Category Archives: France

Nidra Poller on the Sarah Halimi Case

Nidra Poller was among the first to report in English on the Sarah Halimi atrocity. The following excerpts are from Parts 2, 3 and 6 of her extensive French presidential election coverage.

Part 2, Update:  5 April

French Presidential Campaign Part 2 UPDATE

5 April 2017

I drop in to the Shir Hadash Bookstore on rue des Rosiers at the end of the day. Madame Magnichever comes in, pale and troubled, and whispers to me: “A dear friend… we’ve known her for 40 years…she was assassinated… an Islamist pushed her out the window.”

Reports of the incident came out first in Jewish media, then it was picked up by a few two generalist sites: A Jewish woman in her mid-sixties was pushed out of a third (in U.S. 4th)-floor window by a 27 year-old Muslim neighbor who, according to some accounts, had recently become radicalized. He had frequent run-ins with the police for violence and “petty” crime. According to testimony of a  neighbor who witnessed the crime, the assailant who shouted allahu akhbar as he pushed the victim out the window. He is in police custody, undergoing psychiatric examination. Police sources say he made “incoherent statements” (we’ve heard that before).

Detail will follow in Part 3 of the ongoing series.   

From Ilan to Sarah Halimi: Shameful France

French public intellectual, Alexandra Laignel-Lavastine, has written an open letter to Gerard Collomb, the new French Minister of the Interior about the stunning silence in the French public sphere about the terrible murder of Sarah Halimi, a doctor, who was tortured and murdered by her Muslim Arab neighbor while three armed policemen stood outside her door waiting for backup. Below is a translation of the text by André Unterberger with some changes by me.

An open letter to Gerard Collomb [1]: from Ilan [0] to Sarah Halimi, a shameful France

Source: ATLANTICO
Mr Minister,

A 65-yr old Jewish lady MD, during her sleep, is attacked and atrociously tortured for more than one hour.  She lives in a modest apartment in the 11th arrondissement of Paris, rue Vaucouleurs. The murderer,  who reached her apartment through the balcony, attacks with incredible violence, resulting in about twenty fractures all over her face and body.

He then throws her, dying, out of the window, from the 3rd floor. During all this time, the police (3 men with weapons, present in the building just outside the apartment door) do nothing. The neighbours (several dozen) can hear the victim’s yells:  they do nothing either. The French media are alerted. They make no queries and do not report the murder.

Her name was Sarah … Sarah Halimi.

This atrocious scene did not happen in 1942, before or after the “Rafle du Veld’hiv” [2] but in the night from April 3rd to April 4th, 2017, in a tiny apartment close to the “Bataclan” [3]: Cries of “Allah Akbar” accompanied the scene. The next Sunday, a silent march was organised in the area. Youngsters from the nearby quarters countered it with yells of “Mort aux Juifs” or “We own kalachnikovs”.

The Paris public prosecutor immediately pointed out that one should wait for the result of the enquiry before issuing conclusions about the nature of the crime. Who knows? An elderly Jewish lady savagely massacred by a 27-yr old Islamist with many priors (drug trafficking, assault): this could just be a dispute between neighbours… Never mind that the murderer, Kada Taore, from Mali, insulted the victim on a regular basis, and she had reported to neighbours how frightened she was by him. “We are at war”, Manuel Valls proclaimed [4]: “so that Muslims will not feel ashamed any more and Jews will not be frightened any more.” A smashing success.

Mr Minister, you have just taken your position in a country where it is once again possible to murder Jews without eliciting much concern from our fellow Frenchmen and women. By the way, the men who have been in charge before you, both on the left and the right, preferred not to look any further than the end of the broom with which they swept the problem under the carpet. None were up to this challenge. Will you be? This Sunday May 21. on I24News [5], Sarah Halimi’s brother said with extraordinary dignity; “I have waited 7 weeks before I said anything. The absolute silence about my sister’s assassination has become intolerable.”

Malliet: Update on Georges Bensoussan Trial in Paris

A tireless warrior in the cogwar, Martin Malliet, frequent commenter here, left a long comment with an update on the George Bensassoun blasphemy trial in Chambre 17 in Paris. I post it here to give it the attention it deserves.

This is indeed a fascinating case that shows how crazy things have gotten in France. (I put some things together on my facebook page.)

Georges Bensoussan, a French Jewish historian and activist against islamism (with quite some credentials in this field), in a debate on the radio (high-brow France-Culture almost nobody listens to) explains how widespread antisemitism in the French Muslim community makes it vulnerable to the islamists’ attempts to set it up against French society.

He then is accused of incitement to hatred against the Muslim community by professional anti-racism organisations, with the lead being taken by the CCIF (against islamophobia). Other anti-racist organisations join in, among which the venerable old LICRA (against racism and anti-semitism) with its star witness Mohamed Sifaoui, an Algerian journalist in France who is a very outspoken critic of islamism and at the same time very much maligned by the CCIF for being former PM Manuel Valls’s sidekick and by the CCIF’s followers for being a ‘zionist agent’, who explains his testimony against Bensoussan with the wish not to leave the defense of the French Muslims entirely to the CCIF.

Apart maybe from the CCIF, nobody seems to be thinking about the sketch Dieudonné is going to make on Bensoussan, who is also associated with the French Shoah memorial, if he is ever found guilty by the court of incitement to hatred against Muslims, as the public prosecutor demands (with a fine of €1.500), after debates at the trial that lasted for 12 hours (till 1h30 in the morning). The verdict will be pronounced on the 7th of March.

The judge, who is Mme Siredey-Garnier, in the meantime has published a sort of opinion piece in the ‘Gazette du Palais’ in which she contrasts the 12-hour long Bensoussan trial with other hearings where she has to decide on the fate of some 23 illegal immigrants in about the same amount of time. The idea she tries to put forward seems to be that the Bensoussan trial is merely about a symbolic matter whereas the other cases are about real lives. But she reminds herself of the trials of Flaubert, Zola, Baudelaire and Charlie, which were also held before the same tribunal (17me chambre), and promises to do her duty by giving every case the attention it deserves.

