Sunday, February 20, 2011

Wikileaks: America Instructs France

Several readers have been urging me for a while to post an article on the infiltration by America of the predominantly Muslim French suburbs. The purpose of this government-sponsored (both Republican and Democratic) infiltration is to "help" France better cope with her growing minority population through measures similar to those we have here in the States, measures that have had a profoundly deleterious effect on daily life in America. These measures include affirmative action policies in the educational systems, in the workplace and in government. They include attempts by all minorities and women to break through the so-called "glass ceiling" that presumably holds them back from achieving. They include attempts to force integration, assimilation, and egalitarianism through housing policies, through every conceivable form of censorship and intellectual terrorism, through court judgments that penalize acts deemed to be discriminatory, through quotas. And so on… We are all too familiar with this situation.

I have reported on this infiltration at least twice and have posted several items on Yazid Sabeg, the Sarkozy-appointed "czar" of diversity who is using the American system as a template for France, in his mission to make France a mixed (métissée) culture, i.e. one with no dominant European element.

However, with the Wikileaks revelations, it is perhaps time to revisit the issue. Here are a few excerpts from Wikileaks in which France is treated as a backward nation, lagging in the race for diversity, compared to the enlightened United States:

In keeping with France's unique history and circumstances, Embassy Paris has created a Minority Engagement Strategy that encompasses, among other groups, the French Muslim population and responds to the goals outlined in reftel A. Our aim is to engage the French population at all levels in order to amplify France's efforts to realize its own egalitarian ideals, thereby advancing U.S. national interests. While France is justifiably proud of its leading role in conceiving democratic ideals and championing human rights and the rule of law, French institutions have not proven themselves flexible enough to adjust to an increasingly heterodox demography. We believe that if France, over the long run, does not successfully increase opportunity and provide genuine political representation for its minority populations, France could become a weaker, more divided country, perhaps more crisis-prone and inward-looking, and consequently a less capable ally.(…)

France has long championed human rights and the rule of law, both at home and abroad, and justifiably perceives itself as a historic leader among democratic nations. This history and self-perception will serve us well as we implement the strategy outlined here, in which we press France toward a fuller application of the democratic values it espouses. This strategy is necessary because French institutions have not proven themselves flexible enough to adjust to the country's increasingly heterodox demography. Very few minorities hold leadership positions in France's public institutions. As President Sarkozy's own Diversity Czar Yazid Sabeg told Ambassador Rivkin in December, the National Assembly "serves as a mirror of the crisis of representation in France" (reftel B). The National Assembly, among its 577 deputies, has a single black member from metropolitan France (excluding its island territories), but does not have any elected representatives of Muslim or Arab extraction, though this minority group alone represents approximately 10 percent of the population. (…)

Thus the reality of French public life defies the nation's egalitarian ideals. In-group, elitist politics still characterize French public institutions, while extreme right, xenophobic policies hold appeal for a small (but occasionally influential) minority. (…)

The overarching goal of our minority outreach strategy is to engage the French population at all levels in order to help France to realize its own egalitarian ideals. Our strategy has three broad target audiences in mind: (1) the majority, especially the elites; (2) minorities, with a focus on their leaders; (3) and the general population. (…)

We will endeavor to convey the costs to France of the under-representation of minorities, highlighting the benefits we have accumulated, over time, by working hard to chip away at the various impediments faced by American minorities. We will, of course, continue to adopt a humble attitude regarding our own situation in the U.S., but nevertheless will stress the innumerable benefits accruing from a proactive approach to broad social inclusion (…)

(…) we will continue and intensify our work with French museums and educators to reform the history curriculum taught in French schools, so that it takes into account the role and perspectives of minorities in French history. (…)

We will be inclusive, working in this way to break down barriers, facilitate communication, and expand networks. By bringing together groups who would not otherwise interact together, the Embassy will continue to use its cachet to create networking opportunities that cut through traditional cultural and social barriers in France. (…)

Tangible changes include a measurable increase in the number of minorities leading and participating in public and private organizations, including elite educational institutions; growth in the number of constructive efforts by minority leaders to organize political support both within and beyond their own minority communities; new, proactive policies to enhance social inclusion adopted by non-minority political leaders; expansion of inter-communal and inter-faith exchanges at the local level; decrease in popular support for xenophobic political parties and platforms. (...)

Thanks to the reader for the link to Curmudgeonjoy, which links in turn to Wikileaks.

