leader, having no basic principles of his own, and who would compensate for his own inadequacies through despotic and even totalitarian methods.

It seems he does have principles. They are the principles of the New Age - no borders, no barriers, no differences, equality of all men, reaching for impossible dreams, turning dreams into realities through wishful thinking. The New Age is allergic to tradition, to traditional family life, to cultural specificity, allergic to realistic discussions on race, to hierarchies of intelligence and talent, allergic to the arrogant notion of superiority of one culture over another (and yet the New Age, in its totality, is arrogantly egalitarian - so one form of arrogance replaced another).

Sarkozy is a man of his times like no other. Smitten with equality, one world dreams, unification of elements essentially disparate, mixing of cultures that can only flourish when separated, he appeals to the vague but arrogant young visionaries of the 1960's and their descendants, who rejected everything traditional and middle-class, who sought an easy-going and relaxed schooling with no sweat, who wanted top jobs and lots of money without working their way up, who effectuated an irreversible rupture with a flawed but glorious past that they hated because they had not participated in it.

He may have a streak of traditionalism in him, but has great difficulty expressing it, for to do so results in a barrage of angry criticism, which he cannot deal with.

He is much closer in nature to Bill Clinton than to Jacques Chirac, who collapsed under the weight of socialist and immigrant demands, and more or less ruled from the caboose. Sarkozy is center-stage finessing all quarrels, discrepancies and problems with broad unrealizable goals expressed in heart-felt, emotional, elementary, media-friendly language.

In fairness, I think Sarkozy is less arrogant on a personal level than Clinton was. Sarkozy's arrogance is in the transposition into universals of specific cultural values; in his refusal to see differences although these differences, like endangered species, are crying out to be protected; in his belief that France can somehow "manage" terrorists like Qadhafi. Clinton, too, believed such things, but like an adolescent he was enamored of himself more so than of any principle, while I don't think this is true of Sarkozy.

Rather than being a mere opportunist he does seem to believe in these principles, unrealizable though they may be.

Sarko has a dream. Perhaps he wants to see France first among equals?

Eurafrica

Nicolas Sarkozy, on a visit to Senegal, announced his vision of "Eurafrica", an effort to put Afro-European relations on a new post-colonial footing. In his favor, he at least acknowledged Africans' responsibility for their misery, something for which he was severely criticized by part of the African press who accused him of moralizing.

Refusing the notion of repentance, he is attempting to force Africans to take charge of their own destinies, but he still promises a Utopian vision of Europe and Africa sharing responsibilities as equals in the future development of both continents.

This is a condensation of a longer article from TF1:

"I have not come here to erase the past, for the past cannot be erased. There have been mistakes and there have been crimes." Nicolas Sarkozy passionately addressed African youth on Thursday (July 26), during a visit to Senegal, a former French colony independent since 1960. He recognized that colonization had been a "big mistake" even if Africa "had its share of responsibility for its own misfortunes," citing wars, genocide, corruption and waste.

Note: Wars, corruption, genocide and waste are major failings in a civilization, even if, on some level, they are inevitable. Europeans have been forced to expiate these sins, to repent, to flagellate themselves, to hate themselves and to denigrate their own civilization. Should not Africans be held to the same standards of atonement, in the name of equality?

Back to Sarkozy:

"There was the slave trade, there was slavery, men, women, children bought and sold like merchandise. And this was not only a crime against Africans, it was a crime against Man, a crime against humanity," acknowledged the President, who nevertheless declared that "no one can ask today's generations to expiate this crime perpetrated by past generations," and "no one can ask the sons to repent for the errors of their fathers."

Having come to Senegal to reaffirm the "profound and sincere friendship" that France feels for Africa, and to modernize relations with his African partners, the President proposed to African youth who comprise nearly half of the 900 million Africans, to "look together, beyond this rupture and this suffering. I have come to propose to you, the young people of Africa, not to ruminate over the past but to draw lessons from it and to look to the future."

Then he exposed his vision of a "common strategy in the globalization process" between France and Africa, "a great common destiny" baptized Eurafrica. To the skeptics he stressed that "in no way does it mean pushing aside sub-Saharan Africa; on the contrary this union must be the pivot of Eurafrica, the first stage of the greater dream of peace and prosperity that European and Africans are capable of conceiving together.

He concluded by saying that France wants to fight with Europe, Africa and "all those who, in the world, want to change globalization. What France wants is co-development, shared development with Africa. What Africa wants, what France wants, is cooperation, association, a partnership between Nations equal in rights and duties."

Sarkozy is not the inventor of the term "Eurafrica". A quick Google led me to this article (in French) that discusses the concept as defined by its creator, one Paolo d'Agostino Orsini, who, early in the 20th century, spoke of a geographical fusion of the continents, but also of a fusion of interests and values, and of a spiritual entente of the races, where Mussolini's Italy would be a dominant humanizing and civilizing force. This obviously goes back to pre-WWII days, when (according to the article) the conquest of Ethiopia was seen as an advancement of Italian civilization, America was seen as wrapped up in Asian problems, and Britain was considered a traitor to Europe with schemes to turn it into America's Trojan Horse.

Interestingly, the "dream" of an alliance goes back a long time. The only difference is that then, the European cultures were seen to be dominant, impelled by a sense of their own worth to spread civilization to Africa - what we call colonization.

Photo of Presidents Sarkozy and Abdoulaye Wade in Dakar, Senegal, from Yahoo.

