Unmasking the Prophet

There is a new article by Geert Wilders posted at The Brussels Journal. It discusses the psychopathology of Mohammed with information based on the work of psychiatrists who have attempted to draw conclusions about his character and his illnesses, if indeed he was ill. The comments after the article warn about trying to psychoanalyze someone who lived so far back in time. Here is an excerpt:

(...) There has been much analysis of Muhammad’s mental sanity. In spite of all the available research, it is rarely mentioned or debated. It is a taboo to discuss the true nature of the man whom one and a half billion Muslims around the world regard as a holy prophet and example to be followed. That taboo must be breached in the West, and here in the Netherlands.

Ali Sina is an Iranian ex-Muslim who established the organisation for apostates of Islam Faith Freedom International. In his latest book he posits that Muhammad is a narcissist, a paedophile, a mass murderer, a terrorist, a misogynist, a lecher, a cult leader, a madman, a rapist, a torturer, an assassin and a looter. Sina has offered 50,000 dollars for the one who can prove otherwise. Nobody has claimed the reward as yet. And no wonder, as the description is based on the Islamic texts themselves, such as the hadiths, the descriptions of Muhammad’s life from testimonies of contemporaries. (...)

Read more here.

The drawing below by William Blake shows Dante and Virgil meeting Mohammed and his son-in-law Ali in Hell. In this illustration for La Commedia of Dante, Mohammed is ripping his chest open. From Wikipedia.

Dangerous Debate

Some readers may recall a prolonged debate last year on "national identity" that purported to air all opinions on the question and lift the lid that weighted down freedom of expression in France, and give the people a forum where their voices could be heard. It turned out quite differently because, considering the ideological proclivities of French political leaders and the media's propaganda machines, there was not a chance in the world for the debate to be anything but a carefully controlled hot air marathon. Any hint that preserving national identity required ipso facto a stop on immigration and a concerted effort to increase the white European birthrate was automatically considered to be "racist". Sarkozy's idea of course was to convince the French, once and for all, that French identity was a contract, and not a blood lineage. Anybody could be French if he obeyed French laws and was naturalized. The debate never resolved the question of what to do with people who refuse to obey French laws, who secretly plot to control French institutions, and who engage in jihad in the streets of France, but who have a French nationality.

Not content with one fiasco, Nicolas Sarkozy is planning a sequel. This time on "laïcité", the word that I keep in French since "secularism" does not quite mean the same thing. Laïcité, as I've repeated countless times, refers to the Church/State separation mandated by the 1905 law. This latest sure-to-be fiasco will take place on April 5, though April 1 would be a better choice.

One thing is patently clear from the start - any debate on laïcité is a debate on the Islamic presence in France. From this it follows that Muslims are opposed to the debate because (1) they see it as a manifestation of "islamophobia" and (2) Islam does not lend itself to debate - it is not debatable, hence any debate is a farce and a pretext for self-congratulatory statements from Sarkozy.

In January 2011 Nicolas Sarkozy hired an Algerian Muslim named Abderrahmane Dahmane to be his counselor on integration. Dahmane had also been national secretary of the UMP party and counselor on education. Nicolas Sarkozy later elevated him to the rank of general inspector of National Education. When the debate on laïcité was announced, Dahmane denounced it, perceiving that it would be a debate on Islam. On March 11 Sarkozy relieved Dahman of his duties as counselor on integration.

Shortly thereafter, on or about March 12, Dahmane was interviewed by an Algerian news source, TSA. Below are excerpts. You'll note the clever way Dahmane uses Western ideas, and Western politics for his own ends and twists historical facts to suit his purposes:

- What happened exactly?

- The ensemble of Muslims met yesterday at the Paris Mosque. For us, it was simply to put an end to this shameful debate. This debate that discriminates and stigmatizes the Muslims of France. As you know, the Algerian community is the majority community among Muslims. It matters little whether its members are practicing or non-practicing, they respect the Republic and its values. All the more since the Muslims who live here did not acquire their nationality by begging. They fought for this France. They fought for its values. In 1914-1918, 50,000 Muslims died at Verdun. In 1939-1945 they were there to chase the Nazi enemy.

Due to the fact that they are full-fledged citizens, it was out of the question for me to initiate a debate on Islam in France. I personally informed the president several times that this debate is counter-productive. And that it could be of no interest to the French people considering that the problem is the crisis in France - unemployment, housing… These were the real problems that have to be dealt with instead of religion. The debate on Islam should take place in the mosques just as the debate on Judaism should take place in the synagogues and the debate on Christianity in the cathedrals.

- But you have supported Nicolas Sarkozy since 2003…

- I thought I had an agreement with Nicolas Sarkozy. A friendly agreement. He cannot say one day "I am the friend of the Muslims" and the next day launch debates and entrust them to the people who are the real plagues for the Muslims, including Jean-François Copé (general secretary of the UMP party), his assistants and his partners some of whom are closely connected to the Front National. We did not join and work for the UMP or support Sarkozy only to find that he has placed us in a situation of discrimination and stigmatization. I am not Sarkozy's nutritional supplement, or that of Copé, even less so of others. And it is for this reason that I assembled the elected officials of the Right, the Left, the Center as well as minority associations and I said loud and clear that Copé is a plague for the Muslims and I continue to say it even if Sarkozy chooses to dismiss a man who is loyal and faithful. But I am loyal first to my community. The Muslim community. (…)

- What did Nicolas Sarkozy reproach you?

- Unfortunately Nicolas Sarkozy made a stupid mistake. He followed his advisers. He reproached me for having criticized the debate and his party. For me, the party, which is the equivalent of the Front National, merits my criticism. I am an associative party worker. I joined Nicolas Sarkozy at his request. Everybody knows: in 2003, I did not agree with certain of his proposals. I played the game for eight years. But I will not play the game of fascism. I will not play the game of exclusion.

- Do you have the impression that there exists today a desire on the part of President Sarkozy to attack and exclude Muslims?

- Of course, especially when the president goes through with a debate that is rejected by everybody, including Alain Juppé and François Fillon. Nicolas Sarkozy is wrong to try to get reelected in 2012 with votes from the Front National. Because it is diversity that allowed him to get elected in 2007. In 2012, we will form a barrier to fascism. We will form a barrier to the Front National. We will form a barrier to the friends of the Front National.

- That means that you call on Muslims not to vote for Nicolas Sarkozy in 2012?