Her piece inspired me to write a last message in support of Georges Bensoussan that I secretly hope will come to her attention (in French) and that on my part is meant as a simple plea for sanity: “Pour ma part, j’espère seulement que le juge jouera pleinement son rôle de juge, et admettra d’autres considérations que celles introduites par les parties avant d’arriver à une conclusion. Comme par exemple le fait qu’il s’agissait d’un débat contradictoire à la radio, et que dans ce cas on ne peut attendre de personne qu’il pèse vraiment tous ses mots. Que Georges Bensoussan est certes responsable de sa parole, mais qu’il ne peut être tenu responsable de toutes les interprétations malveillantes que d’autres veulent en faire. En d’autres mots, que le juge se rend compte que devant un tribunal révolutionnaire Georges Bensoussan serait facilement condamné pour incitation à la haine raciale. Mais qu’il décide ensuite que devant le tribunal d’un état de droit comme la RF il ne le mérite aucunement. Et qu’il condamne chacune des parties civiles à €10.000 de dommages pour procédure abusive, harcèlement et atteinte à la réputation de Georges Bensoussan.”

http://www.marianne.net/agora-proces-bensoussan-reponse-mohamed-sifaoui-100249704.html

 

French Jewish Historian Sued Over ‘Far-Right Rhetoric’ Against Muslims

The use of accusations of Islamophobia to enforce Caliphater blasphemy codes and block the expression of any criticism of Muslims in Europe has long been acknowledged. The most disturbing trend in this verbal warfare is to criminalize Islamophobia as “hate speech.” Today in France we have a good example of this problem.

French Jewish Historian Sued Over ‘Far-Right Rhetoric’ Against Muslims

(JTA) — One of the world’s leading historians on the Jewish communities in Arab countries is being prosecuted in France for alleged hate speech against Muslims.

The Morocco-born French-Jewish scholar Georges Bensoussan, 64, is due to appear next month before a Paris criminal court over a complaint filed against him for incitement to racial hatred by the Collective Against Islamophobia in France, the group recently announced on its website.

Note that Bensoussan is the author of the first book on the new Anti-Semitism of the 21st century, Les territoires perdus de la République (2002), in English, The Lost Territories of the Republic. It chronicled the way in which a vicious anti-Semitic (and anti-French) hate speech had taken over many schools in France, especially in the banlieues (Zones Urbaines Sensibles). He published it under the protective pseudonym of Emmanuel Brenner.

The complaint, which leading French scholars dismissed as attempt at “intimidation” in a statement Friday, was over remarks about anti-Semitism by Muslims that Bensoussan, author of a definitive 2012 work entitled “Jews in Arab Lands,” made last year during an interview aired by the France Culture radio station, the Collective said.

The Collective based its complaint on two remarks by Bensoussan.

« Aujourd’hui nous sommes en présence d’un autre peuple au sein de la nation française, qui fait régresser un certain nombre de valeurs démocratiques qui nous ont portés….».

“Today, we are witnessing a different people in the midst of the French nation, who have a regressive effect on a certain number of democratic values to which we adhere…” read the first quote flagged.

From an empirical point of view, this is simple observation. Anyone who is familiar with the behavior of French Muslims in these “zones urbaines sensibles” knows the degree to which they show open contempt for democratic principles and norms: shame-murders, butchering teachers in front of the class, rapacious looting, exclusion of women from public places, taking over public space (main roads) for prayer, murders, rapes and assaults. And all of this, while it might have appeared before, became much more pronounced in the 21st century.
You can argue these are not all French Muslims. But you cannot argue that the culture their deeds reflect, is merely marginal to the French Muslim community. The voice of a violent, triumphalist, Muslim rap holds a place of power within that community, especially among youth, and in that world, Muhammad Merah, who filmed himself gunning down little Jewish children outside a school in Toulouse, is a hero. He is a “real man,” like Usama.

William Keylor: Anti-Semitism in France (January 2015)

My colleague at BU, William Keylor drew my attention to this essay he wrote in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo affair this last January (about which, I wrote here). He has given me permission to post it here, where it can be tweeted and facebooked.

JANUARY 14, 2015

As a non-Jewish historian of France with several dear Jewish friends in that country, I read with great dismay the recent news articles suggesting that many French Jews are considering emigrating to Israel to escape the rising tide of anti-Semitism most recently demonstrated in the brutal attack in a Paris kosher market that left four Jewish patrons dead on the eve of the Jewish Shabbat last week.

Of course, Jews in any country have a perfect right to make aliyah to Israel any time they choose to do so, and, as Prime Minister Netanyahu declared last week, they will be welcomed there with open arms. What causes the feeling of dismay and regret in this longtime student of French history is not Israel’s potential gain but France’s potential loss.

I think of the extraordinary contributions that Jews in France have made to the vibrant intellectual life of that country:  The list would include, among too many others to include here, the names of Raymond Aron, Julien Benda, Marc Bloch, Jacques Derrida, Emile Durkheim, Claude Levi-Strauss, Darius Milhaud, and Marcel Proust.

In addition to such path-breaking pioneers in philosophy, sociology, anthropology, history, and literary criticism, hundreds of thousands of ordinary French Jews have played a productive and integral role in their country’s social and political life.  As France’s Prime Minister Manuel Valls (who was born in Spain to a Spanish-Catalan father) has put it so bluntly: “If 100,000 French people of Spanish origin were to leave, I would never say that France is not France anymore. But if 100,000 Jews leave, France will no longer be France.”

The modern history of France’s relationship to its Jewish population is marked by high points and low points: In 1791 it was the first country in the world to grant civil equality to Jews. A low point came in the second half of the 1890s, when the unjust treason conviction and imprisonment of a Jewish army officer, Captain Alfred Dreyfus, for leaking military secrets to Germany precipitated a wave of anti-Semitism on the extreme right.

One of the observers of Dreyfus’s condemnation and of the cries of “Death to the Jews” that reverberated throughout the streets of Paris was the Austrian journalist Theodor Herzl. He subsequently founded the movement of political Zionism in part because the outburst of anti-Semitism during the Dreyfus Affair  in the most democratic, liberal, tolerant country in Europe persuaded him of the impossibility of assimilation and the necessity for a Jewish state to serve as a safe haven for threatened Jews everywhere.

A high point came when Dreyfus was eventually exonerated and reinstated as a major in the French army. The forces of liberal democracy, humanism, and tolerance triumphed over the forces of extreme nationalism, religious prejudice, and intolerance, which enabled most French Jews to feel secure in the secular French Republic.

