New Look for the Eiffel Tower

As France takes over the presidency of the European Union for six months even the Eiffel Tower is commissioned into battle. From Wikio:

To mark the opening of the French presidency of the European Union, the Eiffel Tower will be donning the colors of Europe every evening starting June 30. Minister of Foreign and European Affairs Bernard Kouchner will inaugurate this event at 11:00 p.m., on the Terrace of Human Rights, at Trocadéro, in the presence of 26 ambassadors to Paris of EU countries. The Eiffel Tower will be lit in blue with the 12 stars of Europe shining on the North side of the Tower, facing the Seine.

I hope the Irish are smiling.

H/T: zazie.

Note: On the site of the old Trocadéro Palace, facing the Eiffel Tower, is an open area, like a large patio, called a "parvis" or terrace. In 1985 Mitterand dedicated the terrace to Human Rights. It is the scene of many demonstrations and gatherings. Decades ago it was merely a convenient spot for tourists to take pictures of the Tower, and to get a good view of the city.

Near-Disaster in Carcassonne

If you follow the news about France in English-language sources, you know all about the military accident in Carcassonne, involving the 3rd Marine Infantry Parachute Regiment, that resulted in 17 persons being injured, including a 3-year-old child. If you don't know, here are a few excerpts from an IHT report. After describing how optimistically the whole event started it goes on:

(...) And then it became tragically real.

During the last of six military show exercises at the Laperrine military barracks in southern France, one soldier used live ammunition and wounded 17 people, most of them members of families of the military staff, said Colonel Philippe Tanguy, a spokesman for the Defense Ministry.

Four of the victims, including a 3-year-old child, were hurt critically, though by Monday afternoon their lives appeared to be no longer in danger.

"It is incomprehensible how this could have happened," Tanguy said. "The question everyone is asking is: How could he have had real ammunition on him during an exercise?"

The shooter, a 28-year-old sergeant whose identity had not been disclosed, was arrested and was being questioned Monday. (...)

(...) mysteriously, one of the eight magazines in his military vest contained live cartridges rather than the blanks that were carried by the other 10 soldiers taking part in the exercise, Tanguy said. About 5.15 p.m., rather than firing single shots or salvos of three, he used a third option on his Famas assault rifle as is common for effect in such military show exercises: bullets spraying from the barrel until the ammunition is exhausted.

Witnesses told of surprise and then horror as fellow bystanders were hit amid the deafening shots. (...)

Generally, defense experts said, live cartridges and blanks are difficult to mix up. The former are green and weigh about 80 grams, or nearly three ounces, more than the metallic-colored blanks. (...)

Read more

In America we are no strangers to mishaps at air shows, nor can we ever forget the tragedies of our space program that could have been prevented. In this case, what shocked everyone was the presence of live ammunition, not so much the fact that there had been an accident. There was speculation at once of foul play, but that remains to be seen.

An article from Yahoo gives Sarkozy's reaction:

"At the very least there were errors of supervision" and "extremely serious negligence", declared Nicolas Sarkozy Monday evening on France 3. "The State prosecutor said there was no criminal intent, I take careful note of that."

"It all points to a frightening absence of supervisory controls in the organization of these open house events, and there will inevitably be consequences. I know the importance of this regiment that is so esteemed by the people of Carcassonne, I know the devotion of these soldiers, but there has been grave negligence."

"It is completely abnormal for a soldier to have in his possession live ammunition. It is completely abnormal that he confuse them with blanks. It is most unlikely that, in the simulation of hostage taking, the public is used as a target," continued the president. "I am stunned."

Note: His comment is interesting. It means EITHER that shooting (with blanks) at the public should never have been a scheduled event, which stands to reason since blanks can do harm, OR that the soldier deliberately (or under some influence) turned on the public and started shooting.

Both Defense and Justice have opened investigations.

Report Card Time

If you are suffering from insomnia and in the mood to read a 128-page English version of a report, in pdf format, from the European Union, click here.

This is the first annual report from the European Agency for Fundamental Rights, based in Vienna, and dedicated to the prosecution of the crime of discrimination. These are the fine folks who keep track of the accusations, litigation, trials, judgments and punishments meted out to those wretched souls who can't seem to straighten up and fly right in matters of diversity. Taking each of the 27 countries of the Union, the report admonishes their laxness, or praises their efforts.

Since I have more urgent matters to attend to than to read such a report, I'm providing here a synopsis from the hard-working Yves Daoudal:

In its first annual report, the European Agency for Fundamental Rights, based in Vienna with all its acronyms on display, thunders forth about the racist, anti-Semitic, or extreme-right-wing-generated acts of violence, and acts of discrimination, that are on the rise in the EU and that have not been adequately punished, EXCEPT in the United Kingdom... (Note: my emphasis)

The Agency seems to be particularly interested in discriminatory hiring practices based on nationality, in other words, national preference, or what is left of it, a notion condemned above all others and that must be firmly abolished.

And so, the Agency is pleased that "the United Kingdom possesses the most efficient system of anti-discrimination legislation in all the EU," and that with "95 punishments in 2006 - 2007, it has meted out more punishments than all the member States put together." (This is not unrelated to the galoping dhimmitude we are witnessing in Britain.)

On the other hand, the Agency chokes with fury at what it finds in Ireland and Belgium: "discriminatory job offers declaring that foreigners need not apply."

And it is intolerable that in 12 countries of the EU no punishments have been applied, even though law suits have been initiated. These miserable countries are the Czech Republic, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Greece, Spain, Cyprus, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal and Slovenia.

France is one of those countries that "has implemented a relatively efficient legislation," but where "convictions are still rare compared to the UK."

Here is an excerpt from the report itself about HALDE, the government agency created under Jacques Chirac to track and punish discrimination:

In France, in 2006 and 2007, the High Authority against Discrimination and for Equality (HALDE) gained momentum, as can be seen by the number of complaints received. In 2006, the HALDE received 4,058 complaints: employment was the most important field of complaints (42.87%) and origin was the most important reason for being discriminated (35.04%). In 2007, the number of received complaints increased: the HALDE registered 6,222 complaints, i.e. an increase of 53%. (...) The HALDE has received 11,689 complaints since its creation in 2005. Moreover, an opinion poll conducted by CAS Institute shows that the French people are more and more concerned by the question of discrimination: this demonstrates that communication and information campaigns conducted by the HALDE had an impact on the French public. Indeed, the HALDE developed a strong strategy of communication and it is very visible in the public scene (...)

Note: In other words, the more complaints HALDE receives, the happier the Agency is.