- Today, I ask that they not vote for the UMP in any cantonal election. And we await the reaction of the president. The debate on Islam is not taboo, but a debate that makes scapegoats of Muslims is out of the question.

- Have you had a discussion today with Nicolas Sarkozy?

- I do not wish to speak with people who associate with the Front National.

In his weekly newsletter #120, Yves Daoudal also reports on the dismissal of Dahman and quotes him on the topic of financing the Paris Mosque which has been the responsibility of Algeria. In Dahmane's view, the grand mufti of the mosque, Dalil Boubakeur, because of his friendship with Sarkozy, is a traitor to Algerian values:

"I call on the president of the Algerian Republic and our compatriots to refuse to let themselves be stigmatized and marginalized in this way in French society. (…) Today it is Algeria that funds the Paris Mosque. Algerians and the ensemble of Muslims of all nationalities who have an admiration for Algeria and its revolution are surprised that we are financing traitors. How can the president of the Algerian Republic, who is after all the guarantor of the values of the revolution, continue to fund a mosque that has a traitor at its head? I say sincerely, the president must put an end to this situation. There are hundreds of mosques attached to Algeria that we could fund."

Yves Daoudal reminds us that Dahman, despite his dismissal as counselor to Sarkozy, is still a general inspector of FRENCH National Education.

In an article entitled The Indecency of Dahmane, Joachim Véliocas denounces the wearing of a "green star" by Muslims, an initiative of Dahmane who has ordered the manufacture of more than 600,000 green paper stars stamped "Muslim":

A few weeks ago, Abderrahmane Dahmane was fired by Nicolas Sarkozy for having protested against a debate on Islam's place in our society, going so far as to compare the UMP party to a "plague". Today, this former counselor on diversity has appealed to the Muslims of France to wear a "green star" in protest against an Islamophobic debate: "The green star is the sign that the Muslims of France have decided to wear as a way of demanding the end of the debate on Islam and the end of Islamophobia in the UMP party of Jean-François Copé" he explained in a communiqué.

A press conference is scheduled for March 29 in front of the Paris Mosque to launch the operation. A collective of Muslim associations has signed a text that denounces "an ideology that would expatriate on ships entire contingencies of French citizens back to their homeland, a galloping Islamophobia and the reign of one against the other, for a republic that is one and indivisible."

The UMP party, meanwhile, seems to be drowning in contradictions since Nicolas Sarkozy wants the debate to take place, while a great number of UMP deputies would like to put a stop to the "polemic". This green star, a somber historic symbol, could create deep trouble within the government.

Véliocas begins his article with a reminder that it is the Christians of the Middle East and Africa who are stigmatized and physically persecuted for their faith by Muslims, a fact that demonstrates the full measure of Dahman's indecency.

Note: I would add that Dahmane is simply playing our game with our own cards. He compares UMP to the Front National, he insists he will have nothing to do with "fascism", he assimilates Jews and Muslims, all the while offending the Jews with his green star. But at the same time he reveals several truths: that Algeria controls numerous mosques in France, that he has an intense hatred for Jean-François Copé (who is Jewish), that he was really just pretending to be on Sarkozy's side for eight years, but his true loyalty is to the Muslims. Of course, his words also show Nicolas Sarkozy for the fool that he is to have ever hired such a person. Whatever one thinks of Dahmane (and he is certainly an enemy of France), he would not be an inspector for National Education without Nicolas Sarkozy.

Election Update

The latest percentages at Le Salon Beige are as follows:

The Socialist Party - 36.2%
The UMP Party - 18.6%
The Front National - 11.56%

The FN had two winners - in Carpentras where Patrick Bassot won 54% and in Brignoles where Jean-Paul Dispard won by five votes over the incumbent Communist.

Here are some comments from LSB readers:

- The elections are a failure for the normalizing strategy initiated by Marine Le Pen. (Note: "normalizing" here means making the party respectable).

To which another reader responded:

- Your judgments are a wonder in that they are never backed up: the 10% for the FN are the figures of the Interior Minister who calculates by combining the cantons, i.e., those cantons where the FN was present with those cantons where it was absent. This was already the case in the first round when the minister's 15.2% was in reality 19% (…)

Note: This comment is supported by another reader who cites the figure of 41% for the FN in those cantons where there was a candidate. This is a huge difference. The figure of 11% applies to all cantons, but in the second round the FN only ran in about 400 cantons, out of the original 1400.

Marine Le Pen confirms the figure of 40% (not 41) in a spontaneous interview in which she confronted Jean-François Copé, spokesman for the UMP party. She did not lose her temper but she denounced the contempt that the UMP has for the little people, the candidates of the FN, to which he responded that the FN was showing its true face. The scene is on video (for now) at François Desouche.

Note that figures always vary until at some point the blogs get it right. The FN had said last week that 1500 candidates were running in the first round. Now they are saying that 1400 ran.

More comments:

- Look, Marine Le Pen is not perfection incarnate, but she is the lesser evil who can rally the French patriots to resist the thieves, the rotten UMPS system, etc… Sure, the KING is the solution for our country, you don't need a college degree to realize that. It's a simple truth and if Catholics (traditional or not) would only stop going to bed with this rotten regime things would be a lot better. It goes without saying, Long Live the King, but at the same time you have to be realistic and support the patriots who defend France, particularly those who can make themselves heard. Like it or not, today it is the FN with Le Pen.

In other related news, Le Figaro reports that a poll conducted by Ipsos for France Télévisions predicts that Marine Le Pen will qualify for the second round of the presidential elections, no matter what else happens.

Early Results

The first results of the cantonal elections have been posted at Le Salon Beige. This is not the final tally, but it probably means something:

The Socialist Party - 35.05%

The UMP - 18.89%

The Front National - 10.01%

Marine Le Pen said on TF1:

"The Front National has always been a respectable party. The caricature is waning, these elections are an immense encouragement for the FN."

According to polls, the total abstentions vary from 54 to 56%.

This is on the whole bad news, IMO. Half of the voting population did not vote. They are clearly not Socialists. But they do not like Sarkozy, and they are too timid or cowardly to vote for the FN even in a local election where the population has everything to gain from having a general councilor who is also a patriot. If this happens in May 2012, it means France will have a Socialist president. Whether it is Martine Aubry (whose husband defends terrorists) or Dominique Strauss-Kahn (who has no affinity for France, to put it politely), it will be cause for tears.

Let's just keep hoping that something changes for the better between now and then.