Then the fall of France in 1940, the Nazi German occupation of the northern part of the country, and the advent of the collaborationist Vichy regime in the southern part ushered in another low point in the fortunes of Jews in France. Anti-Semitic laws enacted by the Vichy government severely restricted their rights. French authorities rounded up and deported some 76,000 Jews to the death camps of the Third Reich, of whom less than 2,500 survived.

In the decades since the dark days of 1940-1945, the Jewish community in France has thrived and prospered. Its 500,000 members represent the third largest Jewish community in the world (after Israel and the United States).  France has had five prime ministers of Jewish heritage, more than any other country save Israel.

The ever-present scourge of anti-Semitism was confined to the ideological extremes, from the right-wing Front National of Jean-Marie Le Pen to the proponents of Islamic terrorism such as that recently witnessed in Paris. (In recent years Le Pen’s daughter and political heir, Marine Le Pen, has replaced the anti-Semitism of her father with a virulent nativist rhetoric focusing on the threat to the French way of life posed by Islamic immigration from France’s former colonies in North Africa.).

Indeed, the principal source of anti-Semitism in France is no longer to be found in the old extreme right groups that had targeted Jews from the Dreyfus Affair to Vichy. It now emanates from the impoverished suburbs surrounding major French cities, where a small minority of unemployed, restless youth in immigrant families from North Africa and sub-Sahara Africa are attracted to the siren song of Al Qaeda and the Islamic State and are willing to commit terrorist acts to promote the cause.

More than 7,000 of France’s half a million Jewish citizens emigrated in 2014. Some predict that that number will double this year. Others forecast that half the population of French Jews will be gone by the end of the decade.

As the Jewish citizens of France contemplate the choice or emigration or the maintenance of their religious and/or cultural identity within France, the French government must leave no stone unturned in the process of protecting one of that country’s most precious resources. If it fails, to repeat the plaintive observation of Prime Minister Valls, France will no longer be France.

Terrorist chic en France, de l’exposition du Jeu de Paume, à Al Durah, à Mohamed Merah

Terrorist chic en France, de l’exposition du Jeu de Paume, à Al Durah, à Mohamed Merah

Une nouvelle exposition controversée célèbre les meurtriers de masse et élève la propagande de guerre au niveau de grand art.

Richard Landes – 30 juillet 2013

Traduction d’Isabelle Sfez

Pour consulter liens hyperliens, consultez l’article originale.

Cet été le musée national français du Jeu de Paume, en son temps célèbre pour ses accrochages de peinture impressionniste, héberge une étonnante exposition de photographies, Phantom House. Le travail d’une femme bédouine israélienne, Ahlam Shibli, rassemblant une série éclectique de photos qui dépeignent un certain nombre de groupes différents, dont les maisons ne sont pas les leurs, ou qui n’en ont pas – des gens qui “vivent sous oppression”.  Il s’agit de Bédouins “trackers” (pisteurs, traqueurs) qui s’enrôlent dans l’armée israélienne, de “palestiniens” vivant en Galilée et en Jordanie, d’enfants polonais dans des orphelinats, de militants LGBT du Moyen-Orient vivant dans des pays occidentaux, de français de Corrèze pendant l’occupation nazie, et, de loin les plus élaborés des séries de clichés, les familles de “martyrs” qui “résistèrent” à “l’occupation”, debout avec les photos, les affiches et les tombes de leurs proches “disparus”.

L’exposition a suscité une controverse prévisible. Ces prétendus “martyrs”, qui ont “pris le contrôle de leur propre mort”, objets d’une ardente dévotion par leur famille, sont en fait des meurtriers de masse qui se sont tués eux-mêmes dans le but d’assassiner le plus possible d’enfants, de femmes, de civils.

Comme la plupart des récits palestiniens, ces photos ne laissent aucune place à “l’autre”, exceptée celle de l’oppresseur colonial sans visage. Pour une femme juive, mécène du musée, l’expérience fut horrible. En regardant ces photos de “martyrs”, elle a reconnu ceux qui avaient fait exploser des restaurants, des bus, des marchés qui ont été choisis comme cible justement pour la présence d’enfants dans ces lieux.

Les réactions de protestations outrées affluèrent. La réponse du musée fut d’afficher un avis soulignant que cette exposition n’était pas de la propagande, et, à propos de l’artiste, précisant qu’elle n’était “pas une militante, qu’elle ne jugeait pas”.

Evidemment, tout cela est absurde. Si ce n’est pas de la propagande (comme la fameuse pipe qui n’en est pas une), c’est une exposition qui présente avec bienveillance des photos de propagande. L’artiste émet assurément des jugements, en présentant ses cousins bédouins qui servent dans l’armée israélienne, comme pathétiquement vendus à un régime colonial (ils apparaissent étonnement confortables et bien dans leur peau sur les photos), elle émaille son exposition de victimes françaises de l’occupation nazie, commentant la façon dont ils se retournèrent après la Libération et devinrent des oppresseurs coloniaux en Indochine et en Algérie. La parfaite admiration pour la “résistance à l’occupation” des Palestiniens, calquée sur celle de la résistance aux nazis, joue sur un thème commun, grotesque, de propagande palestinienne – que les israéliens sont les nouveaux nazis et les palestiniens les nouveaux juifs.

Surrealist France Disoriented: From Al Durah to the Jeu de Paume

The Tablet Magazine just published a piece of mine on France’s cognitive disorientation, most recently demonstrated by their putting an exhibit of Palestinian war propaganda (exaltation of suicide terrorists as martyr-heroes) in their first class museum, the  Jeu de Paume, with a sign saying, “this is not propaganda.”

Terrorist Chic in France, From the Jeu de Paume Exhibit to Al Durah to Mohamed Merah

A controversial new exhibit celebrates mass murderers and raises war propaganda to the level of high art

By Richard Landes|July 30, 2013 12:00 AM|Comments: 7

A poster of the exhibit ‘Phantom Home,’ by Palestinian photographer Ahlam Shibli, outside the Jeu de Paume museum in Paris, June 2013. (AP Photo/Remy de la Mauviniere)

This Summer the French National Museum, the Jeu de Paume, once famous for its display of Impressionist paintings, is hosting an astonishing photography exhibit,Phantom House. The work of an Israeli Bedouin woman, Ahlam Shibli, it assembles an eclectic series of photographs that depict a number of different groups whose homes are really not theirs, or who do not have homes—people who “live under oppression.” These include Bedouin “Trackers” who enlist in the IDF, “Palestinians” living in the Galilee and Jordan, Polish children in orphanages, Middle Eastern LGBTs who live in Western countries, the French of Corrèze during the Nazi occupation, and, in by far the most elaborate of the exhibits, the Palestinian families of “martyrs” who “resisted” the “occupation,” standing with the pictures, posters, and graves of their “disappeared” relatives.