In another part of the report focusing on France, the case of Fanny Truchelut is cited as a case of discrimination. I reported several times on this case which involved a bed-and-breakfast owner who turned away Muslim women wearing headscarves on grounds of laïcité. She insisted she only forbade the headscarves in the public areas of the inn, not in the private quarters. The court ruled against her. The last I heard she was appealing the ruling.

Simply Democratic

A communiqué from Jean-Marie Le Pen tells of Sarkozy's latest democratic gesture:

Nicolas Sarkozy would like the president of France-Television - the five national television channels, to be appointed by the Chief Executive, i.e., by none other than himself. "A simple democratic system," he calls it. Simple, indeed it is, and it has the advantage for the viewer of eliminating all ambiguity: they will be clearly channels of government propaganda. Democratic also. In the meaning the word had in the Soviet Union naturally.

And it is at the moment when the morale of heads of households is at an all-time low, and when the Court of Auditors ("Cour des Comptes") sends out a warning on the financial situation in France, that Nicolas Sarkozy makes this announcement.

Government control of the media together with the collapse of the economy: such is the common fate of dictatorships.

Diana West's Journal

Diana West is one of the best journalists following the transformations in America and Europe, from both political and cultural perspectives. A regular contributor to the Washington Times, she also has her own blog that the excerpts below were drawn from. Recently, she returned from a two-week fact-finding tour of several European countries, during which she attempted to assay the process of Islamization, a process everyone knows is taking place though only some will admit it. She wanted to see if the reality were as bad as some were saying; only a first-hand look can provide the kind of affirmation she was seeking. She will be posting regular reports on her trip. In an article dated June 26, she spoke of the differences that divide Europe and America and the ancient bonds that hold them together:

(...) Such differences have helped turn Europe into the European Union, a nation-destroying behemoth both driven and empowered by the infantilizing machinery of the welfare state. Indeed, so shockingly totalitarian is the orientation of the EU, it strikes me that President Bush's misguided effort to democratize the Islamic Middle East might well have been better aimed at liberating the hostage peoples of the Brussels-dominated supra-state.

That said, it's crucial to recognize the precious common ground between the United States and Europe. While on a different plane from those fallow battlefields of the Ardennes, it is also sacred soil. I refer to our shared cultural and historical progressions as civilizations whose ideals are founded on liberty. Such liberty is once again under threat and from an ideological enemy -- the ideology of Islam, which, as spread by a massive influx of Islamic immigration over the past several decades, promises, as historians and writers from Bat Ye'or to Mark Steyn have copiously explained, to transform all of Europe into an Islamic continent. (...)

Read more.

And in a post dated June 28, she relates her conversation with a naïve British MEP who just did not want to believe those terrible rumors about Islam:

My MEP told me he knows a perfectly lovely man who is Muslim--prays five times a day and everything--so, well then. At one point in the conversation, he rather abuptly said that if my reading of Islam's intrinsic incompatibility with Western-style liberty was correct, Europe had only two choices: Conversion to Islam or deportation of Muslims. Rather than face up to the hard-eyed task of shoring up the bulwarks against Islamic law, for instance, it was, for him, presumbaly, far better--far easier--to believe my reading of jihad and dhimmitude was just plain wrong.

Perfectly in keeping with these beliefs, he expressed doubt about the existence of de facto Islamic-ruled "no-go zones" in his own Britain--despite the writings on the subject by the Bishop of Rochester. He also told me, when asked, that he had never, in all of his years in Brussels, visited the neighborhood of Molenbeek, an Islamic enclave a very short drive from the EU environs in which we sat. (...)

Read more and view her slide show on Molenbeek.

H/T: Lawrence Auster and Steen

My Name Is Hussein - Off Topic

Some American imbeciles are so smitten with Barack Hussein Obama, they're changing their middle name to match his. Read the IHT report.

Francs Accepted

An article in the IHT describes the beautiful town of Collobrières in Southern France, where the people still conduct business in French francs:

"We lost something with the franc," said (Christine) Amrane, the mayor since 2001. "We lost an identity. We moved very quickly into Europe, maybe too quickly." (...)

The autumn chestnut festival is on the minds of the people here more than political protest. Paris is 860 kilometers, or 535 miles, away, and Brussels even farther.

But the European Union is a source of confusion and annoyance, both abstract and distant. The French were not allowed to vote in a referendum on the complicated Lisbon Treaty to reorganize the workings of the enlarged union of 27 nations. France, like most countries, thought it safer to ratify the treaty in Parliament, where the government holds a majority.

But the Irish voted, and voted no. And there's a lot of sympathy for them here.

France is thought to be the beating heart of the European vision, but the last time the French voted on an earlier version of Lisbon, in 2005, they voted no - and polls say they would reject it in its current form. (...)

The Irish no has also been a major blow to France, which takes over the six-month presidency of the European Union on Tuesday.

President Nicolas Sarkozy has been full of ideas on how to push Europe along, as another way to restore some of his lost credibility here. But the Irish rejection means that France will spend much of its time - really 4.5 months, with the long European summer vacation - trying to manage Europe's internal crisis.

Read more.

"Devoir de Réserve"

Recently I did two posts on Nicolas Sarkozy's defense proposals, published in a White Paper on June 17. The document met with criticism from many quarters, including a group of generals who hid behind the collective nickname "Surcouf," and who wrote an editorial for Le Figaro, dated June 19, in which they expressed their anger at what they saw as incompetence in the decision-making process.

A brief in Le Figaro dated June 24 reported that the DPSD, a Defense Ministry agency dealing with matters of military security, was attempting to trace the names of the officers who participated in "Surcouf."

Thus the issue of "devoir de réserve", or the duty to remain silent, has been raised with regard to these generals who spoke out, but at the same time the question of a double standard is posited: are you allowed to speak if you say the right thing, but "duty-bound" to keep negative opinions to yourself?

This article, dated June 27, is from Secret Defense, a blog associated with Libération:

The interview yesterday morning on RTL radio with Philippe Juvin (...) aroused feelings within the military. While the DPSD is attempting to find out the names of those who hid behind the nickname Surcouf, and the Minister of Defense on RMC radio yesterday morning reminded the military of their duty to remain silent, the remarks of this elected official of the UMP imply that there is a double standard.

Philippe Juvin is in fact a reservist currently serving for two months as medical officer in a military hospital for French forces in Afghanistan. A professor of medicine and Chief of Emergency Services in Beaujon Hospital in Clichy, Philippe Juvin is also the UMP mayor of La Garenne-Colombes and vice-president of the general council of the department of Hauts-de-Seine. He is close to Nicolas Sarkozy, who wrote him a personal message last week, it was learned on RTL.