Update: I no sooner posted this than I had second thoughts. Since the FN did not have candidates in all cantons, this could account for some abstentions. There must have been people who refused to choose between the PS and the UMP, and so they stayed home. That cannot happen in the presidential election, at least not in the first round. Abstentions in the second round will be determined by what happens in the first round.

Cantonal Elections - The Second Round

Ivan Rioufol writes a blog for Le Figaro. As France gears up for tomorrow's second round of cantonal elections, and as Marine Le Pen more and more expresses what the people want to hear, Rioufol's moderate position now seems passé. Still, his words are welcome, coming as they do from a main stream newspaper. This short article elicited 232 comments:

The self-proclaimed humanists do not see those who suffer. Otherwise it would be known: the forgotten Frenchmen have been trying for a long time to make their voices heard. These citizens will not give their votes anymore to those, on the Right and the Left, who exploit morality for political ends while talking rubbish. It is sad that these voters, disdained by the apostles of respect for the Other and of non-discrimination, have to choose between abstaining or the Front National, the two victors in last week's first round of cantonal elections. But their rejection of the pontificators, proven wrong by the facts, cannot be considered as a threat to the Republic or to democracy, as those closing ranks against the will of the people are claiming. This rejection will become the new political actor.

Jean-Paul Delevoye, mediator of the Republic, is almost in distress. In his report on Monday he explains that society is suffering from a "crisis of recognition" ("crise du regard") - a feeling on the part of the people that they do not exist in the eyes of the leaders, an observation often made here. His diagnosis points implicitly to the indifference of the bleeding hearts, fascinated as they are by Otherness, towards the French who consider themselves as abandoned (40% of the French feel this way according to a poll). "They are asking to be heard," Delevoye repeats, and warns of the risk of implosion for a nation afflicted with the "sickness of living together" ("mal-vivre ensemble").

Why are both Right and Left unable to see the obvious?

The sense of injustice, evident since April 21, 2002, will once again express itself on Sunday in the second round.

Note: A "mediator" of the Republic is a type of independent counselor or ombudsman who resolves conflicts between the public officials and the citizens.

The reference to April 21, 2002 is a reminder that on that date Jean-Marie Le Pen won enough votes in the first round of the presidential election to move on to the run-off. If he lost it was because of media madness and Jacques Chirac's ability to convince the immigrants to vote for him.

According to Le Salon Beige, all eyes are on the Front National and the percentages of the three big parties: UMP, PS and FN, since they are regarded as foreshadowing the second round in the 2012 presidential.

A Visitor to the Dauphin

While browsing through Catherine Delors' website, I came upon an article on the young Jehanne d'Arc (Joan of Arc) that deals with an episode from 1429, when she finally succeeded in convincing the very troubled dauphin Charles that he was indeed the legitimate heir to the throne and destined to be crowned and anointed at Reims. Here's a passage:

“When I entered the King’s chamber,” she will later say, “I recognized him among the others by the advice of the voice that revealed him to me.”

She stops in front of Charles and bows. “God give you long life, gentle Dauphin,” she says.

“What is your name?” he asks. “And what do you want?”

“I am called Jehanne the Maiden and, through me, the King of Heaven directs that thou be anointed and crowned at Reims, and be the lieutenant of the King of Heaven.” Now Charles and all of the courtiers are silent.

‘I am telling thee,” she continues, “from My Lord, that thou art the true heir to France, and the King’s son. And He sent me to thee to take you to Reims to be crowned and anointed, if such is thy will.”

No one has spoken thus to Charles before, no one has put to rest in such definite terms his harrowing doubts about his parentage and the validity of his claims to the crown. Charles then takes Jehanne aside and they have a very long talk. (...)

Read more.

A reader's comment makes it clear that Jehanne was not the victim of some psychosis. She had no symptoms of those illnesses that include the possibility of hearing voices. Furthermore, she had vital information that no one could have known without some divine intervention.

I should bring this post back to the homepage on May 31, 2011, the 580th anniversary of her death.

Geert Wilders' Speech in Rome

The latest speech by Geert Wilders is posted at The American Thinker. Here is an excerpt:

Twenty years after the ordinary people, Europe's mainstream conservative leaders, such as Merkel, Sarkozy and Cameron, have finally - better late than never - come to the obvious conclusion, namely that multiculturalism is a failure. However, they do not have a plan to remedy the situation.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is time for change. We must make haste. Time is running out. Ronald Reagan said: "We need to act today, to preserve tomorrow". That is why I propose the following measures in order to preserve our freedom:

First, we will have to defend freedom of speech. It is the most important of our liberties. If we are free to speak, we will be able to tell people the truth and they will realize what is at stake.

Second, we will have to end cultural relativism. To the multiculturalists, we must proudly proclaim: Our Western culture is far superior to the Islamic culture. Only when we are convinced of that, we will be willing to fight for our own identity.

Third, we will have to stop Islamization. Because more Islam means less freedom. We must stop immigration from Islamic countries, we must expel criminal immigrants, we must forbid the construction of new mosques. There is enough Islam in Europe already. Immigrants must assimilate and adapt to our values: When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

Fourth, we must restore the supremacy and sovereignty of the nation-state. Because we are citizens of these states, we can take pride in them. We love our nation because they are our home, because they are the legacy which our fathers bestowed on us and which we want to bestow on our children. We are not multiculturalists, we are patriots. And because we are patriots, we are willing to fight for freedom.

Church Architecture

In a recent post there was a discussion on the projected Russian Orthodox church scheduled to be built near the Eiffel Tower. More than ever the question of appropriate and inappropriate architecture for a Christian church is relevant as architects concoct depressing, uninspiring and downright insulting designs for buildings that are supposed to fill us with awe and a sense of transcendence. The following comment on the above structure is from Yves Daoudal:

No, it is not an old factory, it's a new church… It was consecrated yesterday (March 20) by Benedict XVI, because it is in Rome and it is dedicated to Saint Corbinian. (…)

Daoudal however speaks well of the speech by the Pope, who graciously extended his warmest congratulations to those who built the church and to the people who will form its congregation. That was not the moment for criticism. But what do they think when they look at this grim eyesore?

I noticed a trackback at my post on the Russian church. It led to this article at a website called Camera Lucida. Those interested in Russian culture may enjoy reading it.