Choosing French Identity

Brice Hortefeux, Minister of Immigration and National Identity, is attempting to justify the new policy of "selective immigration." An article in La-Croix reports on his declarations which, I must admit, I had trouble deciphering. He seems to be saying that "heritage" is no longer the only component of national identity, but service (in the form of skills) is what counts now.

First he defends the idea of national identity against accusations of "hostility towards immigrants":

"Promoting our identity in no way indicates hostility towards immigrants... Far from regarding immigration as a problem in itself, we think that it is the reference to identity that gives meaning to immigration and permits integration." The Ministry of Immigration "allows us to weave anew the fabric of the ties between nation and immigration that had been pulled apart." (...)

"Being French henceforth is a choice rather than a condition," affirms this close collaborator of Nicolas Sarkozy who advocates "selective immigration" based on work and study in areas defined by France, instead of "immigration forced upon France", i.e., family reunification, which accounts for most influxes.

"Identity is based above all on what each person desires to bring to his country more so than on what he inherits," affirms Mr. Hortefeux. (...)

"We are going to bring into balance the portion of economic immigration with the portion of family reunification. In so doing we will be sending a message to those who want to become Frenchmen, as well as to those who are here already: have a project (for France) first, heritage is secondary," adds Brice Hortefeux who, in early July, proposed legislation that the lobbies denounced as an affront to the right to live with one's family and as a further restriction on family reunification.

"The duty to memory is no long sufficient," concludes the minister. "There is also the duty to serve."

Though he is addressing the immigrants, his message is really meant for ethnic Frenchmen. They are being told that the original meaning of "Frenchman" no longer exists. It has been supplanted by a notion drawn from the world of employment: France is hiring. If you are an African or a Maghrebin with marketable skills, France needs YOU! You will benefit from French national identity handed to you with your first paycheck. It's as simple as that. No more of this blood and heritage nonsense.

If that is his meaning he has cleverly institutionalized immigration as a means of putting to rest forever the claims of the obsolete "Gaulois" - those outdated ethnic Frenchmen who wrongly believe that national identity is rooted in race first, if not exclusively.

If France is hiring skilled workers why doesn't Brice Hortefeux entice back to the homeland the 3 or 4 million very capable Frenchmen who have emigrated across the globe?

This is what happens when a basic traditional value such as national identity is "highjacked" by progressives. They deform its meaning and purpose, making it more difficult for future leaders to return to the original meaning.

Testing the Law

Fabrice Robert, founder of the Bloc Identitaire, a nationalist group with branches in many regions of France, has taken a stand on the L'Oréal scandal by writing two letters, one to Louis Schweitzer, president of HALDE, the so-called "high authority in the fight against discrimination, etc..." a government sponsored agency that hunts down those accused of unfair hiring practices, and one to the CEO of L'Oréal Jean-Paul Agon.

Both letters, posted at Novopress, barely conceal a bitter irony. HALDE has never been known to come to the aid of ethnic Frenchmen turned down for jobs on the basis of their race. And I doubt that Agon will lose sleep over fear of being sued.

To Schweitzer he says:

Mr. Agon makes known in terms admitting of no ambiguity that he practices systematic discrimination based on ethnic or national origin, in the hiring of his workers. That is a clear violation of the existing laws.

(...) we would like to know what your organization intends to do about this case.

No reaction on your part could imply that HALDE never intervenes in cases of discrimination against ethnic Frenchmen.

To the CEO of L'Oréal he says:

(...) This is an obvious violation of the laws against racism and discrimination. Perhaps you feel that your position or the financial weight of your company place you above these laws of the nation, or, perhaps you are right, since, for the moment, no lobby or special administrative authority in the fight against racism has shown interest in this case. Likewise, no prosecutor, no judge, seems interested in suing you as they have the power and duty to do. But perhaps judges don't read Le Monde.

(...) This is why Bloc Identitaire has decided to launch a campaign informing (the public) of your policy of discrimination in hiring. Targeted especially will be business school students. And any ethnic Frenchman who is turned down by your company after sending a CV or being interviewed, will have the legitimate right to question the reasons for your refusal. We will also ask our lawyers to study the best way to file a complaint against you in French or European courts.

There are laws to punish Frenchmen suspected of racism. It is high time to apply them equally against those who practice racism and discrimination against the French - so-called ethnic Frenchmen in your case. You can count on us.

The Trial In Libya

I've added a comment to the post on the Bulgarian nurses, but felt it was worthwhile to post a link to a Wikipedia article on the investigation and trial that resulted in the nurses being held captive for 8 years. A French doctor - Luc Montagnier, one of the discoverers of the HIV virus - was a key figure in the trial, along with Vittorio Colizzi. The article shows how the investigators were able to trace the virus back to the child who was first infected, and how the epidemic spread from there. The initial infection occurred before the Bulgarian nurses arrived. There were , in fact, several reported cases before 1998, but no measures were taken to protect against further contaminations. The article also describes the nurses' accounts of the torture they endured, especially during the first year.

The children seem to be spread around. Many are being treated in European hospitals - I presume this is at Europe's expense.

I've been away for almost two days. I hope to resume normal posting this weekend.

The Latest Addition

Nicolas Sarkozy will soon run out of socialists to draw into his ever expanding rogues gallery of left-wing luminaries. With unerring accuracy he has managed to bring into his court some of the most troubling, troublesome, atheistic, anti-French, anti-western individuals ever assembled under one roof since the days of the KGB. Out of all the gifted and patriotic men who still live in France, he chooses those who will serve the cause of French decline, culturally and morally, if not economically.