It is entirely to his credit that, as an elected official of the Republic, he chose to serve in the Reserves, something that is very rare. But his words left a bitter taste in the mouths of active military personnel who heard him on the radio. "The White Paper was very very well-received by the military (...) The President of the Republic put an end to the crazy idea of having a large infantry," explained Juvin, who denounced nonetheless the "very low level of materiel" of the armed forces.

Now, when a reservist serves a tour of duty, in an overseas operation for example, he is a military man like any other. Even though they received orders not to give their opinion - which ran the risk of being negative - on the White Paper and on the elimination of 54,000 positions contained therein, an active officer close to the President describes, during prime time, what a great document it is. So in the army you can speak out, on the condition that you applaud.

Note: There are many comments to this article.

French readers can find more conflicting opinions in the comment sections of Le Salon Beige, here and here. While some feel that it is an officer's duty to obey, others feel that he is also duty-bound to evaluate the worth of orders he receives. Some feel Sarkozy knows who the officers are, others pray the names are never divulged...

It might be worth remembering that Sarkozy's priorities are to intelligence, and he plans to improve and modernize the information-gathering services. However he also plans to reduce the combat-ready forces, with the result that the French military will know more, but may be unable to act upon what they know. This was one of the complaints - that the country was being placed in even greater danger, despite improved intelligence. One could then argue that the generals perceiving this danger have every right to voice an opinion.

The photo from Flickr, of a UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter flying near Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan, is perhaps not relevant to the article, but I found it too awe-inspiring to pass up.

EU Losing Support

From Observatoire de l'Europe, a website linked at Philippe de Villiers' MPF comes this encouraging set of statistics:

According to a poll taken by TNS-Sofres and made public yesterday (June 24), less than half of the French people believe that belonging to the European Union is a "good thing" for their country. Two days earlier, an IFOP poll revealed that 53% of them would have voted "no" to the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon, if their leaders had deigned to ask their opinion in a referendum. After a referendum campaign, it is likely that number would have risen to 55%. In his logic of avoiding the people, Nicolas Sarkozy was, therefore, right. Moreover, in the same TNS-Sofres poll, 66% of those questioned believe globalization threatens jobs, and 60% feel the European Union does not protect them. Brice Teinturier, CEO of TNS-Sofres explains these results as being due to the "democracy deficit" and the "absence of a mobilizing effort" on the part of the EU. Nice euphemisms. The Vice-President of the European Commission and Responsible for Justice, Freedom and Security, Jacques Barrot, who has still not recovered from "these-people-who-vote-wrong", is now grumbling that "if the French do not react, they will go from one disappointment to another". Is that to say that Mr. Barrot's Europe can be even more disappointing than it already is?

More recent polls from Le Salon Beige:

Only 30% of the French regard the European Union as a "source of hope", while 33% see in it a "source of fear", according to a poll conducted for Ouest France Dimanche. Another 37% of those questioned see neither hope nor fear in the construction of Europe.

Regarding the Irish no vote, two weeks ago, to the Treaty of Lisbon, 41% of the French feel it is now necessary to "abandon that document" vs 25% who would like to continue with just those countries that have ratified it. Only 14% call for a re-vote in Ireland.

Belgium Unravelling

The crisis in Belgium is once again on the front pages of The Brussels Journal. Here are three excerpts from an article by Paul Belien:

Belgium is slowly unravelling, like a Yugoslavia in slow motion. The supranational country is in a situation of political limbo since the elections of June 10, 2007. Belgium, which is often described as a miniature version of the European Union with which it shares its capital, is made up of Dutch-speaking Flanders in the north and French-speaking Wallonia in the south. Politicians in Wallonia are preparing for the moment when Flanders secedes from Belgium. Some Flemings fear that French-speaking extremists are planning to take over the Flemish towns surrounding Brussels by force. (...)

Both Flemings and Walloons are now preparing for the post-Belgium age . Since Brussels is geographically an enclave within Flanders, Walloon politicians are demanding a territorial corridor linking Brussels to Wallonia so as to ensure that, if Belgium falls apart, Brussels and Wallonia can form a connected “Wallobrux” union. The corridor, a piece of land 2.5 kms wide, stretches from Brussels to Waterloo (map). (...)

Meanwhile, there are persistent rumours that the health of King Albert II, the 74-year old monarch of the Belgians, is deteriorating. The Belgian royal family has always allied itself with the French-speaking minority in the country. Albert’s likely successor, Crown Prince Philippe, however, is an even more outspoken enemy of Flemish independence than his father. In November 2004, during a visit to China, the Crown Prince told the Belgian press that people who are opposed to Belgium and favour Flemish independence “will have to deal with me. Make no mistake: if necessary I can be tough.”

Read the whole article.

Another Rape

Thanks to Steen for the tip on this latest rape in Belgium:

We now learn that a second tragedy took place a few days ago in the very same station. “A young woman was attacked by five men,” confirms the Brussels prosecutor’s office.

“The five men forced her to leave the station and go with them. The young woman was forcibly taken to an apartment where she was abused by her captors.” Given the fact that the young woman is in shock, the investigation is only just beginning. “It is difficult to listen to. The case is still in the information-gathering stage, waiting until we can re-interview the young woman.”

Read more at Gates of Vienna.

Islam in the Workplace

A long article published in the business journal Les Echos, and quoted by Joachim Véliocas, provides a glimpse into the Islamization process taking place in industry and businesses throughout France. Companies are being called upon to please everybody without sacrificing the esprit de corps necessary for a successful operation. What happened at L'Oréal is becoming commonplace, though most refuse to acknowledge the implications for French society of this transformation:

Young women come to work veiled. Factories provide prayer rooms. Cafeterias offer halal menus. Like the rest of society, the business world is affected by the return of the religious element into French life and the affirmation of the Muslim community. According to a study, conducted in April by IFOP (French Institute of Public Opinion), in which 393 directors of human resources were questioned, 26% of businesses believe that worker demands linked to religious practices are increasing. In Ile-de-France, that figure rises to 37%. Wearing the veil, prayer time, dietary requirements, the practicing Muslim wage-earner aspires to a professional life without renouncing his faith, and is no longer shy about saying so. It's an understatement to say that the topic, a delicate one if not a taboo, makes managers uncomfortable. Countless businesses, contacted by Les Echos, refused to answer questions. For directors of human resources the issue is all the more delicate because they cannot go against the diversity requirement so vaunted by their companies. It is no longer possible to hide behind the principle of laïcité and sweep away any request connected to a religious practice. The time has come to look for a more subtle balance.