Farewell Elizabeth Taylor

We all became voyeurs when she was in the headlines. We could not get enough of her, especially since she represented our suppressed secret desires. I was a little girl mad about movie magazines and I used to rush to the corner drugstore, in the suburbs where I was raised, to buy the new issues every month. When she was on the cover my friends and I gawked and swooned at the sight of that face. As we grew into awkward teenagers we began to carp - maybe she wasn't so perfect after all - her eyes weren't really violet, and she had a ski nose (which was not true). There were so many others who were beautiful, but she was the standard by which others were judged. Jean Simmons looked like her, Hedy Lamarr, Vivien Leigh and Ava Gardner were just as beautiful (I'm speaking of brunettes), but no one had the appeal and the magnetism she had. I disliked her voice - it sounded like a little girl and I felt anyone that beautiful should have a womanly voice like that of Susan Hayward, for example, whose deep husky voice and great diction made me melt, especially when she played Jane Froman in With a Song in My Heart. Still, every new movie with Elizabeth Taylor was an event.

Her earlier films were enchanting and she was the loveliest Rebecca any Ivanhoe ever met (though he had to choose Rowena, for she was of his own people). We were flabbergasted by her love life and in awe at her ability to find husbands (and her inability to live alone, even for a short while). We were also shocked at her behavior and at what seemed to be an absence of morals. But I never stopped being fascinated, since I believe we are all fascinated by the wickedness of celebrities, even as we condemn their acts, but those who are larger than life have certain privileges... I felt she was living authentically, searching for the Right One, taking a new man at each stage in her life. She was frantic for love, and when she lost love she was frantic to recapture it. Her beauty deepened until some point in her marriage to Richard Burton when the two of them began to appear bloated, haggard and even garish. She lost her charm and elegance as she drank life to the dregs, drowning herself in alcohol (as did Burton) and prescription drugs for her countless and predictable illnesses and accidents. Predictable, because from early on Elizabeth Taylor used illness as a way of punishing herself and purging herself of the misery and guilt she experienced whenever a marriage ended. In her relentless search for love she acquired seven husbands and eight marriages, but this is because, as she said, she was raised by a strict family who believed in marriage, not in love affairs. So whenever she had a meaningful love affair she had to marry the man. Was she immoral or too moral? I don't ask myself too many questions about her anymore. She was as deeply religious as she was beautiful. When Mike Todd was killed (a catastrophe for her and for us), they said she was devastated and very angry with God.

I think I will remember the younger woman, rapturously beautiful, and a natural born actress who needed no lessons, though it took me a long long time to appreciate her as an actress.

More important perhaps than husbands were her friends. She had the ability to make and to keep meaningful friendships with men and women. I think this is one thing that sets her apart - she was not just a siren, but almost a mother earth figure, a person who would never abandon a friend in need.

There are many gaudy, unpleasant aspects to her public life, but they don't matter right now. What matters is that Hollywood is definitively dead.

There is no specific French connection to Elizabeth Taylor, that I know of, but she filmed The Last Time I Saw Paris, with Van Johnson, in 1954. Loosely based on a novel by F. Scott Fitzgerald, she plays a beautiful but spoiled American girl who gets bored with her married life and seeks excitement elsewhere. The video above shows scenes from the film with Jerome Kern's song in the background. The last line says "No matter how they change her, I'll remember her that way." And so we shall.

Scrambling for Votes

The graph above shows the percent of votes per party in those cantons where the Front National had a candidate in last Sunday's election. Thus, we see that, on this basis, the FN received 19% of all votes - more than the UMP. This implies that if the FN had had more candidates, the results would have been even more impressive.

Trying to condense the commentary on the French cantonal elections is like trying to "drink the sea", to paraphrase a French expression. But it all revolves around a handful of themes:

1. Will Sarkozy make an alliance with the Front National against the PS (Socialist Party)?

2. Will Sarkozy make an alliance with the PS against the Front National?

3. Is Marine Le Pen merely biding her time until 2017, when she will be a shoe-in if the president at the time happens to be Dominque Strauss-Kahn?

4. What happens to Sarkozy's men when they speak openly about the election and tell their voters to vote for the FN instead of the Socialists or vice versa?

Here are a few excerpts in greatly condensed form from the home page of Le Salon Beige:

Thierry Gourlet, the FN regional councillor from Lorraine, declares that FN voters who have to choose between the UMP and the PS should stay away from the polls on Sunday. The exception would be if there is a candidate from a smaller right-wing party. These parties are known collectively as the DVD - Diverse Right. He explains that FN voters cannot choose between the UMP and the PS because they are the same - a union of failures.

The gendarmes of Versailles-Sud, where they are stationed in large numbers, voted strongly for the Front National last Sunday, demonstrating their disappointment with Sarkozy. The UMP candidate received a total of 67 votes from two voting locations, while the FN candidate received a total of 186 votes. These results are not equivalent to a prediction for next Sunday, but are a significant indication.

For whom should Catholics vote in 2012? Rémi Fontaine, a Catholic writer, says there is a difference between the "lesser evil" and the "lesser worst". Marine Le Pen appears as the "lesser evil", while Sarkozy has proven himself to be the "incompetent leader of decline" and the representative of the "lesser worst which cannot be confused with healthy political prudence. Clearly, the Catholics faithful to Church social doctrine must first rally behind the lesser evil, to the exclusion of the lesser worst."

Note: We can only assume that the Socialists are the "greater worst". Some choice.

As one Salon Beige reader asks:

- And if the Socialists take power, what will that be in terms of natural law?

In a more-than-confusing quarrel over who to vote for on Sunday March 27, members of Sarkozy's UMP are shocked that Prime Minister François Fillon told voters to vote against the Front National in a race where the FN was pitted against the PS (Socialists). Fillon claims there is no difference between his position and that of Sarkozy:

"There is no difference between the position of the president and my own. No vote from the Right or the Center should be given to the Front National. This is consistent with the position of the president."

Sarkozy himself said:

"The choice is to abstain or to vote for the Socialists. The only thing you cannot do is vote for the FN."

Several members of UMP denounced this appeal, calling it catastrophic and disastrous.

UMP deputy from northern France Christian Vanneste declared:

"If there is a candidate of the extreme Left, I strongly advise that each person choose the camp that is closest to freedom."

Note: He is urging voters to vote for the FN, but he doesn't say it overtly.

Foreign Minister Alain Juppé is telling UMP voters to vote for the Socialists if they are opposed by the Front National on Sunday.

