Saturday in Donzère

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

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

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

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


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

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


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


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


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

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

Well said.


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


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

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


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

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


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

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

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

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

Lost Territories, Forgotten People

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

etc...

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

Immigration Turmoil

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

H/T: François Desouche, comment nº 20.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

H/T: François Desouche

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

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

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

A Matter of Urbanism

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Besson Does an About-Face

Will the real Eric Besson please stand up!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Nice try, but it's too late.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Note: I have not read either book.

Haiti - Certain Realities (and Fantasies) Emerge

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

Clovis Slowly Disappears

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



For the French lyrics click here.

Confrontation: Besson and Marine Le Pen

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

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

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

This would have been fine 20 or 25 years ago.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Geert Wilders' Trial Begins

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

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



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

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

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

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

France Accepts Haitian Refugees

Eric Besson, Minister of Immigration, Integration and National Identity has decided to implement an exceptional set of temporary measures to bring victims of the earthquake into France. The article from François Desouche uses information from OFII (Bureau of Immigration and Integration) as the source:

These measures include:

- An easing of the terms for family reunification. Nearly 80,000 Haitian nationals reside in France and have family members affected by the catastrophe in Haiti.

- Facilities coordinated for the issuing of visas for visits to the families.

- Visas and residence authorizations issued on humanitarian grounds to victims whose health requires specialized treatment in France.

"France's response must rise to the level of her republican traditions of welcome, solidarity and humanity, and to the profound historic and cultural ties she maintains with the Haitian people. In such terrifying and painful circumstances, all of our efforts must be focused on helping the Haitians," Eric Besson concluded.

Without in any way denying that the people must be helped, one cannot but wonder if these "temporary" measures will really be temporary after all. Here are a few comments from FDS readers:

- "Profound historic and cultural ties", well, let's see. Eric Besson should review his French history. Haiti, the pearl of the Antilles, was the first black republic in History, following the independence gained after a major struggle with France. But this independence was obtained in bloody battle, and we must not forget that the former slaves massacred all the white colonists who were not able to flee in time - men, women, old people and children. So much for strong historic ties...

- It's completely logical. Every international event is a pretext for more immigration. Besson, with the consent of the Sarkozy government, has been told to implement Attali's plan, the goal of which is to increase immigration to 2 million newcomers per year in France. If we combine legal immigration, illegal immigration, refugees and asylum seekers, plus the new births, by the end of 2010, we should come close to one million new arrivals.

Note: Whatever one may think of the egregious Jacques Attali, he is not responsible for this situation. Blaming him is like blaming the waitress for bad food. The buck stops with Sarkozy. He needs to justify his actions with the name of some Socialist crony of Mitterand, in order not to be held completely accountable for actions that emanate from his will alone.

- Half of the island has a cousin, an aunt, a brother... living in France. Impossible to prove, but we are not far from that. We'll have 5 million more parasites ("crevards"). A few Cubans will journey here as well, I guess. The shops that sell machetes will be sold out.

- Two Haitian women that I met a few months ago told me how opinions have changed there: France has become the scapegoat for all the miseries of the world. These two persons were pregnant, on French soil, and already had a young child being raised in awful conditions that were contrary to all the advice given them by pediatricians. I remember also the last flood there (I think it was 2003). The Blue Berets were impeded in their work by street gangs and guerilla movements hostile to the development of the island. This morning on the news we saw aggressive women and professional wailers: "What is the international community doing, etc...". And again it's our fault! Sometimes it would be better to just let them cope for themselves...

Note: For some readers it's OUR fault:

- The only thing that can save Haiti is to put an end to the rampant corruption caused by the United States. What a bunch of two-faced s.o.b's.

The reader then links to an article by one Louis Prefontaine that enumerates the evils we have committed in Haiti. Among them:

- We occupied the island for 20 years and abolished the article in the Constitution that forbade foreigners from having businesses on the island.

- We (along with France) supported Duvalier.

- We (along with France and Canada) overthrew Aristide in 2004 and replaced him with a neo-liberal economist Gérard Latortue.

It was not God who destroyed Haiti. It was men. (...) Sending a few dollars to Haiti is fine, but it won't change the way the system functions. Nobody opposes charity, but you don't build a society with it. You could bury Haiti beneath a thousand billion trillion dollars and the problem would not be resolved. Haiti is the failure of a country without a strong centralized State, corrupt to the core, and dispossessed of itself by ideological choices made by foreign countries. (...) You can add these tens of thousands of dead to the tragic record of unbridled capitalism; they are less visible than the victims of "communism" but just as dead! Maybe this is what it means to have God on your side.

Note: I will not take the time to argue with his ideas, but when he says that all the money in the world won't help, he has said a mouthful, though he cannot acknowledge all the implications of his words.

One FDS reader actually believes the island IS cursed:

- I know that some readers will laugh, but when you play around with the forces of evil you never know what you will reap. It's very dangerous - I would not laugh at the televangelist's words. I have been convinced for quite some time that Haiti was a cursed land.

She posts a link to a French-language article about Pat Robertson's "stupid" remark that Haiti was being punished for its pact with the devil that rid the island of the French presence.

Over at the website Herodote (registration required), devoted to the history of all countries, the comments are much more toned down and nearly all reject the notion of a curse. They do blame outside powers. Here is one example:

- The "curses" of Haiti are those of a very bad example of a successful slave revolt that immediately attracted the "punishments" of France, the colonial power of the island. An ultra-Protestant preacher (I assume he means Pat Robertson) even mentioned a pact with the devil. The United States saw in this revolt a dangerous example for the abolitionists of the Civil War and later around 1917-1920 a disturbance for Latin America. Canada saw a profitable source of qualified French-speaking intellectuals.

A very cursory look at the history of the island seems to indicate that the only moments of relative stability were when some outside power, including the United States, was in charge. As soon as the outside power departed, Haiti returned to its "demons". Nonetheless, it is a given in today's climate that social and economic problems among American blacks, Africans and Maghrebins are blamed on colonialism, slavery long abolished or foreign intervention of years past.

Illustration at top shows Columbus and the original Amerindian population, known as Tainos. The illustration below shows Jean-Jacques Dessalines being crowned "Emperor" Jacques the First in 1804, after the death of Toussaint Louverture. According to Herodote, this coronation was a "pitiful" imitation of Napoleon. Jacques' excesses resulted in an insurrection and he was killed in an ambush in 1806. It was the "beginning of a battle for influence between the mulatto minority and the black majority".