A very delicate task. "Everything depends on the situation, the person, his behavior and the restrictions imposed by his job. You can only go on a case by case basis," says Thibault Lanxade, CEO of Aqoba, a marketing agency. In his preceding employment as network manager at Shell, he found himself setting up prayer rooms to avoid having the workers congregate for prayer in the garage of a service station. "It was more practical, more respectful of their religion and also less dangerous," he sums up. During Ramadan, Vinci, like other companies in the BTP sector (construction), adapted, if need be, the work schedules of its employees. (...) "Before, we had a high absentee rate and more accidents than usual, the workers being physically weakened during this period. It was decided therefore to create special work hours: very early in the morning in order to work just after eating, or late in the evening after breaking the fast," explains Hélène Louçano-Jeugnet, ex-director of human resources in a construction firm. (...) A number of companies also offer special days off for religious holidays not celebrated in France, Eïd-al-Kebir for example. Out of generosity... or resignation. "Many workers wouldn't show up anyway," explains a director of human resources in a major outlet. To get around this problem the ANDRH (Association of Directors of Human Resources) now asks, in the name of diversity that two or three Catholic holidays be reduced in importance so that workers can take off or not, as they choose. Thus, a Muslim could take off for Eïd but come to work on All Saints Day.

The veil remains the most sensitive issue. At L'Oréal, a young veiled woman, with a diploma from a "grande école" (specialized school of higher learning), has just been given a highly coveted post. Despite some internal grumbling, management held firm. "Our hiring policy is based solely on ability. This woman had the qualifications and we hired her. The veil must not be considered as a distinctive sign and it was not taken into account in our decision," explains Jean-Claude Le Grand, director of diversity. This point of view is defended by Claude Bébéar, founder of an association that promotes diversity in the business world: "A company cannot, without reason, ban the wearing of the veil. The real question is: does the person work well or not, is the job getting done or not?" (...)

Even more troubling is the fact that religion can be the pretext for what is clearly problem behavior. Some examples: a young butcher's assistant who refuses to sell pork meat to the customers; an airport worker who refuses to push a pallet containing bottles of alcohol; workers who refuse to use the same refrigerator as their colleagues because their meat is "impure". In such cases, many managers are paralyzed, out of fear of being accused of racism. And out of a misunderstanding of Islam.

The article goes on to tell of the compromises and concessions, the fixing of limits and boundaries, the need to discuss openly the issues, etc... But in the end, whatever they do, management has adopted the point of view that discrimination must be eliminated.

This line in the article caught my eye:

Legally a company cannot impose laïcité on its salaried employees.

A reminder that the cherished law separating Church and State does not apply to the private sector. While a government functionary cannot wear religious symbols, workers in the private sphere can. And yet, don't many businesses and industries receive government funds, however minimal, which would force compliance with government policies? To put it differently, if "diversity" is a government policy being imposed on everyone, why is not laïcité also?

What purpose does laïcité serve against Islam?

Correction

On the advice of a French reader, I have made a change in the translation of the words of Le Conservateur, quoted in my recent post on a rape in the Brussels train station. Originally, I took the words "boucher-charcutier" literally to mean "butcher, grocer..." (My translation was a bit loose anyway since "charcutier" is really a "pork-butcher.") But he points out that in French today a "boucher" or a "charcutier" refers to someone who glares at women as if they were pieces of meat. While I only saw a reference to sinister shop-keepers, it is really a reference to potential rapists and murderers. Apologies for my ignorance. But I'm glad to have learned the current nuance associated with the expression. And it fits in perfectly with the context of the story.

"We Live In Harmony With Other Religions..."

My previous post dealt with the rapid naturalization of Moroccan Mohamed Moussaoui, the new president of the CFCM, (French Council of the Muslim Faith). In the following interview conducted by Le Figaro, Moussaoui outlines his thoughts on Islam in France:

- Does the CFCM still have a role to play?

- The difficulties are real. (Note: He is referring to the internal disputes.) But we would be wrong to condemn the CFCM too quickly. It's barely five years old! The Council must take on concrete issues of religion. We lack everything: mosques, financing, but especially human cadres. That explains in part why the different components of the CFCM rely on their countries of origin. We don't have the means to be independent. Morocco introduced a special chapter on France in the training of religious leaders. It's a transitory solution to make up for the lack of imams, until French Islam is more solidly constructed.

- A marriage annulled because the bride was not a virgin, and a gym forbidden to males: Is Islam responsible?

- These people are confusing custom with religion. Chastity is recommended for the man and the woman but it is not a condition for a Muslim marriage. A man loves a woman as she is, virgin or not. Men and women together is not a problem in itself. It depends on how people behave. The imams will have to do the job of pedagogues in the education of believers, so that the practices of the home country can be separated from the religious dogma. The CFCM must become involved in the training of imams within the context of French life.

- Can the CFCM promote a more modern Islam?

- The CFCM does not have a theological mission. We will not create a theology for the Islam of France. I hold to the following principle: in one's private life dress and food habits can be maintained. Collectively, French law applies to everybody. We respect the law forbidding visible religious symbols at school. But we will see to it that this ban on headscarves does not spread to universities, municipal buildings and the workplace.

Note: More than one Figaro reader caught the contradiction in the above comment: If French law applies to everybody, that has to include Muslims wearing headscarves in municipal buildings, etc...

- A young Jew was assaulted on Saturday. Should the CFCM get involved in matters of anti-Semitism?

- This violence is of concern to us, as it is to other Frenchmen. Not just Muslims. We live in harmony with other religions. Isolated cases of anti-Semitism by Muslims must not lead to generalizations. The statistics on the perpetrators of anti-Semitic acts have demonstrated nothing.

Note: The court ruling that annulled the marriage of a Muslim couple on grounds the bride was not a virgin has been revoked on government orders. The couple are therefore still officially married. An appeal has been filed.

The five attackers of the Jewish boy in the 19th arrondissement of Paris have been released for lack of evidence.

New Leadership At the CFCM

My previous post mentioned the recent election for president of the CFCM, the French Council of the Muslim Faith. This organization was created by Nicolas Sarkozy when he was still Minister of the Interior and is meant to act as the primary authority on religious questions or disputes between the Muslim community and the host country. Since its inception it has known internal quarrels and divisions, the election being only the latest. However, whoever leads the CFCM, it remains a powerful channel for the infiltration of Islam and the spread of Islamic law in France.