Note: Salon Beige readers react with unmitigated contempt to Juppé's collusion with the Left.

Last but not least, an ex-delegate of the UMP, Jérôme Jarny wrote in his blog of his consternation over the attempt to obstruct the Front National. He says:

"Personally, if I were to choose between a Socialist ballot and a Front National ballot, I think I would pick the latter!"

For this he received a letter of reprimand from the local UMP headquarters advising him that he could no longer use the UMP logo or the title of delegate from the canton of Mouthe on his correspondence. The letter concludes:

"It is not admissible, when one exercises political responsibilities, to express personal opinions that reflect on the whole party."

For Le Salon Beige readers, this is tantamount to Stalinism.

"A Strong Showing" for the Front National

Update: March 22, 2011 - According to a reader I misread the results. The Front National came in first in 40 cantons. I assumed that meant it had a majority in those races, and therefore a second round would not be necessary. This is not the case. The FN did receive the highest number of votes, but not the 50% majority needed to do away with the second round. I'm very sorry about this error. The FN did well, not as well as we would have liked, but Marine Le Pen, despite her satisfaction over the results did not display a triumphalist attitude. She is, and I hope will continue to be, cautious about all elections results, polls, and commentary.

The Front National will participate in the second round of elections in 399 cantons, according to LCI.TF1. The party had deployed about 1500 candidates. Therefore, roughly 1100 FN candidates did not win enough votes to proceed to next Sunday's run-off. However, it appears that this result is not at all bad, and in fact 39 FN candidates won a majority of votes, eliminating the need for a second round. (Note: Le Salon Beige gives the number as 40.)

Another article quotes Marine Le Pen who spoke of a "strong showing" by the Front National and called the election "historic." The article also provides the following results:

(…) the Socialist Party obtained 25.11% of the votes, the UMP (Sarkozy's party) 17.13%, the Front National 15.26%, the Front de gauche more than 9% and Europe Ecologie-Les Verts 8.3%, according to the Interior Ministry. (…) The presidential majority was credited with 32.5% via additional votes from the right, a tactic that angered both the Front National and the Socialists. Participation in the election appears not to have gone beyond 45%, a record low for this type of election.

Note: The Front National has issued a communiqué warning about the methods used by the Interior Ministry to report the results. As stated above, the Ministry "padded" the UMP's results by adding to it votes from other right-wing parties, instead of enumerating all parties separately.

Recriminations shot back and forth between Prime Minister François Fillon and the Socialist leaders. When Fillon urged the voters of the "republican right" to gather around their values, the chairman of the Socialist Party, Martine Aubry, deplored that, for the first time, a republican party had chosen the Front National instead of the "front republican".

What this means is that she expected Fillon and the UMP party to form an alliance (known as the "front republicain") with the Socialists against the FN. This is a common occurrence in France where any political bed partner is better than the FN. However, another leading Socialist, François Hollande, explicitly called on Socialists to vote for the UMP in those cantons where there is no Socialist candidate.

So next Sunday in about 400 cantons the FN will face either a Socialist or an UMP candidate. And in those cantons where there is no Socialist running we can expect leftists to vote for any party except the Front National.

One other piece of good news: Véronique Besse of the MPF, the party of Philippe de Villiers who governed the department of Vendée for so many years, won a majority in the first round in the canton of Herbiers. She is a person of traditional values, pro-family and certainly an asset in Vendée, now that Villiers is no longer president of the General Council. A reader at Le Salon Beige regards this as proof that Vendée still favors those close to Philippe de Villiers.

Below, a graph showing the percent of votes for the FDG (Left Front, including the Communists), the Socialist Party, the Front National, the UMP and the Ecology-Green Parties. Note that the Socialists won the greatest percentage of votes, and that the UMP and the FN are very close, some say almost neck to neck.

A Russian Cathedral for Paris

An interesting piece of news, architecturally and culturally speaking, and a welcome change from the usual mosque. Le Parisien reports:

Yesterday, in the vast salons of the Russian Embassy, the fifteen members of the jury - both French and Russian - unveiled the result of the international competition for the creation of the new Russian Orthodox Church to be built at the foot of the Eiffel Tower. The Franco-Russian team of architects - Sade and Arch Group - led by the Spaniard Manuel Nunez Yanowsky, 69, was hired for the job.

The affair is highly political. The idea for this project, which includes an Orthodox church and a cultural center, was decided upon directly by Nicolas Sarkozy and Dmitri Medvedev. (…)

The Russian religious center will include five golden onion domes that will reach 27 meters above the ground. A lightweight glass veil will cover half of the 4300 square meters of land. And to persuade the jury, and the Parisians as well, an immense garden open to the public will be built and will form a staircase covering one of the buildings. (…)

The work should begin early in 2012 according to the Embassy. The cost of the project, estimated at 34.5 million euros will require donations from French and Russian benefactors, plus contributions from the Russian State. (…)

According to Russia Today, the new church is part of a larger plan by Patriarch Kirill to extend the influence of the Russian Church over the Russian diaspora - the scattering of Russian émigrés throughout Western Europe and the United States after the Bolshevik Revolution. The article concludes:

For some, these recent steps by the religious Moscovite authorities are an attempt to control valuable church properties, and to dominate Russian orthodoxy throughout the world. Others say that Patriarch Kirill is trying to reintroduce spirituality in Western secular societies. It is with this goal in mind that he, along with Pope Benedict XVI, has undertaken to revive friendly relations with the Vatican.

The Times Online has posted this short article:

Russia has pulled off a spectacular coup by winning permission from President Nicolas Sarkozy to build an orthodox cathedral next to the Eiffel Tower.

According to sources, the Russian government has paid about £60m for a site where it will build a gilded cathedral with “onion” domes like St Basil’s in Red Square, Moscow.

The building will dramatically alter the fabled Paris skyline. France’s agreement came only after intensive lobbying by Russian officials, including President Dmitry Medvedev, who told Sarkozy how important the cathedral was to him, and Vladimir Putin, the prime minister.

It would be the first Russian Orthodox cathedral built in France since the days of the Romanovs.

Moscow went to extraordinary lengths when the site, headquarters of the French weather service, went on sale last year. It employed a French lobbying firm to get across the message: the Kremlin would consider a sale to anyone else an “unfriendly act”.

The building is expected to be in place by 2013.

It will no doubt highlight divisions in the orthodox flock. Many in France are descendants of white Russians who fled communism after the death of the last tsar and who are opposed to the patriarchy in Moscow because of its links to the Soviet-era KGB.