I'm sure I'm exaggerating, and that these people all have some good qualities. The point is that he is mocking his own constituents with astounding vigor.

Le Salon Beige reports:

Openness to the Left continues unabated. Jacques Attali has agreed to head the commission on obstacles to growth. President Nicolas Sarkozy had announced the formation of this commission on June 20 and had ordered that it "evaluate all the obstacles to growth", notably the "piling up of regulations". This commission is to issue a report towards the end of November, after debating, in particular, the issue of Sunday as a work day, as a possible prelude to proposed legislation.

Economist and writer Attali was the special adviser to former President Mitterand from 1981 to 1990. A graduate of the ENA (National School of Administration), he founded the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and since 1998 has headed PlaNet Finance.

Le Salon Beige adds this addendum:

It is legitimate to be concerned about this appointment, because on the list of obstacles to growth one could find extended life expectancy. Jacques Attali has declared:

"I believe that in the very logic of the industrial system in which we find ourselves, the lengthening of life expectancy is no longer an objective desired by the logic of power. Once past 60-65 years of age, man lives longer than he produces and he costs society dearly. In truth, from society's point of view, it is preferable that the human machine stop suddenly rather than deteriorate progressively.

One could accept the idea of longer life expectancy on the condition that the elderly be made solvent, thus creating a market. For my part, as a socialist, I am objectively against longer life spans because it is a lure, a false problem. Euthanasia will be one of the essential instruments of future societies in any case."

Note: Mr. Attali, born in Algeria in 1943, is 64. Isn't it time for his human machinery to stop???

Besides all that, Wikipedia informs us of his unreliability and his penchant for distorting facts and rewriting history:

His book Verbatim was severely criticized by historians, political analysts and journalists, as well as by Françoise Carle, former collaborator of François Mitterand and Pierre Joxe, former minister. They fault him with apocryphal remarks, use of unverifiable documents, a lack of seriousness of purpose and even the use of notes taken by others.

Elie Wiesel and his publisher Odile Jacob accused Mr. Attali of using notes taken for the book of interviews between Weisel and Mitterand. Jack Lang Robert Badinter, Pierre Mauroy and Laurent Fabius (all prominent socialists) affirmed that in the first volume Jacques Attali had deformed their statements.

François Mitterand himself declared that his former adviser had "easy quotation marks", and that "he is perhaps more concerned about the number of readers than about historical truth."

Xavier Darcos - Update

Here is a follow-up, from Le Salon Beige, to a earlier post on Minister of Education Xavier Darcos. It will be recalled that he had initially banned the showing of a video depicting an abortion to middle and high school students. Under pressure from education unions and movie lobbies he rescinded the ban in order to reexamine the issue. Now his final decision has been made:

The Rumanian film 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days, winner of the Palme d'Or at the recent Cannes Film Festival, "will be allowed to be shown" in middle and high schools, announced the Ministry of National Education yesterday. The Ministry followed the advice of the National Film Ratings Commission "which proposes a distribution with a warning, but to the entire public," according to the Ministry's communiqué.

The film had been awarded the National Education Prize. Xavier Darcos had at first decided not to have the movie edited onto DVD for pedagogic use, judging it to be "potentially shocking and traumatic for pupils between 11 and 18." Faced with pressure, he reversed his decision, allowing himself some time for reconsideration. Today, he has definitively reversed course.

Big Deal For Libya

The French websites and the world press have been full of commentary on the release of the five Bulgarian nurses and one Palestinian doctor released from prison in Libya. If you are not familiar with the story, here are the opening paragraphs of an account from the International Herald Tribune:

SOFIA: After eight and a half years in captivity in Libya, five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor stepped off France's presidential plane here to freedom Tuesday morning, welcomed by tearful family members, Bulgaria's top officials and a presidential pardon.

They were accompanied by the two women who reached the final breakthrough with the Libyan leader, Muammar el-Qaddafi - France's first lady, Cécilia Sarkozy, and the European Union's foreign affairs commissioner, Benita Ferrero-Waldner.

Sarkozy, who has said nothing publicly about her role in the negotiations, waved to journalists as she descended from the plane, putting her hand over her heart and mouthing "Merci."

"I still can't believe that I am standing on Bulgarian soil," Kristiana Valcheva, 48, one of the five nurses, told state Channel 1 television as the medical workers embraced their families. "I want my life to return to what it was before all this happened."

The medical workers' liberation brings to an end a bizarre and tortuous episode in Libya's recent history that tarnished its standing in the world. The conclusion opens the way to full political and economic rapprochement for Libya in the international community.

Despite proclamations of innocence and despite contrary evidence, the six medical workers had been convicted and condemned to death, accused of having deliberately infected hundreds of Libyan children with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.

Along the way, Qaddafi accused the nurses of acting on the orders of the CIA and Israel's intelligence agency, Mossad, calling their actions part of a plot to destabilize the Libyan state. The workers were allegedly tortured to extract confessions.

Bulgaria consistently said the medical workers were not guilty. Then, suddenly, days after their sentences were commuted to life imprisonment last week, they were allowed to leave Libya.

Their liberation is the result of an intense, three-year diplomatic process that the European Union began, that Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain and German officials moved forward and that the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, and Sarkozy's wife clinched. In the end, the rapport that Cécilia Sarkozy established with Qaddafi and his wife and daughter helped propel the outcome.

Read the rest of the article here.

While everyone is relieved that the nurses have been freed, the cost to France and to the EU will be prohibitive. In exchange for the release of the nurses millions will be paid for the treatment of the over 400 persons infected with the HIV virus.