The exhibit has elicited predictable controversy. These alleged “martyrs” who “took control of their own deaths,” the object of loving devotion by their families, are actually mass murderers who killed themselves in order to murder as many children, women, civilians as they could. Like so much of the Palestinian narrative, these photos give no place to the “other” except as faceless colonial oppressors. For one Jewish woman, a patron of the museum, the experience was horrifying. Looking at these pictures of “martyrs,” she recognized people who had blown up restaurants and buses, which were chosen precisely because there were children there.

Outraged objections poured in. The museum’s response was to post a notice that insisted that this was not propaganda and quoted the artist insisting that she was “not a militant, not judgmental.”

Of course, all of this is nonsense. If not propaganda (like the famous pipe that is not a pipe), it is a display of lovingly presented photographs of propaganda. The artist is decidedly judgmental, presenting her fellow Bedouin who serve in the IDF as pathetic sell-outs to a colonial regime (they appear strikingly comfortable and secure with themselves in the photos), peppering her exhibit on French victims of the Nazi occupation with comments on how they turned around after liberation and became colonial oppressors in Indochina and Algeria. The unalloyed admiration for the “resistance to occupation” of the Palestinians, juxtaposed with that of the French resistance to the Nazis, plays on a common, if grotesque, theme of Palestinian propaganda—that the Israelis are the new Nazis and the Palestinians the new Jews.

Snip.

The editors cut my final sentence. Here in bold:

Thus, cognitively disoriented by both their media and their academics to such a degree, it is altogether possible for the curators at the Jeu de Paume to put up an exhibit celebrating mass murderers—and to believe that, in so doing, they were siding with the innocent and “speaking truth” to Israeli “power.” And so they raise war propaganda that targets their own culture to the level of high art. Little wonder that, even as they celebrate Palestinian Jihadis who make martyr-heroes of mass murderers, they remain willfully blind to the fact that the “jeunes” in their own Muslim communities are doing the same to their very own child-killing Jihadi, Mohamed Merah.

 

Notice at the Jeu de Paume in Response to the Controversy about “Phantom Homes”

A major controversy roils French “high culture” these days concerning an exhibit at the Jeu de Paume museum (where, in the old days – my youth – the Impressionists used to be housed). Called Phantom Home, the exhibit displays the photography of a Bedouin Israeli woman named Ahlam Shibli, the central part of which is dedicated to photographing the way Palestinian society honors and celebrates the “martyrs” of their “resistance” to the Israeli “occupation.” A tastefully done series – not a hint of the blood these “martyrs” shed when blowing themselves up in public places in Israel, often chosen for the high incidence of children – it has nonetheless stirred controversy among “Pro-Israel” figures who object to its content. In response, the Minister of Culture has asked the Museum to put up a notice explaining that the exhibit’s text was provided by the artist and not the museum.

This is the text of the notice, which appears in several places of the exhibit.

To avoid misunderstandings, the Jeu de Paume wishes to make it clear that the artist Ahlam Shibli’s series Death, a work centered on images, in neither propaganda, nor an apology for terrorism.

As the artist herself explains, “I am not a militant. My work is to show, not to denounce or to judge.”

Death explores the way in which dead or imprisoned Palestinians – “martyrs,” according to the term that Ahlam Shibli reuses – are represented in public and private spaces (posters and graffiti in the streets, inscriptions on tombs, shrines and mementos inside homes, etc.), thereby regaining a presence in their community.

All the photographs in this series are accompanied by captions written by the artist that are inseparable from the images.

It would be harder to find a better illustration of the surrealistic doubletalk that the French have so grown accustomed to, that they don’t even realize how absurd they sound. Okay, ceci n’est pas une pipe, but a drawing of une pipe. This is not propaganda, it’s photographs of war propaganda: virtually every martyr hero appears with his weaponry; the partisan (and deeply misleading) language of “resistance” to “occupation” of “disappeared” or “imprisoned” fathers of families defines the presentation.

Whatever Shibli claims about herself, she’s heavily judgmental – her fellow Bedouins who joined the IDF are selling out their souls to the occupier in order to get a comfortable home, the French who suffered the Nazi occupation turned around and fought to occupy Indochina and Algeria, while her “martyrs” get not one word of disapproval for targeting children.

Far from distancing themselves from the text of Shibli’s exhibition, the curators actually confirmed them.

Alas, poor France, I knew her well.

Karsenty-Enderlin Court Decision

Arrêt Cour Appel 26 juin 2013

Will provide translations of critical passages and commentary over time. Anyone interested in transcribing/translating the text or parts, please communicate with me.

 

Announcing the First Anti-Darwin Democracy Award Nominee: Curators at the Jeu de Paume in Paris

Yesterday I read the definition of the Darwin Awards:

Darwin Awards commemorate those individuals who ensure the long-term survival of our species by removing themselves from the gene pool in a sublimely idiotic fashion.

That definition then inspired me to formulate another such collection which we could call The Anti-Darwin Democracy Awards, which one would define thusly:

Anti-Darwin awards commemorate those individuals, who in a sublimely idiotic fashion, undermine the long-term survival of democracies by imposing their folly on us all.

Obviously such an award would give a life-time achievement award to the journalists who can look at the evidence around the Al Durah case and still say, “that’s a boy dying,” as well as those detectives from rekaB Street who, two years before the Boston Marathon bombing, closed the case on a triple, throat-slitting murder, on 9-11, of three young men, two Jews, one of whom was Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s “best friend.”

But for my first formal candidate, I’d like to propose the curators at the Museum of Jeu de Paume in Paris, who have elevated the crudest war propaganda, aimed against their own culture, into a form of art.

Of course, they have an excuse for their folly. They’re just honoring the just cause of the Palestinians against the Israelis. They’re not the target of the propaganda of hatred behind which they place their moral weight.