The winner of the election was Mohamed Messaoui. Joachim Véliocas of Islamisation reports on what he calls the "farce" of the CFCM:

Mohamed Messaoui, professor of mathematics, 44 years old, of Moroccan nationality, president of the Rally of French Muslims (...) has been propelled to the leadership of the antinomic French Council of the Muslim Faith. In an attempt to mask the absurdity of the name of a group such as this, composed of Turkish, Algerian and Moroccan federations, Mohamed Messaoui will become a naturalized French citizen instantly, in this emergency situation, thanks to the French Republic, reports Le Monde of June 23. The move is rather clumsy, but nervous politicians dare not raise their voices against this fraud, thanks to the intellectual terrorism of ideological "anti-racism".

The new special ambassador of Mohammed's commandments will keep his Moroccan nationality and remain a subject of King Mohammed VI, in accordance with the laws of the Sharifian Kingdom... and with French laws that permit the absurd double nationality.

In Morocco the constitution forbids Christians to be naturalized... does anyone dare remember this?

This naturalization, one of the 140,000 cases per year, is a grotesque administrative hypocrisy. If the Ministry of the Interior wanted to show the French that these foreigners are completely at home in France, they could not do any better than this.

Note: In the French text the expression "chez nous, chez eux" is used. In America we use the Spanish version: "mi casa es su casa". My home is yours.

The new strong man of Islamization has just announced his first measure: he will appeal to an Institute that trains Moroccan imams to educate the imams of France.

Véliocas closes with the warning that the type of Islam taught in Morocco - Malekite fundamentalism - is cause for concern.

Visas and Nuclear Energy

Prime Minister François Fillon was in Algeria on Saturday (June 21) to assure the Algerian government that France will issue more visas to Algerian nationals wishing to work or study in France, and that the Algerian community in France will receive fair treatment and representation. This article is from Google:

"We cannot imagine economic, cultural, educational and other types of relations without taking into account the human exchanges and the need for a greater ease of travel and movement between the two countries," said Prime Minister Abdelaziz Belkhadem to his French counterpart François Fillon, according to the translation into French of his words distributed to the press.

Underscoring the fact that a great number of Algerians are present in France, Mr. Belkhadem felt that "the various types of exchanges between Algeria and France cannot take on full meaning if they are amputated from their human dimension."

Note: What does he mean by "human dimension"? He can only mean that more Algerians should be allowed to go to France.

"I am sure that you share this concern with me (...) and that we will work together to expand the advances that have already been made in this area over the last two years."

The article points out that France now grants 170,000 visas to Algerians per year, compared to 57,000 in 1997, that Paris has re-opened consulates in Annaba and Oran and that the issuing of visas is gradually being moved back to Algeria from Nantes, in western France.

However, an article in Le Monde, presents the statistics on visas a bit differently:

(...) contrary to what Fillon affirmed to the press in Algiers, the number of visas is not "constantly increasing" but diminishing. From 270,000 visas issued in 2001 to Algerian nationals, the number has fallen to 150,000 in 2007.

Note: If we combine the two sets of statistics we arrive at this result: visas INCREASED from a low of 57,000 in 1997, but DECREASED from a high of 270,000 in 2001. At any rate, we can say that today roughly 150,000 - 170,000 visas are issued to Algerians.

Belkhadem also declared on Saturday that "Algeria is following attentively all developments relative to the progress of the Islam of France." Algiers "hopes that the Algerian community - the largest component of the Muslim community in France - obtains fair and equitable representation in all organizations dedicated to the Muslim faith in France."

Note: This remark refers to a recent turbulent election within the CFCM (French Council of the Muslim Faith), a government organization that is supposed to act as an arbiter in all questions and controversies relating to Islam of France. The out-going president was Dalil Boubakeur, grand mufti of the Paris Mosque. Elections for a new president made headlines as the Moroccan faction warred with the Algerian faction for supremacy. It turns out that the Moroccan RMF (Rally of French Muslims) defeated the Algerian Federation of the Grand Mosque of Paris, which boycotted the voting. See my next post.

The article in Le Monde, quoted above, also discusses two agreements that were signed during Fillon's visit:

In Algiers, (Fillon) signed two major contracts, one for civilian uses of nuclear energy, a contract initiated by Nicolas Sarkozy during his visit in December 2007, and the other for military cooperation. With the signing of these two documents, "our two countries have sealed a true guarantee ("brevet") of long-term confidence," said a delighted French Prime Minister.

The military agreement, that Fillon called "historic", opens the way to future "industrial cooperation in the field of armaments" he said. Algiers is seriously considering the purchase of military helicopters as well as four frigates, two of which would be built in Algeria.

H/T: Islamisation

Europe Intimidated

At Covenant Zone, Charles keeps up not only with events in France, but in Belgium also. He has a substantial article, with numerous links, on a serious outbreak of violence in Anderlecht that began last month with repercussions going on still.

He also has a post relevant to the Islamization of France: a Muslim demands the removal of a crucifix from a French hospital.

"We Reject Integration..."

Browsing through the archives of The Brussels Journal I came upon this article by Paul Belien written during the French riots of 2005. It was during this violence that the world became acutely aware of the disaster of Muslim immigration into France, and everybody learned that "youths" or "young persons" was code for immigrant thugs and vandals. It's worth re-reading. An excerpt:

(...) West Europeans cannot blame the Muslim “youths” for looking at the world the way they do. Europe willingly opened the door to the Muslims, not just by allowing large-scale immigration on an unprecedented level, but also by encouraging the newcomers to retain their culture. Several million Muslim immigrants allowed in at a speed and scale that was unique in history. As Bat Ye’or wrote, “even in the course of the European colonization, the emigration of Europeans to the colonies took place at an infinitely slower pace. The number of European colonists, including their descendants, even after a maximum of one or two centuries, was incomparably lower than that of present-day Muslim immigrants in each of the countries of Europe after only three decades.”

In the “Resolution of Strasbourg,” passed unanimously by the general assembly of the Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation on June 7-8, 1975, more than 200 Members of Parliament from Western European countries, representing all shades of the political spectrum (except the far right), unanimously agreed to allow Arab immigrants to bring their culture and religion to Europe, to promote it and spread it. The parliamentarians stressed “the contribution that the European countries can still expect from Arab culture, notably in the area of human values” and asked the European governments “to accord the greatest priority to spreading Arab culture in Europe.” Today the forests of satellite dishes on the apartment blocks in the suburbs of Western European cities link the immigrants to the culture of their countries of origin, whose television programmes they watch day after day.

Dyab Abou Jahjah, the young and charismatic Brussels-based leader of the Arab European League, rejects assimilation and demands segregated schools and self-governing, Arab-speaking ghettos. “We reject integration when it leads to assimilation,” Jahjah says: “I don’t believe in a host country. We are at home here and whatever we consider our culture to be also belongs to our chosen country. I’m in my country, not the country of the [Westerners].” (...)