For those interested here are some relevant GalliaWatch posts:

America's Mission in France

America's Mission in France - Sequel

On Yazid Sabeg, here is the most important of several articles:

The Engineer of Diversity


Note: Most of the information in the Wikileaks cables had already been "leaked" to the MSM, since I had reported on it as early as July 2008 when George Bush was still in office. This initiative is a project of both Democrats and liberal Republicans. We cannot blame Obama, since Bush was ahead of him. Ambassador Rivkin has been a most compliant servant of diversity and post-Western multiculturalism.

Here's a related article about Sylvester Stallone's visit to a French suburb in August 2010.

And another from WatchingAmerica that reproduces an article from Le Monde. In this article ghetto residents explain that there is a difference between Bush's intervention and Obama's:

Imagine George Bush doing the same! “We would not have come,” said the young people. Nevertheless, according to experts, Barack Obama’s projects strangely resemble those of his predecessor. The "Greater Middle-East", for example, one of the former Republican president’s whims, is not without a link to the Obama administration’s partnership programs. However, there is an important difference, insists a diplomat: “Obama placed the political issue — the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — at the center of his foreign policy. With his Greater Middle-East, Bush tried to get around it."

Labels: , , , ,

19 Comments:

At February 21, 2011 12:34 PM, Anonymous dauphin said...

America has long been sticking its nose into French affairs, even before the Suez crisis which America may live to regret if the canal falls into unfriendly hands.

De Gaulle had confided that he was not worried about the Germans being defeated, but was more concerned about being dictated to by America and Britain after the war.

Though I grew up with the illusion, like many, that France and America were allies, today the multi-cultural, pc government of America may be an ally of the "UMPS", but it has become the enemy of France and a threat to its survival. I'm sorry to say that things like Wikileaks make me wish we would sever ties, beginning with some of the Hollywood films that are forced down our throats (though I believe the trade agreements allow France to sell wine, cheese, water and some films to the US in return). I'm not sure it's worth it...

 
At February 21, 2011 4:45 PM, Blogger zazie said...

to Dauphin : WHICH America was an ally for France? The "boys" who truly believed they were dying for freedom, of course! Wall Street and the White House? Surely not!
Now, suppose the ties were severed ; how could we make our American friends understand that Rousseau and Robespierre are not France? That France had been thriving long before 1789?
We must keep our ties with the USA because on each side of the ocean there are human beings who can help one another by exchanging ideas, by sharing ideals! What the lefties do, we can do too.

 
At February 21, 2011 5:51 PM, Blogger Unfrench Frenchman said...

Neither the French nor the American model of integration can cope with a Muslim invasion such as the one that France is dealing with.
The only solution is to put the Muslims aboard ships bound to Africa and to unload them where they or their parents or grand-parents came from under the watchful eye of the French Navy. It would take a few years to achieve this, but right now at least, the French State still has the means to make it happen.
Philip III of Spain anyone?

 
At February 21, 2011 6:27 PM, Anonymous dauphin said...

@ zazie

You are right, but I was referring to the government. Like-minded patriots across the pond should of course stay as allies and friends, and thank God for the free internet that allows us to do it. But I think formal cultural exchanges run by the governments or things like film festivals run by leftist multi-culturalists only serve to exchange their "values". I would prefer to have less American films, rap music and tv shows in France as they create harmful effects on French culture, not to mention American culture! As to the American embassy, I would order them to cease and desist their interference immediately.

 
At February 21, 2011 7:57 PM, Blogger tiberge said...

All I can say is that the "Tea Partiers" and groups such as the Christian Broadcasting Network are the ideological allies of the Bloc Identitaire, possibly of Riposte Laïque, and certainly to some extent of the Front National. These various groups have not abandoned the last shred of realism over the current immigration disasters both in France and the U.S. How they would get along if they all had to work together I cannot say, but except for them, and other similar groups whose names I do not know, there is a terrible disconnect between France and the United States. This is because the ruling party in France, i.e., the UMPS, and the ruling party here, i.e., the Democrats plus liberal and unreliable Republicans, no longer represent the founding principles of our respective nations. American liberals, be they Dems or Reps, regard multiculturalism as a good thing, a universal good, and immigration as an inevitability. Therefore they are "in sync" with both the French Socialists and the Sarkozy-ites.

Those really concerned about saving our two countries are apt to blame the other country. American traditionalists scorn French Socialism. French traditionalists scorn American globalism. Each sees the other as coward and collaborator.

But if "great minds meet" then maybe too "great patriots meet". Those on both side of the pond who want to rescue Europe and America will probably find themselves on the same side when the showdown everyone is expecting really occurs.

Unfrench Frenchman is right - the Muslims will have to be removed from Western soil, lock, stock and barrel. There will be no way of saying who can stay and who can leave. We have crossed that point.