  • For not seeing the obvious links between Palestinian anti-Zionism and the Jihadi war on Dar al Harb, not understanding that the (near-unanimous) Muslim animus against autonomous Jews (ie Israelis) is directly related to the animus towards any autonomous infidel…
  • For not understanding the profoundly dishonest, communautariste, nature of Palestinian lethal narratives, for their astounding credulity…
  • For debasing a justifiably proud (and often sardonic) national culture in the service such crude, hate-mongering propaganda…

Below the announcement of a demonstration outside the Jeu de Paume. I plan to be there and document the dysfunctions of the French elite (and the sane reactions of the Jewish community there).

France : manifestation contre l’exposition qui fait l’apologie du terrorisme au Musée du Jeu de Paume à Paris

 juin 13th, 2013  Aschkel
Ahlam-Shibli-foyer-fantôme-300x183 (1)

Une action soutenue par le Centre Simon Wiesenthal

Dimanche 30 juin 2013, nous organisons une grande manifestation devant l’entrée du Musée pour protester et faire fermer cette exposition indigne.

Rendez vous tous devant le Musée du Jeu de Paume à 15 h, 1 Place de la Concorde, 75008 Paris le Dimanche 30 Juin.

Si vous souhaitez manifester votre indignation vous pouvez téléphonez directement au Musée au 01 47 03 12 50.

En raison de menaces sérieuses circulant dans les milieux islamistes, nous avons décidé de reporter au dimanche 30 juin la manifestation contre l’exposition qui fait l’apologie du terrorisme au Musée du Jeu de Paume. Ce report nous permettra de mieux sécuriser la manifestation et d’avoir un service d’ordre optimal.

Rappelons que le Musée du Jeu de Paume consacre une exposition photo à la mémoire des terroristes palestiniens !qu’ils osent appeler des « martyrs », reprenant ainsi la terminologie islamiste, alors qu’il ne s’agit que d’assassins ayant tué des civils, femmes, enfants israéliens au nom du fameux Jihad. Imagine-t-on une exposition glorifiant les « martyrs » islamistes ayant perpétré les attentats du 11 septembre ?

Madame le Ministre de la Culture n’a pas jugé bon faire interdire cette exposition odieuse. Dès lors il nous appartient à nous citoyen français de prendre nos responsabilités et d’agir contre cette apologie du terrorisme issue de la barbarie islamiste !

Il s’agit là d’une véritable apologie du terrorisme où des ordures de la pire espèce sont qualifiés de « Martyr mort en opération » !

La direction du Musée dans une inconscience absolue glorifie ainsi le terrorisme islamiste tuant des civils juifs en Israël. Ainsi il y a donc d’un côté les « bons terroristes », ceux qu’on peut glorifier dans des expositions dès lors où ils tuent des civils juifs en Israël, et de l’autre « les mauvais terroristes » ceux qui font des attentats en France… pourtant ce sont les mêmes qui tuent au nom d’Allah pour les mêmes raisons !

Faut-il rappeler aux dirigeants de ce musée que ces terroristes ne défendent pas la cause palestinienne mais celle de l’Islam radical ? Comment combattre des islamistes comme Mohamed Merah quand un grand musée consacre une exposition à la mémoire de terroristes ayant assassiné des civils ?

Dejà en 2012, le nombre d’agression antisémites à doublé. Les agressions sont de plus en plus violentes jusqu’aux attentats de Toulouse et Sarcelles. Combien faudra-t-il d’enfants juifs avant que les pouvoirs publics réagissent, avant que l’intelligentsia de gauche qui se fait l’écho de la propagande palestinienne comprenne qu’elle justifie ainsi les gestes d’extrémistes islamistes ?

Nous avons lancé à cet effet une pétition.

Dimanche 30 juin 2013, nous organisons une grande manifestation devant l’entrée du Musée pour protester et faire fermer cette exposition indigne.

Rendez vous tous devant le Musée du Jeu de Paume à 15 h, 1 Place de la Concorde, 75008 Paris.

Si vous souhaitez manifester votre indignation vous pouvez téléphonez directement au Musée au 01 47 03 12 50.

Signez la pétition en cliquant ici voir tous les commentaires

Si vous-même avez une contestation à faire, n’hésitez pas à faire une pétition sur ce site – http://www.notrepetition.com/

La Rédac

Lire la suite: http://www.israel-flash.com/2013/06/france-manifestation-contre-lexposition-qui-fait-lapologie-du-terrorisme-au-musee-du-jeu-de-paume-a-paris/#ixzz2Y5WIuyGL

French Judiciary Politicized? Banish the thought!

In discussions of the al Durah trial in Paris, the subject of the politicization of the judiciary in France has come up often. It’s kind of hard for an American to imagine a judiciary that would decide a case purely on political lines, in disregard of the evidence. But then it’s probably difficult to imagine a Syndicate of Judges who would have a “Wall of Imbeciles” in which they posted the faces of prominent “right-wing” political, intellectual, and media figures whom they liberally smeared with accusations of being (in the same camp with) Nazi collaborators and  fascists.

The amusing thing is that the journalist who revealed the existence of this “wall” – itself a classic example of a “public secret” – was immediately accused of doing it towards “political ends.” When I was in France working on al Durah in the mid-aughts, I came up with an idea for a conference called, “Plutôt mort que con” [Sooner dead that be considered an idiot, or, in an English idion: Embarrassed to death.] Couldn’t ask for a better illustration of the mentality: the suicidal peacock rhinos try to shame their opposition as cons.

France, apparently, holds valuable real estate on rekaB Street.

Updated by William Goldnadel, who brings in the Al Durah case as well.

Une justice impartiale ? Manifestement, pas pour un certain nombre de juges du Syndicat de la magistrature qui ont leur mur des cons…

Atlantico a obtenu une vidéo tournée en cachette du “Mur des cons” du Syndicat de la magistrature. Il expose dans son local syndical la tête des adversaires – et des justiciables ? – à abattre. Parmi eux, de nombreux hommes politiques de droite, des intellectuels… et des journalistes. Une curieuse conception de la justice…

INFO ATLANTICO

Publié le 24 avril 2013
INFO ATLANTICO
Atlantico a obtenu une vidéo tournée en cachette du "Mur des Cons" du Syndicat de la Magistrature.Atlantico a obtenu une vidéo tournée en cachette du “Mur des Cons” du Syndicat de la Magistrature. Crédit DR

C’est un magistrat qui a fait cette découverte. Accompagnant un collègue au siège du Syndicat de la magistrature à Paris, ce juge apolitique et non syndiqué a eu la surprise de constater la présence d’un gigantesque panneau dans la salle principal du local syndical, surplombé d’une affichette sur laquelle était écrit “Mur des cons”.