Thanks to the reader who sent the links.

Marine Le Pen at Lampedusa

Four days ago Marine Le Pen visited the Italian island of Lampedusa where she spoke bluntly but diplomatically about the devastating consequences of massive immigration. Here is a slightly condensed version of the video above:

The announcer introduces the topic - Marine Le Pen campaigns on the island of Lampedusa.

Then the reporters on the scene explain that it was a very controlled visit. From the moment she arrived, she was taken by the island authorities to the detention center.

We see demonstrators with signs such as "Liberté Egalité Fraternité for undocumented immigrants!"

The president of the Front National meets with immigrants away from the camera.

Marine Le Pen explains her reasoning to the reporters:

"If I listened only to my heart, of course I would offer to take you on my boat. But my boat is too fragile and if I take you on board my boat will sink and we will drown together. This is a metaphor for saying that Europe does not have the capacity to take in these illegals."

The announcer describes the latest arrival at Lampedusa of about sixty more illegals. Marine Le Pen proposes that they be sent back:

"The risk of a migratory wave would be the result of a potential collapse of the Libyan regime. If this illegal immigration is not stemmed - and the Italian government does not hide the fact - we can expect perhaps hundreds of thousands of immigrants who want to try their luck in the European Union."

Marine Le Pen's visit lasted only three hours - long enough for her to place immigration at the heart of her program. It is a theme that has stood the Front National in good stead.

Note: She has introduced in clear speech the notion that Europe CANNOT take in any more people, even if it wanted to, because there is no room - physically, culturally and economically.

Cantonal Elections in France

Sundays March 20 and March 27 are election days in France. The first round of cantonal elections will determine, by a process of elimination, two candidates for the position of general councilor ("conseiller general"). The second round will determine the winner, unless a candidate receives a majority in the first round. This system is similar to the presidential election that we witnessed in 2007. Two thousand twenty-three cantons in the various departments of metropolitan France (except Paris) and overseas departments, including Mayotte, will be involved.

General Councilors are normally elected for a period of six years, but this year a change in procedure goes into effect and those elected will serve only three years. Then in 2014, for the first time, an election will be held to elect "territorial councilors" who will sit in both the General Council of the department and the Regional Council of the region.

The General Council of a department is roughly equivalent to our State legislature, and the president of the General Council is like the governor of a State. A region is composed of two or more departments and is headed by a regional president.

If this sounds confusing, it could be an effort to reduce the number of councilors elected, since one winner will effectively hold two posts. But it also could complicate matters more than simplify them, since the councilor will have to split his loyalty between his department and his region. Or, to put it differently, he will have broader powers, but the importance of the smaller entities such as departments will be diminished as they become gobbled up in the new notion of a "territory". I have no idea why this is being done or what its implications are, and my comments here are pure speculation, but several constitutional changes are being made that will affect voting procedures and redistricting.

So, this weekend and next, for the last time, the French will elect general councilors. According to Le JDD cantonal elections do not usually produce a heavy turnout. In 2008, 65% voted in the first round and 55% in the second. However, since it is the general councilors who elect the Senators, and since in September 2011 there will be a senatorial election, these cantonal elections could have an impact later.

(Note: In France Senators are elected by an electoral college composed of municipal councilors, general councilors, regional councilors and deputies. The municipal councilors constitute the largest segment - 142,000 delegates out of a total of 150,000.)

This will also be a test for the Front National, to see if the gains made by Marine Le Pen carry over into the cantonal elections, and if the voting public is ready, at long last, to voice its dissatisfaction with Nicolas Sarkozy.

There is a short summary in English at Americans in France, where I found the photo below of campaign posters along a road in the French Alps. And you can read a synopsis about French cantons at Wikipedia.

Marine Le Pen on Bioethics

Last month, Marine Le Pen, in an interview with the Catholic website La Croix, presented an overview of her policies on bioethical issues such as euthanasia, the Veil Law on abortion and embryonic research:

- If you were a deputy in the National Assembly, would you take part in the debate on bioethics?

- Yes, because it is a subject that is absolutely fundamental, that affects our vision of man and the roots of our civilization. But it's not only the Front National that has been sidelined from the debate. The French people have been also. We saw this clearly with the "medicine baby": they learned overnight that you could create a baby to treat another.

Note: A "medicine baby" (what we call a "donor baby") is one that is conceived in vitro and carefully monitored for the presence of disease and compatibility with its siblings. The baby's purpose on earth, therefore, is to become a blood or tissue donor to a sibling in need. According to Le Monde the practice is not new in the United States or in Spain, but the birth, on January 26, 2011, in France, of a little boy of Turkish origin, was a first.

A full English version of the story is at France 24.

Marine Le Pen goes on:

Despite all the compassion that we have for the families of children afflicted with rare genetic diseases, we may find ourselves tipping the scales. When you choose one embryo, and discard the others, with the only goal being to make a donor baby, you are edging closer to transforming the human being into an object.

- In general, what do you think about embryonic research?

- That it must be banned, pure and simple. Furthermore, a certain number of researchers, opposed to the utilization of the embryo, emphasize that it's taking the easy way out, that there are other ways to advance research, such as stem cells from the umbilical cord. The role of political leaders is to place limits.

- Would you like to review the Veil Law?

- To review the law or to apply it? Because this law that provided for abortion as an last resort has been denatured. Today, when a woman goes to Planned Parenthood, they offer her an abortion or … an abortion!

It is imperative to restore conditions that would allow a real choice. This means information, financial assistance to families and prenatal adoption. I also think that we must stop reimbursing abortion. There are sufficient means of contraception today. In general, we have to promote respect for life in or society.

- Isn't that in contradiction with your desire to bring back the death penalty?

- Not at all. We were speaking of innocent life! However, when someone is himself the bringer of death, of barbarity, the role of leaders is to protect society. I am therefore in favor of a referendum on this issue.

- What is your position on euthanasia?

- That we must not cross that line. The Leonetti Law seems adequate to me, it provides a bit of balance. If we go beyond it we will once again be tipping the scales, even if there has been a lot of progress in terms of accepting financial responsibility, and pain management.

Note: The Leonetti Law was passed in April 2005. It forbids "active" euthanasia, encourages comfort care, and controls "passive" euthanasia which prevents doctors from trying heroic measures to save a life when there is clearly no hope for the patient. Many Catholics objected to this law.