 
At February 22, 2011 9:24 AM, Blogger DP111 said...

The only solution is to put the Muslims aboard ships bound to Africa and to unload them where they or their parents or grand-parents came from under the watchful eye of the French Navy.

I agree.

The central and main threat is the demographic one. Muslims, if left at peace here or in Muslim nations, will continue to increase their numbers in the West, and in the fullness of time, will be able to enact sharia via democratic legislative action. We will be asleep as this remorseless threat grows. And even if we wake up, there is nothing we can do short of competing with them in birth rates – which we will lose.

The only solution is to separate the West from Islam and Muslims, of that there is no question. But we need to do this without sacrificing our principles of liberal and free democracies, or that would be admitting defeat.

This means

1. No force or compulsion as regards the practice of Islam.

2. No forced repatriations of people who are citizens.

Breaking any of the above two rules means that we have breached our own rules of fair play and tolerance, i.e., we have broken our own society.

 
At February 22, 2011 12:38 PM, Anonymous dauphin said...

Even if Marine were elected next year, forced repatriations would not occur any time in the near future. Charles Martel arriving on horseback lopping off heads is not going to happen either, though a Martel-like resolve is needed.

A better solution is self-repatriation or self-emigration; some use the word "self-deportation" but I think we must avoid the connotations of that term. In essence, through legislation to stop public funding of mosques, forbid funding from outside the country, outlawing of ritual slaughter of animals and the sale of such products in France, outlawing the veil and the burqa, legislating priority in employment and education to people who have been in France at least 3 generations, a complete stop to extra-European immigration and family regrouping, and probably some other measures that could be taken, those affected will see that they cannot practice their religion or find employment in France and will eventually leave by choice or necessity.

There would be mass protests and riots, but there is where resolve is needed also, not just by the government but by a majority of the French people. However, more people have to wake up first and their mindset has to change. When the caviar socialist elites and showbiz/media people living in the chic quarters of Paris begin to feel threatened, then we may see a real turning point in terms of public opinion.

 
At February 22, 2011 3:19 PM, Anonymous Kevin said...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/215223

"and, most troubling, he forments fear and hatred of immigrants."

 
At February 26, 2011 3:30 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

MAM is leaving as Foreign Minister. So who will be the next FM?

Christine Lagarde?

She was recently in the south "to talk finance". She speaks English.

What do you think?

 
At February 27, 2011 6:03 PM, Anonymous dauphin said...

MAM has been replaced by Juppé.

 
At February 28, 2011 10:34 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

as a supporter of Israel it really pains me to see jews like Rivkin interfere in France's affairs on behalf of Muzzers who hate their guts

It isn't as if the USA is perfect - it was undoubtedly a lot better before all the bleeding heart new york jews got negroes out of their cages in the 60's

 
At March 01, 2011 9:54 PM, Blogger 1389 said...

My responses to a persistent hostile commenter on my own blog explain what we need to do about Islam in the West.

Islam is the only thing that, in my opinion, should be subjected to a policy of zero tolerance. In that comment linked above, I explain why.

 
At March 04, 2011 4:49 PM, Blogger tiberge said...

@ anonymous

Your comment should have been expressed a bit more cautiously. Especially the word "cages".

However, it is true that many Jews are leftists. Many also were victims of the violence in NYC during the 60's and later. Many left New York, but the problem followed wherever they went. They were not the only liberals, only the most visible.

Ambassador Rivkin, as far as I know, is not Jewish. He is Catholic. His wife is Jewish.

 
At March 04, 2011 5:05 PM, Blogger tiberge said...

@ 1389

Your comment section is fascinating. You can insert your replies within the comment. Thanks for the link. As you say, Islam is more than a religion. Sometimes I wonder if it is a religion at all, but most people say that it is, but it is also a conquering political ideology, with few scruples when it comes to eliminating the "infidel". We have to somehow get the courage to admit that it is our Enemy and not our friend. This inability to recognize the enemy is one of the most bizarre hallmarks of today's liberalism. In 1941 Roosevelt, a liberal, was more than able to recognize the enemy and to fight to the finish. Today, we have leaders with diluted blood.

 
At March 08, 2011 6:54 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@tiberge

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/24/world/la-fg-france-ambassador-20100425

"Reporting from La Courneuve, France — Only a few hours after returning from a White House meeting with President Obama, the U.S. ambassador raced out of his 19th century residence on chic Rue Saint Honore in a highly secured convoy, heading for a somewhat less fashionable address.