(voir vidéo ci-dessous)

Créé en 1968, le Syndicat de la magistrature représente 1/3 des magistrats de l’ordre judiciaire. Proche de la gauche, il a appelé en 2012 à voter contre Nicolas Sarkozy. C’est la garde des Sceaux, Christiane Taubira, qui a ouvert son 46e Congrès en novembre dernier.

Sur ce mur, des dizaines de photos de personnalités pour la quasi-totalité classées à droite de l’échiquier politique. Nicolas Sarkozy, au premier chef, mais aussi, Eric Woerth, Edouard Balladur, Nadine Morano, François Baroin, Luc Chatel, Michèle Alliot-Marie, Luc Ferry, Eric Besson, Christian Jacob, ou encore Patrick Balkany y figurent en bonne place. Certains sont marqués d’un signe supplémentaire “d’infamie” : un autocollant du Front National. Le portrait de l’ancien ministre de l’Intérieur Brice Hortefeux est souligné d’une mention particulièrement injurieuse : “L’homme de Vichy”.
 
Mais il n’y a pas que des politiques. Certains intellectuels comme Jacques Attali, Alain Minc, Guy Sorman, ou encore Alexandre Adler sont mis au pilori syndical. Les journalistes ne sont pas en reste. Eric Zemmour est placardé, bien sûr, mais il y aussi deux patrons de presse, l’ancien directeur du Figaro Etienne Mougeotte, et l’ancien patron de TF1, Patrick Le Lay ; l’éditorialiste du Figaro Yves Thréard, la journaliste Béatrice Schoenberg (épouse à la ville de Jean-Louis Borloo) ou encore le présentateur David Pujadas.

La liste n’est pas close. Le Mur des cons est d’ailleurs évolutif. Chaque magistrat syndiqué est invité à y placarder une prochaine victime. “Avant d’ajouter un con, vérifiez qu’il n’y est pas déjà“, averti une seconde affichette placée au milieux des photos.

Effaré, notre visiteur a eu le réflexe de filmer ce Mur des cons à l’aide de son iPhone.

S’agit-il d’une plaisanterie, comme on pourrait en voir dans un local lycéen ? (Essayez donc de plaisanter avec un magistrat en le traitant de “con”, vous verrez ce qu’il vous en coûtera). Ou d’un innocent folklore syndical que l’on pourrait comprendre s’il s’agissait de camionneurs ou de sidérurgistes ? Mais le problème est que cette liste noire a été dressée par des magistrats qui se montrent eux-même très sourcilleux lorsqu’il s’agit de poser pour autrui les limites de la liberté d’expression en matière d’injure et de diffamation.

Certaines personnalités qui figurent sur le Mur des cons en ont d’ailleurs fait l’amère expérience. On se souvient de l’affaire Zemmour. Brice Hortefeux a lui aussi été condamné  pour une simple plaisanterie jugée “xénophobe” par la 17e chambre correctionnelle. Le raisonnement juridique des magistrats était d’ailleurs un peu spécieux puisque Brice Hortefeux a été relaxé en appel par des juges qui ont souligné l’erreur d’analyse du premier jugement.

Mais l’essentiel n’est pas là. Le Mur des cons du Syndicat de la magistrature semble constituer bien moins un “tableau de chasse” réunissant ceux qui ont déjà eu à connaître des foudres de la justice, qu’une future charrette de justiciables qui auront peut-être du souci à se faire le jour où d’aventure ils se retrouveraient devant les tribunaux. Qu’ont donc en effet les syndicalistes-magistrats à reprocher à Etienne Mougeotte, Yves Thréard, Patrick Le Lay, David Pujadas, Alexandre Adler, François Baroin, Luc Chatel… qui n’ont jamais été condamnés, si ce n’est de ne pas être suffisamment porteurs des valeurs de gauche et d’extrême gauche dont le Syndicat de la Magistrature se fait le porte-étendard ? Voilà pourquoi ce petit “pilori privé“, installé dans un local syndical  – au sein d’un bâtiment du ministère de la justice ! – est une forfaiture qui déconsidère ceux qui en sont à l’origine.  Ce mur de la honte constitue une faute grave qui autorise à s’interroger sur les messages – voire les consignes – que le Syndicat de la Magistrature est susceptible de faire passer à ses adhérents.

En savoir plus sur http://www.atlantico.fr/decryptage/justice-impartiale-manifestement-pas-pour-certain-nombre-juges-syndicat-magistrature-qui-ont-mur-cons-706344.html#A68wGh1Lms9Be3GL.99

read the rest

UPDATE: Guillaume Goldnadel pursuit l’affaire.

 

Nous n’avons pas de leçons à apprendre: The French React to American “Can Do.”

 

Today’s NYT/IHT has an article by Liz Alderman that gives a brilliantly illuminating insight into the dynamics of honor-shame culture and the degree to which it inhibits economic growth in France (HT/J and EF). The main characters are the French government, the French unions, the French media (including blogosphere). The title of my post comes from a common French expression that encapsulates their attitude nicely, and suggests a kind of stubborn pride that guarantees a flatter learning curve than one even they might hope for. I’ll intersperse the article and my comments with sections from an article in the Telegraph by my journalist friend, Anne-Elisabeth Moutet.

Quel Brouhaha! A Diatribe on Unions Irks the French

By 

Published: February 20, 2013
Michel Spingler/Associated Press A Goodyear plant in Amiens, in northern France, is slated for closure.
PARIS — “How stupid do you think we are?”

With those choice words, and several more similar in tone, the chief executive of an American tire company touched off a furor in France on Wednesday as he responded to a government plea to take over a Goodyear factory slated for closing in northern France.

“I have visited the factory a couple of times,” Maurice Taylor Jr., the head of Titan International, wrote to the country’s industry minister, Arnaud Montebourg, in a letter published in French newspapers on Wednesday.

“The French work force gets paid high wages but works only three hours. They have one hour for their breaks and lunch, talk for three and work for three.”

“I told this to the French unions to their faces and they told me, ‘That’s the French way!’ ” added Mr. Taylor, a swaggering businessman who is nicknamed “the Grizz” by Wall Street analysts for his abrasive negotiating style.