Preserving Subsidiarity

I liked this essay by Anne Cognac, writing at Bernard Antony's blog during his absence, on the meaning of the Irish vote and how it stands in contradistinction to the EU's total lack of a spiritual dimension:

The Irish "no" at least will have had the merit of forcing people to reflect on the meaning of this vote. The commentaries are innumerable.

But who has realized that it is in reality one more warning
from the peoples of Europe to our autistic leaders?

The threats of Valéry Giscard d'Estaing to Ireland, his disdain for the people and his fundamentally anti-Christian conception of European institutions enlightens us - but we were already aware of it - as to the true face of the European Union, that is not to be confused with the true Europe that we love: "A democracy without values is easily transformed into a declared or hidden totalitarianism, as history has shown." (John-Paul II, Centesimus Annus)

In reality, behind the denial of democracy there lies hidden an attack on the principle of subsidiarity (1), according to which the higher echelon must not do what the lower echelon can and must do. This principle is advocated tirelessly by the Catholic Church because it is the only guarantee of integral respect for the dignity of persons, peoples and States.

The technocratic methods of our ruling elite and their intellectual and moral relativism run counter to any truly human conception of politics: the disconnection from the real - all ideologies being intrinsically perverse in that they are disconnected from the real - signals the clear and obstinate refusal of the Incarnation. On one hand, the real, the true democracy, which (...) is "the regime that consults the people on topics within its competence" (2), with, at the highest level, the Holy Trinity, summit of the Irish Constitution...

On the other, the "values" of the European Union, Christian ideas run amok, hence frighteningly destructive of human beings, of the nature of each people, of the sovereign States, and of true freedom. We must choose!

(1) According to an EU website called Europa Glossary, subsidiarity is defined thus:

The principle of subsidiarity is defined in Article 5 of the Treaty establishing the European Community. It is intended to ensure that decisions are taken as closely as possible to the citizen and that constant checks are made as to whether action at Community level is justified in the light of the possibilities available at national, regional or local level. Specifically, it is the principle whereby the Union does not take action (except in the areas which fall within its exclusive competence) unless it is more effective than action taken at national, regional or local level. It is closely bound up with the principles of proportionality and necessity, which require that any action by the Union should not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaty.

(2) The quote is from Jacques Trémolet in the June 18 edition of the journal Présent, a Catholic publication.


In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred,
We, the people of Éire,
Humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, Who sustained our fathers through centuries of trial,
Gratefully remembering their heroic and unremitting struggle to regain the rightful independence of our Nation,
And seeking to promote the common good, with due observance of Prudence, Justice and Charity, so that the dignity and freedom of the individual may be assured, true social order attained, the unity of our country restored, and concord established with other nations, Do hereby adopt, enact, and give to ourselves this Constitution.

Preamble of the Irish Constitution

FYI here are a few of the "Fundamental Rights" provided by the Constitution:

Prohibition of abortion: Prohibited by Article 40.3, except in cases in which there is a threat to the life of the mother.

Freedom of speech: Guaranteed by Article 40.6.1. However, this may not be used to undermine "public order or morality or the authority of the State". Furthermore, the constitution explicitly requires that the publication of "blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter" be a criminal offence.

Family and home life: Under Article 41 the state promises to "protect the family" and its "imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law". Under the same article the state must ensure economic circumstances do not oblige a mother to work outside of the home. The State shall ensure that a mother need not leave her place in the home through economic necessity.

Education: Article 42 guarantees parents the right to determine how their children shall be educated, provided a minimum standard is met. Under the same article the state must provide for free primary level education. Currently Irish law also guarantees free second and third level education.

Source: Wikipedia

Rioting At the Champ-de-Mars

Friday evening, between five and seven thousand high school seniors were assembled on the lawns of the Champ-de-Mars, at the foot of the Eiffel Tower, to celebrate the end of the battery of exams they are required to take in order to receive the "bac" or "baccalauréat", the once-prestigious French high-school diploma. This report is from Le Journal du Dimanche:

It has become the rallying spot of Parisian high-school seniors. With the warm weather and the end of exams, the Champ-de-Mars is transformed every evening into a giant and festive picnic scene, for thousands of young persons often quite drunk. On Friday evening there were several thousand, from 5000 to 7000 according to the police who struggled to enforce the ban on consuming and selling alcohol around the Champ-de-Mars, when the trouble began. (...)

Note: Already this is a scene I would hardly recognize. When I used to visit Paris, the high-school students were well-behaved, and looked and acted like young adults. WE were the rowdy ones - American students were always regarded as boisterous and undisciplined, compared to the French. The deterioration of family and morality, plus immigration, has resulted in uniformity of behavior in Western school systems. However this article does not indicate the ethnic composition of the students.

According to Alain Gardère, head of the Parisian urban police, the profile of the trouble-makers is similar to that of those who rioted in March and April 2006, in protest of a government reform: "Young adults from the departments of Yvelines and Val-d'Oise arrived by Regional Rail, line C, their faces covered with hoods, scarves or helmets, their only goal to attack and rob the students of their money, cell phones, MP3... Delinquents who came to ply their trade."

Around 1:30 a.m. after multiple aggressions, fights, and a high degree of drunkenness in persons who were quite young, the order was given to evacuate the site. If the students gave in, more or less, to police injunctions and to tear gas, the same cannot be said for 300 die-hards: for an hour they fought the police, two of whom sustained minor injuries from projectiles. Using rubber bullets the police arrested about 30 people, but some of the die-hards were pushed back towards the podium set up for a music festival near the Ecole Militaire (the Military Academy, situated at the opposite end of the park from the Eiffel Tower). From there they spilled out onto Rue du Commerce and smashed store windows (photo). A deployment of two squadrons of gendarmes brought the fighting to a close.

No figures were available Saturday night on the number of assaults and robberies committed. Twenty-two young persons were still being held for acts of violence, thefts, or receiving stolen goods. The judiciary police were also called in on a complaint filed by an 18-year-old girl who said she had been raped. On Rue du Commerce, a dozen shops bore the signs of the preceding night's violence, while the employees of a perfume store that was completely destroyed tried to salvage whatever they could.

There were several political reactions. Mayor Bertrand Delanoë condemned "with the greatest firmness" the violent acts committed on the Champ-de-Mars. Minister of Justice Rachida Dati, who is also mayor of the 7th arrondissement (where the Champ-de-Mars is located) requested that "a meeting between the mayor, the prefect and herself, be held early next week to implement security measures so that such incidents not occur again." (...)