According to Le Salon Beige the amount of 461 million dollars has been paid by the Qadhafi Foundation to the families of the victims. Qadhafi intends to get this money back through contributions from Qatar, the European Commission, the member states of the EU, including France, and the private sector. Between 2005 and 2007 Brussels poured 2.5 million euros into the renovation of the hospital in Benghazi where the contaminations occurred.

Furthermore Libya receives:

(...) greater access in the European markets for its exports, as well as technical and financial aid in the fields of archeology and restoration, equipment for the protection of Libyan borders, scholarships and training for Libyan students in European universities and Schengen visas for residents of the Great Jamahiriya.

Note: The visas allow freedom of movement in Europe. The Great Socialist Libyan People's Arab Jamahiriya is the official name of Libya.

But the most important result of this quid pro quo is that France will furnish Libya with a nuclear reactor. This information came to me a few hours ago via e-mail from Via-Resistancia, and as of now I cannot provide a link:

The shame of Sarkozy!

France will furnish Qadhafi's Libya with a nuclear reactor, ignoring the security of western Europe, ignoring human rights that are trampled upon daily by the regime in Tripoli and its true nature that resembles the regime in Tehran...

Normalization of relations is very promising for French businesses (oil, gas, nuclear, banking) in a country that is a major producer of hydrocarbons and that is opening its doors to investors in an attempt to catch up after a decade of embargo resulting from its implication in a series of anti-western attacks, most notably against an American airplane in Lockerbie (270 deaths in 1988) and a French plane over Niger (170 deaths in 1989).

Besides a military-industrial accord, Nicolas Sarkozy intends as well to initiate an "all points cooperation, in all domains" with Libya, a "strategic player" in the Mediterranean basin, announced his spokesman David Martinon on Wednesday.

Note: The spelling of Qadhafi's name varies greatly. I used that of the US State Department. The British often use Gaddafi. In the IHT article they chose Qaddafi.

Update July 26, 2:11 p.m. - Thanks to the reader that provided this link to the article on the nuclear reactor.

Killer Found

In another crime-related story the killer of Jean-Jacques Chenadec has been arrested. Le Chenadec was a victim of the November 2005 riots when he and a friend stepped out of their apartment to put out a trash can fire. Both were beaten but Le Chenadec succumbed to his injuries three days later.

His death was regarded as collateral damage by the authorities who insisted that no deaths had occurred during the rioting, except for the two "youths", Bouna and Zyed, who had walked into an electrical transformer and been killed, triggering the almost three-week long spree of violence, arson and vandalism.

One year after his death, when his killer had not been found, the patriots vented their anger at a government who paid homage to the two youths, but seemed oblivious to the fate of Mr. Le Chenadec. I reported on that in a post called "A Double Standard".

A blog called Amor Patriae tells of the story of how the police actually found the killer (a reminder that the French government referred to the immigrants as "Chances Pour la France" or "France's Good Fortune"):

If Kamel K., the first suspect arrested by the police, was found innocent of the murder of Jean-Jacques Le Chenadec, a victim of the ethnic riots at the end of 2005, his arrest loosened some tongues in the ghetto where many bringers of "good fortune" live, including the real killer. Having remained totally silent until then, they deemed the death of a Frenchman far less important than the freedom of one of their brothers. An example of citizenship.

And it was in fact the injustice of the first arrest, and only that, that induced some of these bringers of "good fortune" to speak out, preferring to reveal the identity of a killer to watching one of their own brought down for a crime he didn't commit. Thus, Kamel K. was freed to the detriment of Salah A. (...)

Some will see in the sound of the first name of this low-life criminal and his act nothing more than a coincidence. Enlightened ones, on the other hand, won't fail to establish the proper connection and to face the future accordingly.

Vannes Burns

Terrorism reigns in the city of Vannes in western France. The local press, Ouest-France, reports on a wave of arsons that has been sweeping the city for months. The following is a condensation of their article:

He put his nose out the door, smelled smoke, put on his robe and left his apartment without panicking. Along with his neighbors, this retiree from Vannes was taken to city hall at 5 o'clock in the morning. Meanwhile, in the basement of the apartment building, firemen were trying to put out a blaze that completely or partially destroyed 4 cars.

A tenant had called the fire department. "I heard very loud explosions." Another added, "(It was) the noise of glass bursting from the heat."

These explosions were identical to those heard the night before at another residence when 60 people had to be evacuated to a gymnasium. Six cars were destroyed by fire. In this incident even more harm was done: water lines and electricity were seriously damaged.

The police have very few clues. "It's always the same modus operandi - fire starts in the front part of the car. And always in luxury buildings." Another similarity is that in the underground parking lots there is no sign of breaking in where the doors operate by remote control. "With the number of passes that are floating around..." The investigators are appealing to witnesses to come forth.

This series of fires could create a psychosis among the inhabitants of Vannes. In the last three months, at least 8 fires of criminal origin involved either residences or cars parked on the street. Last Friday, the firemen came three times: first, fires in trash cans, then two cars burned, and finally the door of an apartment late in the afternoon. This last fire could be a settling of accounts.

The month of May had also been active with fires in the parking lot of the veterinary services, in the basement of an apartment building and in trash cans.

Saturday morning, Mayor François Goulard assured everyone that special measures would be taken by the police and that supplementary patrols would be recruited.

If you click here you'll see a photo of the port of Vannes in the Morbihan Gulf, with the sea dotted by countless sailing vessels. The official website of the port lists ten reasons for moving to Vannes, but arson is not one of them. We do learn, though, that in 2004, Vannes was listed as the 9th safest city in France.