- Doesn't the success of the PACS prove that it corresponded to a social need?

Note: PACS refers to the law on civil unions, passed in 1999, under Socialist Prime Minister Lionel Jospin.

- No. The objective of the PACS was to accustom people's minds to the coming legislation on gay marriage. It's a success because it is above all a tax break. I remind you that only 6% of the PACS involve homosexuals. I am therefore in favor of making it useless by increasing the desirability of marriage through tax breaks.

- Should family subsidies be granted on the basis of income?

- Not only should they be universal, but they must be substantially reevaluated. For twenty years, families, more so than others, have been largely abandoned by the politicians. The FN's key measure is the creation of a parental salary equivalent to the minimum wage, starting with the first child. In other words, a real choice given to the mother to take care of her children.

Furthermore, large families should benefit from privileged access to public housing. It is understood that, within the framework of national preferences, all of these subsidies ought to be reserved for French families. Foreigners who come to live on our territory must be able to take care of their own needs.

- Do you believe that Islam is compatible with the Republic?

- Yes. But we are seeing a very troubling rise in Muslim fundamentalism which IS incompatible with republican principles, and French traditions, mores and life style. What are the authorities waiting for to stop it?

My fight for laïcité also aims to protect our compatriots of the Muslim faith from fundamentalist pressures - dress, food, etc… - that are leading them to radicalize a religious practice that was compatible with France and the Republic until recently.

- Are you in favor of the building of mosques?

- I disagree with the claim that there are not enough mosques in France. Be that as it may, the construction of mosques ought to be subject to several conditions, beginning with respect for the 1905 law that has already been violated by the public financing of religious associations, posing as cultural associations, and by the granting of long-term leases.

I am also against financing by foreign powers who refuse to allow the construction of churches on their soil. In short, if Muslims want more mosques, let them finance them. And finally, there must be no giant mosques and no minarets.

Note: Obviously, this is not quite what we expected from her. On bioethics, she is fine. On Islam, she is making the mistake so many others have made, that of imaging that there is a moderate Islam compatible with the Republic, and a fundamentalist Islam that deviates from the norm. She is therefore, on the nature of Islam, closer to Nicolas Sarkozy than to the Bloc Identitaire or Riposte Laïque or conservative Catholics, all of whom have made it clear, over and over, that there is only one Islam.

Japan's Nightmare

Above, the magnificent Great Wave off Kanagawa by Katsushika Hokusai (1760 - 1849), part of a series of thirty-six views of Mount Fuji. The artist became world-famous thanks to this work that we see reproduced everywhere - on calendars, note cards, etc… It takes on new and dire meaning as we watch the apocalyptic scenes from Japan. And now, there is talk of a possible volcanic eruption in southern Japan.

Click here for a 6-minute video of incredible devastation.

Below a 10-minute video of almost supernatural impact. If the video stops and starts constantly, you may have to let it run its course to the end, then replay it. For some reason, I've been having this problem all day with all the videos at all the websites.



And turn to the Daily Mail for some of the most striking photos you'll ever see.

Below two photos out of the hundreds that appear all over the Internet.




Lawrence Auster at VFR has been following this disaster and provides in-depth discussions and many links.

The Foreign Minister and the Muslim Brotherhood

During the holiday season of 2010 then Foreign Minister Michèle Alliot-Marie (above) made a trip to Tunisia with her "partner" Patrick Ollier and several members of their family. When she arrived, the Tunisian "Revolution" was in full swing but it seems she underestimated its impact and continued to maintain friendly relations with the now-deposed Ben Ali, suggesting among other things a security agreement between France and Ben Ali's regime. While in Tunisia, she made use of a private plane belonging to Aziz Miled, a longtime friend and presumed associate of Ben Ali. Some members of her cabinet insisted he was not connected to Ben Ali, and that the new Tunisian government had returned his assets to him. But the main point here is that a major scandal exploded over the minister's sojourn in Tunisia, and even though at first she refused to resign, pressure ultimately won out. She was replaced by Alain Juppé, about whom I have written several articles, first after Sarkozy's election, and later within the context of his function as mayor of Bordeaux and benefactor of the Muslims seeking funds for the Bordeaux mosque.

The French blogs have reported on Alliot-Marie's departure without much emotion one way or the other, but the appointment of Juppé (photo below), and above all, his visit to Egypt last weekend (March 6) and his conciliatory remarks about the Muslim Brotherhood, have aroused the indignation of Riposte Laïque, Yves Daoudal, Joachim Véliocas, and Bernard Antony, to name a few.


First, some excerpts from Daoudal Hebdo #118, the weekly journal sent out by Yves Daoudal:

Alain Juppé, our Foreign Minister, went to Egypt. He met members of the "youth coalition of the revolution", notably the Muslim Brotherhood. Said Alain Juppé:

"The discussion allowed me to determine that the way this movement is sometimes presented warrants a deeper and more enlightened approach, in view of the fact that several of them shared with me their vision of a liberal Islam, respectful of democratic principles."

This is pitifully stupid. And criminally unconscionable. Moreover, Alain Juppé assured General Tantaoui, chief of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (CSFA) " of the confidence France had in the CSFA to lead the political transition process."

Daoudal explains that part of this "process" involves abolishing constitutional guarantees that protected Mubarak. He then points out that article 2 will not be changed:

Thus, article 2, that stipulates that sharia is the principal source of legislation, will not be touched. In addition, the great imam of Al Azhar, sheikh Ahmed El-Tayeb, had warned on February 16 against amending article 2, saying that any amendment to article 2 could "spread discord and curtail the freedoms and democratic processes in the country." Sic. There's another Muslim Juppé must be fond of: sharia is freedom and democracy.

Alain Juppé had nothing to say about the Copts. And yet at least a thousand of them demonstrated before the offices of State television. (…) And even more the next day and the day after that. They were there to protest the attack on the village of Soul by 4000 Muslims who burned the church and forced numerous Copts to flee. To protest the attitude of the army who at first refused to intervene, then who intervened once everything was over to impose a curfew on the 12,000 Copts of the city and to watch the Muslims destroy the last walls of the church and take possession of the site by organizing a "prayer meeting"… At the origin of this attack there is a love story between a Copt and a Muslim girl. The girl's father was killed by her cousin because he refused to kill his daughter to save the family's honor. The girl's brother then killed the cousin to avenge the death of their father. And the Muslims attributed responsibility for the two murders to the Copts…

Daoudal concludes his article with a summary of how, despite Tantaoui's promise to rebuild the church, the governor of Soul decreed that the church would have to be rebuilt elsewhere in order to leave the use of the land to the Muslims. This was the reason why the Copts demonstrated. Tuesday night, there were thousands demonstrating on the highway. The Muslims attacked. There were ten killed and more than a hundred wounded…

The photo below of Coptic Christians demonstrating is from UPI. The accompanying article by Arnaud de Borchgrave confirms that the situation in Egypt is worse now than under Mubarak.