One need not be an ethnologist to decode the implications in the article: the thousands of high school students were primarily, though not exclusively, white Europeans; the thugs who came in on the subway were largely North African or black, possibly more black, if we are to judge by previous riots. This is of course conjecture; I could be wrong. At any rate the kids should have been home or at supervised parties. No alcohol should have been allowed. If police ban the sale of alcohol, do they incarcerate those who continue to sell to minors? Do they at least fine them heavily? Are any parents at all held accountable for their children's whereabouts after the exams are over?

These are largely rhetorical questions. The answers are obvious.

Note: They picked a good place to fight. The Champ-de-Mars is the Field of Mars, Roman god of War. But the riot mocked the Military Academy, one of the country's great traditional and patriotic institutions, especially now in view of the cutbacks for the armies and the general decline of importance of the military tradition.

"Basic Anti-Semitism..."

The 19th arrondissement of Paris has become a war zone between Jews and North Africans. The most recent flare-up of violence occurred on Saturday June 21, as reported by Le Monde:

The violent assault on a Jewish adolsecent, 17 years old, has aroused the general indignation of the Jewish community and the leaders of the various political groups. The young man suffered several broken ribs, skull fractures, and was hospitalized in an unconscious state at Cochin Hospital. Now in an artificial coma, his condition is stable, according to medics who withheld prognosis. (...)

Five minors were arrested, said a police source, but they have not been identified by witnesses. Accounts of the circumstances surrounding the attack and its anti-Semitic nature vary. The Jewish associations speak of an anti-Semitic attack against one isolated person. However, the police sources, who do not wish to be identified, tell a different story - that of consecutive beatings between groups of young Jews and persons of African origin.

According to the first version the boy was walking on Rue Petit, in the 19th, and by chance came upon a group of 30 young persons of African origin who insulted him before beating him. Again according to this first version, from the Jewish associations and his father, interviewed on RTL radio, the young man was identified as a Jew because he was wearing a kippa. According to the second version, the assault must be put into the context of "brawls" between groups of young Jews and North Africans. One such brawl is said to have occurred just before the beating.

Another article in today's Figaro (June 23) further analyses the situation in the Buttes-Chaumont (the Chaumont Hills) in the 19th arrondissement of Paris, where urban warfare has become commonplace:

Weekends are "war time in the Buttes-Chaumont" sums up Jonathan, a young Jew from the 19th. Like a tide that rises every seven days. "Even though anti-Semitic acts have decreased in France since 2007, the 19th arrondissement of Paris remains a sore spot," explains Ariel Goldman, director of the Protection Services for the Jewish Community (SPCJ). For all of France the SPCJ has reported 121 acts between January and May 2007 and 106 this year, including many threats and 62 overt acts. The 19th is particularly affected.

This month the deteriorating atmosphere has degenerated even further. "The situation is alarming. there is very strong inter-community tension, which is of great concern to me," confirms Roger Madec, the socialist mayor of the 19th arrondissement, who on Sunday requested supplementary police units to restore order.

In these pitched battles it is sometimes difficult to discern aggressors from aggressed. In mid-June, a car chase resulted in several young Jews being arrested, "but they were the victims," insists Sammy Ghozlan, of the Bureau of Vigilance against Anti-Semitism. "They felt compelled to stick together to protect themselves," he said though he agrees that certain Jewish gangs are also looking for a fight. These clashes, that turn into assaults, have aroused concern.

"It has created a lot of anxiety among the Jews, especially the children," deplores the director of CRIF (Council of French-Jewish Institutions), Haïm Musicant. And more so when you realize that many Jewish families of the 19th arrondissement settled there in recent years, attracted by the religious schools and associations. The arrondissement now counts almost 150 Jewish houses of worship. Some people came to escape the hostility of near-by Seine-Saint-Denis. Aline left La Courneuve in 2002: "It had become unbearable." She decided to settle on Rue Petit, to be "safe and near the Jewish community at a reasonable price in Paris." But after a short respite, her daughters are once again facing "hostile looks and insults." The fear of gratuitous aggression has returned she says.

Note: She should know that it is not gratuitous. It is purposeful.

(...) But beyond this robbery-motivated crime the most basic anti-Semitism emerges. The notion "I do not like Jews" transcends origins and religions, say the police in charge of the arrests.

The Palestinian cause, so often evoked during the anti-Semitic attacks that resurged in 2000 in France, seems to be totally forgotten... contrary to anti-Jewish stereotypes.

An interesting comment from the French MSM. Even they perceive a worsening of the cancer that is spreading. Now they need to apply this reasoning to all the attacks and crimes in France committed by Muslim immigrants and Africans, and they will see that the motivation is basic anti-white European hatred, like basic anti-Semitism, and not some trumped up excuse like insufficient housing.

However the authorities will rush to turn this into part of their anti-racism/anti-Semitism campaign, where aggressions against Muslims and Jews are lumped together as equally bad, and aggressions against white Europeans are almost non-events.

Update: The latest is that the boy came out of the coma. The photo shows relatives at the hospital.

Rape In Brussels Train Station

A young Belgian woman, 21, was raped by Muslims in the Brussels train station on June 12. Le Conservateur reports, beginning with a description of the crime by the girl's parents:

It was June 12. "My daughter was returning from Waterloo. it was 9:00 p.m. After getting off the train she headed for the Bancontact." A busy area. And yet that is where the crime took place.

Note: Bancontact seems to refer to an automatic banking machine.

"Right in the middle of the station. How is that possible?" continues the father of 21-year old Lola. "Two men reproached her for not wearing the veil. My daughter is pretty. She is blond with blue eyes."

The rest happened quickly. "One of the assailants took out a knife. My daughter was pinned against the wall of the Bancontact. With a knife at her throat one of the guys raped her. The other looked on."

Le Conservateur comments:

It's the classic technique of Islamists, as related recently in a book by a young European woman who finally converted to Islam after several rapes. Women are slowly but surely abased to the level of an object for males. It begins in the street with dirty remarks, as we see on a daily basis in the streets of Paris, with stares from butchers and grocers, then there's a rape, repeated, that destroys the young woman by branding her body and soul with the idea that she is nothing but an object. Now, an object after being used is shelved and veiled. What happened to this young Belgian woman is not just an isolated crime, it is a message of intimidation to all European women, and to those who have abandoned them - European men, who prefer to turn away and make appeasing and cowardly remarks. This cowardice stains all of us. When we allow scum to make intolerable remarks to women in the street or in the bus, capitulation has begun...

Le Conservateur gives as his source DHNet, a Belgian website. One of his readers believes the story might be a fake, possibly because a few days ago there was a hoax on Belgian television: a woman fully covered in a burqa gave the weather report. After an uproar from viewers and users of the Internet where the video was posted, it was learned that it was a hoax that had slipped past the TV station's controls.