"I want to help those communities," Ambassador Charles H. Rivkin said of low-income banlieues, or suburbs, such as La Courneuve. "I want to show those communities that the face of America is multicultural, that the face of America is Barack Obama."

Surrounded by youths at La Courneuve's cultural center, most of them of immigrant backgrounds, Rivkin didn't necessarily present a picture of American diversity.

But the 48-year-old Yale alum and Harvard Business School graduate with Russian Jewish roots shook hands with everyone in the room, and asked in fluent French about their various projects."

Not that it matters to me, but Rivkin is a jewish name, like Rifkind in the UK.

Yes, "cages" was not the word to use.

 
At March 08, 2011 3:40 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

DP111 said:

""The only solution is to separate the West from Islam and Muslims, of that there is no question. But we need to do this without sacrificing our principles of liberal and free democracies, or that would be admitting defeat.

This means

1. No force or compulsion as regards the practice of Islam.

2. No forced repatriations of people who are citizens.

Breaking any of the above two rules means that we have breached our own rules of fair play and tolerance, i.e., we have broken our own society.""


Sorry but that is wishful thinking. The Muslims will never self deport in large numbers with the way the West is now. Ie- we treat them like Kings and pamper them. Also, Muslim nations in Africa are know where near as nice as Europe is. Even Albania, Europe's poorest nation is a step up from N.Africa. Considering that why would they self deport ? Theres no reason to and they wont.

The only way they would - without being expelled, is through Civilian violence against them on a large scale [Which I do not condone]. Christians in Iraq and Egypt...They are leaving in great numbers today due to their Muslim countrymen blowing up their churches and killing their Children. Is that France's future if the West continues to tolerate Muslims ? Probably.


As far as Iolerance itself goes, it was a great idea at its inception when dealing with Native minorities such as French Jews [who were here for 2000 years]...But it falls apart when dealing with Foreigners. Muslims have been in France for only 60-70 years - they are not a Native population and the EU should stop treating them like one. If anything Muslims are a Colonizing population since they refuse to integrate and resent the Native culture/population.

Tolerance today, is what got our Western nations into this mess of immigration. Expulsion of [all] Non-Europeans is the best solution.

 
At March 09, 2011 1:45 AM, Blogger tiberge said...

@ anonymous

Regarding Rivkin's origins I'll bow to the LA Times. There is very little about him online. But his marriage and the marriage of his brother Robert were both reported in the society sections of the NYT. When Ambassador Rivkin married in 1990, a Catholic priest and a rabbi officiated. His bride was Susan Melissa Tolson. I must have assumed she was Jewish and he Catholic, but it could be the other was around. I believe Tolson is also a Jewish name (though names can be very deceiving).

Now I see that when his brother Robert married only a rabbi officiated, so I deduce the Rivkins are Jewish.

On another note, Ambassador Rivkin received a letter from then French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner (half Jewish) regarding the possibility of forming a Palestinian State, no matter what the outcome of talks between Israel and the Palestinians. Kouchner wanted it done quickly, with borders undetermined. Rivkin presumably remarked that Sarkozy was always in a rush to establish Middle East policy without the U.S. This story came from the Wikileaks cables (I have not read this cable in full):

http://213.251.145.96/cable/2010/01/10PARIS79.html

So being Jewish, half-Jewish or quarter-Jewish does not in any way preclude a willingness to create a State that would destroy Israel.

 
At March 10, 2011 4:06 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@tiberge

"So being Jewish, half-Jewish or quarter-Jewish does not in any way preclude a willingness to create a State that would destroy Israel"

Indeed. I often wonder whether these jews know what fate awaits them in their brave new world/caliphate.

Even this weekend, there was some sort of Jewish/Muslim congress in Paris against anti-semitism & "Islamophobia".

Who do these jewish representatives think is responsible for the explosion of anti-semitic attacks in Europe ? They presumably think that if the "Palestinians" get their own state then everything will be hunky dory.

Very depressing.

EdL

 
At March 11, 2011 2:02 AM, Blogger tiberge said...

The problem of the Jewish drift to the Left, often the extreme pro-Muslim Left, is not limited to France, but exists in Israel as well. I received this from an Israeli website:

The Chief Rabbinate protested a decision by Jerusalem municipality to hold a food festival in the Old City which would include booths with non-kosher food.

With gay parades in Jerusalem and the promotion of non-kosher food in the Old City, the atheist state is encroaching on the religious freedom of Jews to live in a Jewish state. No similar attempt is made to restrict the freedom of Israeli Muslims: the government wouldn’t dream of advertising non-halal eateries in Umm al Fahm.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home