Shades of France2 authorities from Charles Enderlin and Didier Epelbaum, when confronted with footage of Palestinian cameramen shooting clearly staged footage, responding, “Oh yes, well, you know, they do that all the time.” Public secrets are about things that are shameful on the public stage, but “everyone” knows they’re done “all the time,” and are willing to admit to them “off the record.” On record, it’s “how dare you impugn the impeccable journalistic integrity of Talal abu Rahma?” when he’s really a hack who, off the record (or in this case, on the record in Arabic) considers his profession a platform for waging war, or “how dare you accuse French workers of being slackers?” when they are. French media are masters of the public secret.

The real problem comes in when the privately confessed (wink, wink) truths emerge in a framework (in this case economic reality) where they are clearly not acceptable. In an honor-shame culture, the response is aggression.

Le Pont entre l’anti-semitisme classique et l’anti-sionisme du 21e siecle.

J’ai assisté aujourdui au colloque annuel du CRIF à Paris, Combattre la menace antisémite“. Ma session s’intitulait:

DE LA JUDEOPHOBIE A L’ANTISIONISME.

Voici mes remarque.

Le Pont entre l’anti-semitisme classique et l’anti-sionisme du 21e siecle.

Les médiévistes ont tendance à distinguer entre l’anti-judaïsme et l’anti-semitisme.

L’anti-judaïsme, peut se résumer en cette formule:  “j’ai raison car tu as tort; ma religion est supérieure car la tienne est inférieure; je me couvre d’honneur en t’accablant de honte.” C’est le «supersessionisme» du Christianisme et de l’Islam: une théologie à somme nul, de remplacement: “nous sommes le peuple choisi car vous ne l’êtes plus.” Une telle attitude représente précisément le manque de maturité émotionnelle, d’où les lumières étaient censées nous sortir. Donc, pour les chrétiens pré-moderne et l’Islam (hélas de nos jours), “notre honneur dérive du fait que nous privons les juifs de la leur.” Tant que les juifs acceptaient de se soumettre, se plier devant leurs supérieures, on les laissaient vivre en paix, même prospérer. L’anti-judaïsme manifestent des sentiments qui font partie de la condition humaine quotidienne – l’envie, le Schadenfreude, l’insécurité psychologique. La maitrise de ces sentiments, surtout leur expression à l’échelle politique, ont joué un rôle essentiel dans la naissance des démocraties et de l’égalité devant la loi.

L’anti-sémitisme, par contre, représente une forme paranoïaque de cet anti-judaisme. Il rend rend impitoyable le jeu à somme nul de celui-ci. De “dominer ou être dominé,” on passe à “exterminer ou être exterminé.” Pour les Nazis, et hélas pour trop d’islamistes aujourd’hui, l’existence même des juifs représente une menace existentielle: la race allemande, la religion de l’Islam, se sentent en péril mortel par l’existence même des juifs qui doivent être écrasés, supprimés, pour assurer leur propre survie. L’anti-sémitisme est un délire paranoïaque et génocidaire, un développement que toute civilisation doit combattre: comme le montre l’épisode des Nazis, de tels délires dévorent bien plus que les juifs.

Pourquoi nous voyons l’antisémitisme jaillir aujourd’hui, surtout dans un monde moderne qui s’est soi-disant libéré de son anti-judaisme politique en octroyant aux juifs l’égalité?

Apparemment il y a des anti-judaistes qui, privés de leur sentiment de supériorité, et confronté par les succès presque inconcevables des juifs dans ces conditions de liberté et d’égalité, ne supportent pas l’épreuve. Le cas des Musulmans est très net: un peuple dhimmi devenu autonome représente une abomination théologique qui provoque des rages génocidaires, et qu’ils puissent se défendre contre un monde musulman bien plus nombreux, c’est insupportable.

Ce qui nous amène au 21eme siècle en Occident, en Europe, en France. Ici il y a une nette résurgence du pire anti-sémitisme parmi la population musulmane et parmi certains cercles de la sois-disante gauche: En quelque sorte, on pourrait dire qu’ils ont tous les deux le même Antichrist (ou Dajjal): Israel. Par ailleurs, un aspect important – j’ose même dire dominant – de l’élite intellectuel et politique en Occident, manifeste des éléments inquiétants d’un anti-judaïsme qui permet et encourage l’anti-sémitisme jaillissant. Si l’on compare la Judéophobie à une boisson enivrante, on pourrait dire que l’élite européenne, surtout les professionnels de l’information (journalistes, profs, intellos) vident leurs verres de vins pendant qu’ils maintiennent un “bar ouvert,” bien munis d’alcools forts pour les musulmans.

Et le “bar ouvert” où tout ces poisons se dégustent, c’est la presse européenne, qui passe directement dans les systèmes d’information de leurs démocraties, des récits meurtriers contre Israel produits par des djihadistes génocidaires, non pas en tant que les projections de haine et paranoïa qu’ils sont, mais en tant qu’“événements réellement passés,” “actualités.” Ces récits meurtriers font un double travail. D’un cote elle inspire la haine et le désir de vengeance contre Israel parmi les musulmans. Violence qui, quand elle se présente même sous la forme la plus effarante (Merah), se trouve expliquée voire excusée par la chose même qui la provoqua: le récit meurtrier. De l’autre côté, elles nourrissent la Schadenfreude des européens qui, pour des raisons troublantes, se réjouissent de pouvoir dire aux israéliens: « vous juifs, pendant 2 millénaires on vous maltraita, et dès que vous le pouvez vous faites la même chose aux pauvres palestiniens. »

L’Europe est malade de ces récits meurtriers qui alimentent le Djihad et permettent aux européens de croire que tant que les juifs sont la cible de tirs venus de la position musulmane, eux, post-chrétiens, sont à l’abris. Quand ils se sont précipités sur le plus puissant de ces récits meurtriers, celui de Muhammad al Durah, ils ont mis en marche une dynamique avec des implications tragiques pour le continent entier. Se comblant du sentiment de déculpabilisation – cette image efface et remplace celle du ghetto de Warsovie – ils agitaient en même temps le drapeau de Djihad devant leurs populations musulmanes (?). Les grand personnages qui adoptèrent la formule «Israéliens les nouveaux Nazis et Palestiniens les nouveau juifs», ont peut-être pu se draper d’un moralisme sadique, mais en même temps ils renversaient la réalité précisément au moment ou une nouvel force de haine génocidaire envahissait leurs cultures. Mohamed Merah, et ceux qui font de lui un hero, nous montre la culture toxique que cette folie engendra.