Like so many places in France and Europe, it looks like an enchanting place to live, in the right circumstances. Just the love of their beautiful land should prompt Frenchmen to fight for it.

"A Profound Mystification"

During the presidential campaign, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, formerly of the UMP party, ran as a solitary candidate on a platform of national sovereignty, but soon renounced his candidacy for lack of support. A long-time advocate of sovereignty, he was an out-spoken opponent of the European Constitution during the 2005 referendum. His most recent blog entry focuses on the symbolism behind the presence of the European flag in the French National Assembly:

The debate over the European flag next to the French flag in the National Assembly, behind the leader of the Assembly, is wholly symbolic of the mental confusion that prevails today.

Since Nicolas Sarkozy's election, in a sort of post-electoral jubilation, the defenders of supranational Europe who were defeated on May 29, 2005 are getting their revenge against the people by multiplying the symbolic gestures that are supposed to show the conversion of the French people to the most naïve "Europeism" after, and I quote, "an error in 2005".

They are totally mistaken about the meaning of Nicolas Sarkozy's election. For if it is true that he had announced a simplified treaty adopted by the Parliament (that was my reason for becoming a presidential candidate), the future President of the Republic was careful not to say that this simplified treaty would be a carbon copy of the Constitution.

On the contrary, in his debate with Ségolène Royal, he had insisted, and I quote, "the Constitution is dead".

Moreover, his whole campaign was built around the theme of a return to political will and French identity as responses to the trends of the Central European Bank and the World Trade Organization. Now that the election is over, we see unfortunately the wide gulf between his words and his acts.

The truth is that, today, those who were defeated in 2005 by the French people are doing all they can to manipulate and lock in public opinion, preparing it, in a way, to accept with resignation the future treaty which in reality liquidates French democratic sovereignty.

Yes, with that Constitution, when European decisions are made, we will move from a unanimity of States to a qualified majority on key issues (trade negotiations, immigration, public services, justice and police cooperation, etc...)

Thus, the French people, through its representatives, deputies and senators, would definitively no longer make French law if a majority in the European Council of Ministers decided otherwise.

To mask this fundamental fact, which is equivalent to a parliamentary and democratic suicide, they lead us to believe that it is the only way to build Europe.

Hence, these symbolic acts such as the parade of European armies on July 14, the European flag at Quai d'Orsay, and now, the last straw, the European flag in the National Assembly. (...) But the National Assembly is the one place where it would have no practical meaning, since by right it is we, the deputies, who represent the French nation. Only the tricolor can be present.

Unless, and it must be said frankly, the National Assembly becomes a regional assembly and we are obliged to pledge allegiance to a new outside sovereignty: that of a new Nation, Europe.

Behind this matter of the flag, there is a profound mystification. This fall will be decisive. Let us enjoy our well-deserved vacation and prepare for the political fight in the autumn.

The photo comes from a web page devoted to his biography.

A First For Cambridgeshire

Today, many news items that would normally be considered as insignificant suddenly take on greater significance because of the current situation in Islamized Europe and Britain. One such is this article from the Cambridge News:

A SPECIAL constable who is the first officer in Cambridgeshire to wear a Muslim hijab on duty is receiving a warm welcome on the beat.

Rukshana Begum, 23, who was featured in the News after deciding to wear the headscarf, said the reaction from the public has been "confidence-boosting".

She said: "I have had so many members of the general public saying it's really good to see someone doing this and representing their group. People are also saying good luck and I hope it goes well.

"When I went on duty without the hijab I got ordinary looks, but now people recognise me from the newspaper and have congratulated me. When they say 'all the best' and 'good luck' it boosts your confidence."

Read the rest here:

Turkish Elections

The legislative elections in Turkey yesterday resulted in an overwhelming victory for Prime Minister Erdogan's AK party, considered by many to be "moderate Islamist". Catholic writer and political traditionalist Bernard Antony issued this communiqué posted at Yves Daoudal's website. He refers to the party as "Islamist", but has no illusions as to the true nature of its intentions.

The crushing electoral victory of the Islamist party in power in Turkey, and of its allies, proves, as if it were necessary, how those who express their confidence in the secular claims of this country within the European Union are turning their desires into reality.

Disregarding its name (the party of Justice and Development), disregarding what it is, disregarding what it does, our media, probably obeying some misinformed order, call it a party of "moderate Islamists"! As if Islamism could only have the face of Bin Laden!

In fact, Mr. Erdogan's party is merely prudent. Over time, it has eaten away little by little at the power of Kemalist secularism which is the official doctrine of the army. The Turkish army, like that of Iran at the time of the Shah, is more and more penetrated by Koranic ideology. Furthermore this army has always been fundamentally anti-Christian, and Turkey, secular or Muslim, has never initiated the slightest adumbration of acceptance of the recognition of the near-total genocide of Armenians and other Christian communities.

The so-called moderate Islamist party, in reality, does not tolerate any religious freedom other than the tolerance, for diplomatic purposes, of a tiny residue of Christians, who are under constant threat.

Nor does it tolerate any utterance in favor of some degree of repentance for the genocide. Those who express such a notion are either sentenced to heavy penalties (and we know what prisons in Turkey and Islamic countries in general are like), or assassinated, and the assassins benefit from great impunity.

Finally, Turkey tolerates no regional autonomy. Therefore, it would constitute the most populous, most militant, most demographically expansionist entity for Muslims within the European Union.