Alain Juppé's obtuse naïveté (if it is naïveté and not voluntary debasement) did not escape Bernard Antony, a Catholic writer and watchdog for the security of Christians throughout the world:

Alain Juppé warmly congratulated himself on his very fruitful conversation in Cairo with Salafists and various other Muslim Brothers. He complimented them for being in all very respectable interlocutors, reflective and quite concerned with promoting democracy.

Did he think perhaps that Islamists look like savages, foaming at the mouth with a razor between their teeth?

He takes his place, alas! in a long line of Western politicians afflicted with a naïveté bordering on stupidity who, having met them, confided that they had finally found very worldly, very reflective and often seductive interlocutors in the persons of Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and Mao, and even those wise, impassible, and courteous ayatollahs of Iran.

Alain Juppé obviously did not inquire of his interlocutors if they intended to promote a democracy that had broken with the model of totalitarian theocracy established in 622 A.D. by the prophet Mohammed.

Disdaining the incessant burnings of churches and massacres of Christians, he did not take the trouble to find out what, according to these kindly Muslim brothers, would be the fate of non-Muslims living in Egyptian society.

But Alain Juppé no doubt does not know what dhimmitude is, nor what the consummate art of taqiyya consists of, namely, double meanings and dissimulation, that is taught in Islam as a virtue in the service of the higher interests of the Umma of Islam.

Joachim Véliocas, writing at Islamisation, reminds us of the generous helping hand offered by Juppé, in his capacity as mayor of Bordeaux, to the Muslim association that sought funding and real estate for a mosque. This might be an opportune moment to point out that Véliocas has written a book, available at Amazon in French, exposing those mayors of France who have openly or covertly facilitated the building of mosques by granting long-term leases to the Muslims. Entitled The mayors that court Islamism it looks at each city where funds, privileges and favors have been provided to Muslims for mosques designated as "cultural centers", usually at taxpayers' expense. The publisher is Tatamis who also published La Mosquée de Notre-Dame. The introduction posted at Amazon begins:

Alain Juppé claims to have "excellent relations" with the "principle leaders" of the Muslim community of Bordeaux. Tareq Oubrou, future imam of the Great Bordeaux Mosque, nonetheless praises the Muslim Brotherhood, a movement that fights for the restoration of the Caliphate and for the reunion in Bordeaux of the Muslims of Istanbul, since borders are "a disdainful heresy." (…)


At his website Véliocas denounces Juppé's reluctance to debate the problem of Islam:

Very much in the limelight for the past several weeks for having rushed to the defense of Muslims who are "stigmatized", Alain Juppé has made a number of statements on the idea, launched by Nicolas Sarkozy, of a debate on Islam. He began by saying that we "had to be very skeptical of the idea" of a debate. Hence, not very skeptical about Islamization itself. The journal Marianne reexamines his wild arguments on religion in public spaces, namely, that he authorizes many Catholic processions in the streets of his city, implying that the Muslims praying in the street should be judged by the same principles. In Le Figaro, he asked that the debate be "controlled" so as not to offend, urging, notably, not to "stigmatize" Islam.

As far as the mosque itself is concerned, on January 9 on France 2 Television, Juppé declared:

"We are in permanent contact with the promoters of the project - the Association of Muslims of the Gironde (note: closely affiliated with the UOIF which is in turn connected to the Muslim Brotherhood) and with imam Tareq Oubrou and we hope that the plans will move forward and I will do everything to make land available (…) "

Note: Land has already been purchased by the municipality for the giant mosque.

As for Riposte Laïque, Christine Tasin has posted a take-no-prisoners article denouncing the minister as a traitor and a disgrace to his country. Unfortunately, despite her realistic assessment of Islam, she speaks as a leftist when she evokes French identity. Some excerpts:

The man who has become, horror of horrors, our Foreign Minister, has justified, once again, the title of Islamo-Collaborator (...)

In truth, we already knew that the king of compromise with Islam had granted a piece of land with a long term lease to the Muslim association of Gironde to construct a gigantic Islamic complex presided over by Tareq Oubrou, the man who gladly acknowledges that Muslims can, temporarily, so long as they are a minority, respect the laws of the Republic, but once they are numerous enough, they must apply sharia law everywhere.

We already knew that the king of compromise with Islam was opposed to the law banning the burka because of "possible stigmatization of Islam", and had proclaimed that Islam was compatible with the Republic because "France must be welcoming and respectful of differences."

The misdeeds of Sire Juppé continue: in the midst of the Egyptian revolution, when the fanatic Qardawi preached before hundreds of thousands of Muslims at Place al-Tahrir, the minister (I can't bring myself to say "our minister") held talks with those who are among the most intransigent Muslims and dared tell us that we were wrong about them…

We're wrong about them, Mr. Minister? (…)

She lists the 50 measures established by the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood to be implemented once Islam takes over a country, measures which would turn France, or any country conquered by Islam, into a closed world, a world ruled by sharia.

Sire Juppé is a collaborator ready to sell for a mouthful everything that makes life in France pleasurable: equality, co-ed institutions, freedom of expression, of mores, of religion, art, the primacy of man's law over divine law…

Mr. Juppé is our shame and we will not forgive this government for having given him such iniquitous power (…) If there were a real Left, secular and republican, in France, it would demand his immediate resignation, for grave complicity with fascism!

Note: I would like to remind her that there is a real Left in France and that it is largely responsible for the importation of Islam. How ironic, that the Left demanded and got the resignation of Alliot-Marie for befriending Ben Ali, a lesser evil, and yet says nothing about the much greater evil of the Muslim Brotherhood.

We hope that a Nuremberg will judge all the Islamo-Collaborators, and when that day comes, Juppé will have a seat waiting for him!

The cartoon below showing the minister licking the slippers of Tareq Oubrou is not exactly subtle. A contented Oubrou says: "I really like this new minister."