On the topic of rapes of Western women, particularly in Scandinavia, and the silence or even consent of the feminists, read this recent article by Fjordman at Gates of Vienna. (I agree with him that we should not rush to blame European men. Men are reacting to the aggressiveness of the feminists and feel no obligation to help women in danger. Since women have used coercion to achieve their goals, they cannot expect men to rush to their rescue. Of course, innocent girls suffer because of this.)

And this on the highly-publicized gang-rapes in Sydney a few years ago.

Update: June 26 - I have made a change in the translation of the words from Le Conservateur, on the advice of a French reader. Originally, I took the words "boucher-charcutier" literally to mean "butcher, grocer..." But he points out that in French today a "boucher" or a "charcutier" refers to someone who glares at women as if they were pieces of meat. While I only saw a reference to sinister shop-keepers, it is really a reference to potential rapists and murderers. Apologies for my ignorance. But I'm glad to have learned this expression.

Why They Voted No

You may be interested in this article from The Economist on how the EU ignores voters when they give the wrong answer. The article begins with a few condescending (if not insulting) remarks about the Irish and their unfounded fears:

EMERGING unsteadily from a Dublin polling station on June 12th, the grey-haired man said that he had voted against the European Union's Lisbon treaty because he knew “nothing” about it. “I haven't a clue,” he added, speaking with a drunk's slow precision. Moments earlier, an old woman explained her “no” vote by murmuring that “we want to keep ourselves here.”

There was a fair amount of this in a day spent outside polling stations. The treaty was “a lot of crap”, said three young women in Ringsend, a dockside area. “If we voted yes, it'd mean abortions, and being called up to a European army,” said one, repeating two of the more effective fibs about Lisbon spun by the no camp. The treaty would mean “homosexuality and different things”, said an intense, bearded young man.

None of this would surprise the diplomats, politicians and Eurocrats who inhabit the EU's corridors of power. Long before the blow of the Irish no, they were inveighing against the folly of putting complex treaties to ordinary voters. Much safer, they say, to leave ratification to national parliaments, as the other 26 EU countries have chosen to do.

The article closes, however, with comments on the EU's closed mind on the subject of referendums:

EU governments have muddied the waters when it comes to the merits of referendums. Fully 11 countries offered referendums on the EU constitution, saying that this was a momentous text worthy of a national debate. In the end, only four votes were held, and the French and Dutch no votes in mid-2005 brought the constitution down. The constitutional fiasco is cited as evidence of the follies of referendums. Yet the EU was happy enough when the Spanish and Luxembourgeois voted yes to the constitution. Indeed, these two later used their status as referendum-winners to host a meeting of the willing who had approved the original text, clearly feeling that winning a referendum gave them some sort of super-mandate.

European political leaders have proved as guilty as ordinary voters in treating the referendum as a Rorschach test. Federalists said that it showed the need for a two-speed Europe, in which a hard core surges ahead. British Eurosceptics insisted that it was all about preserving Irish sovereignty. The French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, said the vote proved that Europe needed to protect its citizens from such global ills as higher oil prices. In short, EU leaders will happily accept referendum results that tell them what they want to hear. But if the votes are unwelcome, they dismiss them as democratically meaningless. If they really think that this is a sustainable way of dealing with no votes, it is they who haven't a clue.

Read the whole article.

While you're at it you can read another article, this one in the Telegraph, on how the Irish will be made to re-vote, possibly in March.

French Court Defines Affirmative Action

Some readers may recall the controversy surrounding French cosmetics giant L'Oréal, that I reported on last July. The CEO of the company, Jean-Paul Agon, was accused of racist hiring practices that passed over minorities in favor of ethnic Frenchmen. To this accusation Agon responded with unexpected candor that a job seeker with a foreign first name had a better chance of being hired at L'Oréal than one with a French name.

To French nationalists, in particular Bernard Antony, founder of AGRIF, an organization that uses French anti-discrimination laws as grounds for legal action against those who discriminate against Christians and ethnic Frenchmen, Agon's remarks were proof of discrimination against Frenchmen and a suit was filed in criminal court in Paris. Yves Daoudal describes the outcome:

The criminal court of Paris has thrown out the case brought by AGRIF for racial discrimination against Jean-Paul Agon.

Agon had said that he accepted the concept of affirmative action and pointed out that in his company "a job candidate with a foreign first name had a better chance of being hired that one with an ethnic French name."

The judges ruled that Jean-Paul Agon was demonstrating "more a desire to restore a balance that was compromised, by favoring those who normally are victims of prohibited discriminations."

There you have the most unjust definition of affirmative action uttered by a French court, and the most immoral: affirmative action that is overtly ethnic, in other words racist, on grounds that aliens must be favored in order to "restore a balance" with ethnic Frenchmen.

The justice system thus confirms the true meaning of this concept of "restoring balance" so often used by politicians, Nicolas Sarkozy first among them, that we were told to regard as a restoration of balance benefiting underprivileged persons of certain neighborhoods, without ethnic implications. Now, it is official that the "restoration" serves only those who have a foreign name.

This ruling, which is radically opposed to the rule of Law, but which looks ahead to the next European directive on this topic, conforms as well to what we already knew about the notion of "restoring balance", notably as concerns the building of mosques to balance the Muslim faith against the Catholic faith.

And this anti-French and anti-Christian ideology is never questioned. Not only was the case thrown out, but AGRIF was forced to pay 2,500 euro in damages to the head of L'Oréal for having initiated a frivolous lawsuit against him ("poursuites abusives")...

Daoudal recommends joining AGRIF as a way of protesting the ruling.

Note: AGRIF stands for "General Alliance against Racism and for the Respect of French and Christian Identity." The name is an imitation (not to say parody) of MRAP: Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples, one of France's notorious "civil rights" groups that has avidly pursued Frenchmen accused of discrimination or racism.

In an earlier post dated May 21, announcing the start of the court proceedings, Daoudal pointed out that L'Oréal's attorney was Jean Veil, son of Simone Veil, former Minister of Health who sponsored the abortion law. He also noted:

It is extremely unlikely that Jean-Paul Agon will be convicted, because, like it or not, affirmative action itself would be condemned. But it is the official ideology and it will soon be an absolute obligation at the European level, as this resolution from the European Parliament demonstrates:

"The Commission must work out a definition, common to the ensemble of the Union, of 'affirmative action' and so doing, correct the myths about its meaning and its application in certain member States, considering how efficient it has been in fighting discrimination and effectively establishing equality of results in certain member States."