If, on this point at least, Nicolas Sarkozy kept his promise of rupture with Chirac's policies and the Israeli-American pressure for integration of Turkey, we would have something to rejoice about.

America's support of Turkey in the EU is incomprehensible, except when viewed from the perspective of bad ideas arising from the minds of incompetent, poorly educated policy makers, ideas such as hostility toward Europe, hostility toward the traditional nations with specific cultural identities, unrealistic faith in a secular Turkey and in moderate Islam, multi-culturalism, pro-Islamic feelings, etc...

But the alliances formed between Israel and Turkey, though perhaps naive on the part of Israel, started out, at any rate, as an attempt on the part of the Jewish State to remove itself from isolation and to form some kind of friendly relations with a non-Arab country in the region. These alliances go back to the 1950's and have been controversial from the start. How this alliance will fare as Turkey becomes less secular remains to be seen.

No attempt to discuss this complex issue can be made here, but for those interested in reading a long (13 pages, plus many footnotes) on the topic of Israel and Turkey, written in 1995, try this report by Jacob Abadi. It also provides a link to the PDF version, if you prefer. I have only skimmed it so far, but it seems readable and lucid.

For those who read French, Le Figaro published a report on the Turkish elections entitled "The Islamists triumphantly re-elected in Ankara". The article skirts the truth that Bernard Antony faces head on, by saying that now Turkey will have to reconcile the unreconcilable, i.e., secularism and religion.

L'Oréal Embraces Diversity

Many websites have noted the interview in Le Monde with Jean-Paul Agon, Chief Executive Officer of cosmetics giant L'Oréal. Interest centered particularly on one statement he made about hiring practices. Here is a brief excerpt:

Le Monde: Less than one week after your affiliated company, Garnier, was convicted of racial discrimination, L'Oréal is establishing a "diversity and performance" chair, along with Air France and Deloitte in partnership with Essec. Is that a coincidence?

Note: Deloitte is one of the world's largest auditing firms. Essec, where the new chair has been established, stands for "school of advanced studies in economics and business".

J-P Agon: We did not wait for the verdict of the appeals court to become active on this issue. For a long time diversity has been at the heart of our concerns. This conviction is profoundly unjust and incomprehensible because nothing in the records incriminates Garnier. For us, diversity is not a trendy topic, but a basic reality. This chair, the first of its kind in a school of advanced learning, has been discussed since September 2006. We are going to recruit about 20 students in September and the classes begin in January 2008.

Le Monde: What does L'Oréal do with regard to diversity and is it measurable?

J-P Agon: In France we employ more than 40 nationalities. In 2006, we recruited 423 cadres and about 100 of them were of foreign origin. The law forbids us to count, either by name or place of residency, the number of people hired in the name of diversity. But today, when we meet a job-seeker with a foreign first name, he has a better chance of being recruited than one with a French first name.

Le Monde: So you're practicing affirmative action?

J-P Agon: Yes, in a way. And we accept our responsibility for it. As soon as one category of the population has more difficulty attaining certain positions, it becomes necessary to be pro-active.

For those interested in L'Oréal, this is the opening paragraph from Wikipedia:

The L'Oréal Group, headquartered in the Paris suburb of Clichy, France, is the world's largest cosmetics and beauty company. L'Oréal has developed activities in the field of cosmetics, concentrating on hair color, skin care, sun protection, make-up, perfumes and hair care. L'Oréal is active in the dermatological and pharmaceutical fields. L'Oréal is also the top nanotechnology patent-holder in the United States. The CEO of L'Oreal is Jean-Paul Agon.

L'Oréal is a listed company, but the founder's daughter Liliane Bettencourt, who is one of the richest people in the world, and the Swiss food company Nestlé each control over a quarter of the shares and voting rights.

In addition to Garnier, L'Oréal owns Lancôme, Helena Rubenstein, Giorgio Armani Perfumes, Ralph Lauren, Paloma Picasso, and The Body Shop among many others.

Thanks to the reader who sent the article.

Creating Disorder

Two days ago, Le Figaro published the reactions of Huguette Chomski Magnis, president of the Movement for Peace and against Terrorism, to the meeting between Hezbollah and the French Foreign Ministry last Saturday:

(...) What has been the reaction? Yes, a rally took place last Sunday, initiated by the UEJF (Union of Jewish Students), a rally that we supported. Still, we cannot help but be surprised at the low citizen turnout. Is protesting against the arrival of Hezbollah a concern only for the families of victims? Are the Jews of France the only ones interested in the fate of the three Israeli soldiers taken captive a year ago?

This indifference of the public in turn fosters the creation of a diplomacy that bears the stamp of real politik: we have to live with Hezbollah, as the Lebanese themselves do. We are not helping them to live without it. (...)

What is France's position with regard to Hezbollah? The contradictory statements of our politicians are perplexing. A closer look at them leads to some questions: how can an organization that is being asked to "renounce its terrorist activities" not be terrorist? How can one call an organization terrorist, without wishing to see its name on the European list of
terrorist organizations? How can one have as an objective that Hezbollah become again what it has never been - a "Lebanese party that plays the game of Lebanese parliamentary democracy"?

The decision to include Hezbollah and Amal (a Lebanese shiite party that sympathizes with Hezbollah) in the meeting at La Celle-Saint-Cloud is grave for several reasons: it discredits even more the UN since it provides proof that one can remain a player, invited by France for talks, and still refuse to bend to the terms established by a Security Council resolution.

It confirms a state of political disorder in which international law and humanitarian law are trampled on with impunity. Implicitly it sends a dangerous message to all terrorist organizations: terrorism pays.

On the regional level, it hinders the Lebanese who would like to be free from the terrible grips of Hezbollah. And it strengthens objectively a ferment of war between Lebanon and Israel.

You could, in the extreme, allow that French diplomacy used the invitation as a "carrot": "if you free the two soldiers, then..." or "if you let the Red Cross visit them, then...", because trying to save lives justifies many compromises.

There was nothing of the sort. Hezbollah was invited without having to answer to the slightest demand. And the confusion remains.

Reminder: Gilad Shalit, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev
have been held captive since the summer of 2006. Gilad Shalit is somewhere in Gaza; the two others are in the hands of Hezbollah. No definitive news of the condition of the men has ever been received, though there have been reports of a tape in which Shalit describes his health as deteriorating.

I don't know how realistic the "real politik" of Quai d'Orsay is, but it is consistent with its long-standing policy of friendship with Islamic countries. This policy was discussed in greater detail here.

Sarko's Style Viewed From The NYT

A reader just sent me this link to a New York Times article on Sarkozy's clean sweep of the Socialist Party. The author, Elaine Sciolino, reports his strategy as being one aimed at disabling the Left:

Some Socialists have called Mr. Sarkozy’s strategy a devious campaign to cripple the left in France, and have accused their fellow party members of political treason.

“It’s incredible how a certain number of Socialist leaders, because of their thoughtlessness or their media-narcissism, the obsession to talk about themselves, have jumped head first in the traps laid by Mr. Sarkozy,” Jean Glavany, a Socialist deputy and former minister, said last week. He accused Mr. Sarkozy of “seeking only one thing — to divide us in order to weaken us.”

Even François Bayrou, the failed centrist presidential candidate who originally called on the left and the right to work together, has accused Mr. Sarkozy of acting “like a piranha in a goldfish bowl.”

Read the whole article here - it's not long and quite readable.

You might also take a look at this blog entry by Marty Peretz, writing for the New Republic, a left-leaning publication, but not extreme (as far as I know). The New Republic is an old journal - my parents, who were liberals, swore by it. Eventually, when I grew up I swore at it. But some of their articles are good. Here, Peretz agrees that Sarko is a welcome change for France (and America).

The question is: are American journalists seeing Sarko through rose-colored glasses?

Behind Closed Doors

The French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner welcomed Hezbollah to Paris on Saturday, July 14 - a fitting date to choose for meeting with terrorists!

The meeting took place behind closed doors at La Celle-Saint-Cloud in the department of Yvelines, outside Paris.

Here are excerpts from an article in Nouvel Observateur:

The representatives of the Lebanese political factions met on Saturday, July 14, for two days of "informal" exchange at the invitation of France. Quai d'Orsay said explicitly that this summit behind closed doors had opened in the presence of all the invited participants, 2 representatives from 14 factions, including Hezbollah, which has nonetheless been named by President Sarkozy as a terrorist organization. The French Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner, and several diplomats will host the discussions, with no agenda or order of the day.

For Paris, this "good will mission" is intended to encourage inter-Lebanese dialogue and to help the country emerge from the crisis, even if these efforts encounter a certain skepticism in part of the Lebanese ruling class.

According to Denis Simonneau, assistant spokesman for Quai d'Orsay, France is "at the service of the different Lebanese factions in hopes of organizing an informal meeting (where they can) come together, talk, and break the ice, without any particular expectation."

The idea, insists a diplomatic source, is "not to solve the problems of Lebanon," but to seat people "around a table."

Hezbollah leaders in Beirut made known on Tuesday (July 10) that the pro-Iranian shiite party would participate in the week-end meeting, despite the fact that Nicolas Sarkozy called the organization "terrorist". Nicolas Sarkozy made this remark on Monday when he met with the families of the three Israeli soldiers kidnapped by armed groups, two of them by Hezbollah, last summer.

Sarkozy's remark was surprising considering that France had invited the Party of God to the meeting in La Celle-Saint-Cloud. Quai d'Orsay explained on Tuesday that the presence of Hezbollah, as a player in the drama of Lebanese politics, "posed no problem." Nicolas Sarkozy "completed" his original remark by saying that his objective was that the movement "renounce terrorist actions and become once again a political party like any other, and that it play the game of Lebanese parliamentary democracy."

Note: An article in Le Figaro responds to this meeting. I will try to post excerpts later today.

The photo shows Bernard Kouchner welcoming Nawaf El Moussaoui, Hezbollah's chargé for international relations.

A Method In His Madness?

Writer Olivier Pichon questions Nicolas Sarkozy's strategy of openness. He begins by pointing out that "cohabitation", between an executive Right and a Left with a parliamentary majority, has already been tried (in 1986-88, 1993-95, 1997-2002) with unfortunate results:

We thought we were through with that, and here's Sarkozy inventing a cohabitation with a minority opposition. You ask yourself: is the UMP joining the opposition? The UMP base is beginning to balk. Lionel Luca, who does not mince words, declared,"soon we'll find that a ministerial position has been given to Besancenot." (...)

Note: Besancenot was a presidential candidate of the extreme-Left.

What bug has bitten the new president? For if it is understandable to entice a few leftists, here and there, in a display of adroitness, to pursue the policy on such a scale is no longer a tactic, it is a vice. Of course you can delight in the idea that he is taking advantage of his adversary's weaknesses and divisions. But he is also stating implicitly that there is no difference between the Right and the Left. Is it reasonable to devitalize the Socialist Party only to revitalize the Left? In the long run, aren't you helping the socialists get rid of some of their dinosaurs, since the road to the cemetery passes through Elysée Palace?

We find ourselves in the following situation: either the president is skillfully banking on neutralizing the adversary so that he can carry out the reforms that France so ardently needs; or he is enthralled by the dead star of the Left that he is irremediably pulling into his orbit.

Since he wants all of France to be represented, why not pick his ministers from the parties of Philippe de Villiers or Jean-Marie Le Pen? (...)

To reform the institutions, the president gathers an ad hoc commission under the leadership of Balladur and invites Jack Lang, paying homage to "his sense of the common good." That Prince of Ambiguity, lawyer though he be, is best known for his knowledge of graffiti and other products of the vile sub-culture; until now his sense of the common good had escaped us. (...)

If words still have any meaning, what does it mean to govern for a few days after having drawn up a treaty that removes from France the essential powers that the president claims to exercise in her name? A cohabitation of the third type, but a presidential power of second order?

Must it be repeated that this is no longer the time to please others, but that it is the time to govern insofar as it is possible?

Photo of Jack Lang with his new boss from L'Internaute.

Routine Events

The night of July 13-14 resulted in the usual statistics on burned cars. This report is from 20 Minutes:

Two hundred sixty-six vehicles were burned and 100 people arrested in France on the night of July 13-14, it was announced on Saturday by the National Police.

By 6:00 a.m. Saturday morning, the same source indicated, 266 vehicles were torched (versus 254 the same night in 2006), 195 of them in the region of Ile-de-France.

In all, 100 persons were questioned, 89 of them in Ile-de-France, of whom 46 were arrested, 43 in Ile-de-France.

At the same time, four police officers were slightly injured.

The acts committed entailed primarily the throwing of pyrotechnical devices, hurled deliberately at the police or the public.

Among the most serious incidents was that of a little girl 6 years old, wounded by a firecracker that had been thrown in the direction of the city officials of Romainville (Seine-Saint-Denis), the same source indicated. She was taken to the hospital for treatment.

First police reports issued in the middle of the night indicated that only "about 10 burned cars and 20 arrests" had been reported in Seine-Saint-Denis.

Whither the MPF?

Talk of a union of patriots is once again in the news, according to Le Salon Beige. This time it involves what may be an ultimatum to Philippe de Villiers:

Nicolas Bay, political action delegate for the MNR (National Republican Movement, headed by Bruno Mégret) was interviewed by Synthèse Nationale, on the future of the national Right:

"I believe that the union of national forces could easily take place during the municipal elections. (...) But this union must not be reduced to a tête-à-tête between the Front National and the MNR. On the contrary, the national party activists must get into the habit of working together, all the while respecting the differences among them. Many leaders and activists of the MPF (Movement for France, headed by Philippe de Villiers) can participate in this drive for a union, as can other organizations such as Alsace First, Christian Solidarity, Nissa Rebela, etc... The MPF was indeed the right-wing satellite first of the RPR, then of UMP.

Note: The RPR was the party of Chirac that merged with Sarkozy's UMP. Today they just call it UMP.

This is the first time I have seen an objective observer state that the MPF was really an arm of the UMP. Philippe de Villiers always denied it.

Today, because of the positions taken by Philippe de Villiers during the presidential campaign, he could decide to take his place entirely outside of the political system. Many party leaders and activists of the MPF desire a clear and definitive rupture with the false Right, even if it means losing the general council of Vendée and the two MPF deputies who were recently elected in this department with the support of the UMP.

During the municipal elections, the MPF will be up against the wall with two possible routes: they can nominate their own candidates under their own banner, or they can place the names on the UMP ticket, and renounce once and for all all political independence.

Special Dispensations

According to Observatoire de l'Islamisation, Muslims who marry in France benefit from special privileges. In order to understand the article you have to know that, by French law, a couple must first get married at city hall, before marrying in a religious ceremony. The French State only recognizes the civil ceremony. A reminder also that religious matters are handled by the Interior Ministry:

Many Muslims do not stand before his honor the mayor before marrying religiously. Such a thing, though punishable by law, has become so common that a deputy of the UMP party addressed the question to the Interior Ministry. Etienne Mourut, a deputy from the Gard formulated his question thus: "in most towns, the civil services that provide certificates of a civil marriage, when requested by the couple wishing to proceed to a religious ceremony, are almost never solicited by couples of the Muslim religion."

The law specifies that "any minister in charge of religions who repeatedly permits religious marriages without having received the marriage certificate from officers of the civil services, will be punished with 6 months in prison and a fine of 7500 euros."

In its reply, the Ministry of the Interior, after referring to that very law, tried to defuse a scandal by naively affirming that in Islam marriage is not what it is in Christianity, therefore the law does not apply to Muslims:

"It needs to be pointed out that in Islam marriage is not a sacrament comparable to that of other religions and does not require a religious celebration. It is a civil contract, carried out in a private ceremony."

It's true that Muslim marriages are most often performed at home, but the fact remains that they are prepared with an imam and that they lead to the same result as a Christian marriage: the union between two beings before God. The ceremonies are so private that Muslim marriages are often followed by a cortege through the city, with horns blowing and Algerian and Moroccan flags waving.

It's nice to know that Islam is in a position, on French soil, to produce civil contracts recognized by the State.

Meanwhile, one more free ride for the Muslims.

Jerry Hadley - Off Topic

I'm sorry to announce that another American opera singer has died from a self-inflicted wound. Tenor Jerry Hadley was 55. For those interested turn to the NY Times or the Chicago Tribune.