Al Durah c’est le pont entre l’anti-semitisme du 20eme siècle et l’anti-sionisme du 21e siècle: une accusation de meurtre rituel globale, le premier à être diffusé par un juif auto-identifié, peut-être le plus meurtrier de toute la longue lignée de ces producteurs d’atrocités. Et, en fin de compte, c’est une histoire ridicule, qui ne tiendrait pas trois minutes d’analyse sérieuse, mais qui répond à tant de désirs que ces trois minutes ne lui ont toujours pas été accordées par la vaste majorité des gens, meme les juifs, surtout les journalistes. C’est cette icône de la haine qui amena l’Occident à adopter pour leur compte le Dajjal-Antichrist des Djihadist, et ainsi à se rallier à un cauchemar apocalyptique génocidaire qui les vise en même temps qu’Israel.

L’appétit des occidentaux pour les récits meurtriers de Djihadistes au sujet d’Israel, c’est comme un homme avec le cholestérol élevé qui ne peut pas s’empêcher de se goinfrer de steaks rouge, à la sauce Schadenfreude. La prognostique pour le malade, bien qu’il se sent bien, n’est pas bonne. Si l’Occident se remet de tout cela, ses historiens futurs analyseront notre temps, émerveillés de la folie des hommes dits “progressifs” au début du troisième millénaire.

Qu’on s’en tire vite et de nos jours.

 

 

Talk on Mass Pilgrimage at the IKGF’s Conference on Pilgrimage

Talk delivered at On the Road in the Name of Religion. Pilgrimage as a Means of Coping with Contingency and Fixing the Future in the World’s Major Religions, Erlangen, November 11, 2011

Mass Pilgrimages:

Voluntary and Prescribed, Yearly and Apocalyptic-Messianic

Richard Landes

 

I’d like to contribute a problem to the issues raised by this conference on the role of contingency, future, and freedom in pilgrimages by discussing the question of mass pilgrimages. I define a mass pilgrimage in terms of two phenomena: first, that the pilgrimage has already become a massive group on the way. As opposed to more routinized forms of pilgrimage – the overwhelming majority of the cases we find in our documentation – mass pilgrimages have an infectious quality, picking up pilgrims almost spontaneously, gathering steam as they go. Second, that upon arrival at the pilgrimage’s goal, the holy site, there are again massive numbers of participants. All of this is of course relative. Certain pilgrimage sites like the Maha Kumbh Mela at the Ganges and the Hajj at Mecca draw millions of pilgrims over a specific period of days and weeks, either annually or in some regular yearly cycle.

There are, broadly speaking, three major sources for mass pilgrimage: 1) prescribed annual pilgrimages, and 2) apocalyptic pilgrimages, and 3) closely related to apocalyptic matters, “political” pilgrimages – really messianic or what I call millennial pilgrimages. Here the two most obvious traditions are monotheistic. The earliest recorded mass pilgrimages were the Israelite ones to Jerusalem, three times a year, starting, allegedly, in the 10th century BCE. Obviously not all of the three were equally observed (Passover more than Tabernacles and Pentecost), and more by those close than those far away. But this seems to be the earliest example of a religiously prescribed, mass pilgrimage. The still current form of this is the Meccan Hajj about which we have already heard, and to which I will return in my concluding remarks.

What I’d like to do here is explore the second type of mass pilgrimage, what we might call the “spontaneous mass pilgrimage.” Such a pilgrimage is not prescribed – indeed, we will see in one case that it was vigorously disapproved of by the religious authorities – but rather something much closer to a mass religious movement. And accordingly, let me begin with what Carl Erdmann called “die erste religiöse Massenbewegung im Mittelalter,” the Peace of God.

The peace assemblies were clearly – by my definition – mass pilgrimages. Monks and clerics from may sites took relics from their crypts and paraded them – delationes – through the countryside to gather with others at a given open-air site where, before hundreds and thousands of participants, the peace assembly, replete with public vows from the milites not to attack unarmed people – took place. The relics were magnets, drawing huge crowds along the way – peasants, dropping their plows and rushing to the unwonted sight of so powerful a reliquary out of the crypt where, by Carolingian statute, they were jealously kept by their guardians. When these relics and their attendant crowds arrived at the peace assembly, they were so numerous that one hagiographer, writing a generation later, described the scene as if “you were viewing the children of Israel, leaving Egypt and preparing the enter the Promised Land.” In virtually every account of the peace assemblies held from the late 10th to the early 11th centuries, these crowds play a particularly powerful role.

The Supernova of 1006: Chinese vs. Monotheist responses

I just gave a lecture here at the Internationale Kolleg für Geisteswissenschaftliche Forschungen (IKGF) in Erlangen. The scholars here are a wonderful combination of Sinologist (primarily Chinese religion) and Western medievalists.

In preparing my talk on the year 1000, I went back to an astronomical incident seen round the world, which had an enormous impact on Arab Islam and Christendom, and, with the help of my Sinologist colleagues here, found the contrast with how it affected China quite instructive — the Supernova of May 1006.

Put briefly, the spectacular celestial phenomenon triggered feverish apocalyptic expectation – what, in my book, I call an “apocalyptic moment” – both among Muslims and Christians, while in China, a wisely advised emperor managed to calm his people.

Let’s begin with the incident, starting with a definition of a supernova.

A supernova (plural supernovae) is a stellar explosion that is more energetic than a nova. Supernovae are extremely luminous and cause a burst of radiation that often briefly outshines an entire galaxy, before fading from view over several weeks or months. During this short interval a supernova can radiate as much energy as the Sun is expected to emit over its entire life span. The explosion expels much or all of a star’s material at a velocity of up to 30,000 km/s (10% of the speed of light), driving a shock wave into the surrounding interstellar medium. This shock wave sweeps up an expanding shell of gas and dust called a supernova remnant.

In May of 1006, the most spectacular Supernova ever to be visible from earth occurred 2,700 light years away from earth. It was the brightest apparent magnitude stellar event in recorded history, reaching an estimated -7.5 visual magnitude. A thousand years later, the Hubble Telescope photographed the still-expanding shock-wave created by this explosion.

This picture represents the shock-wave of gases emanating from the explosion in all directions, 1000 years after the explosion.

Ignoring Taguieff: Al Durah, Judeophobia, and the Success of Islamism in Europe

Pierre-André Taguieff sent me two links to articles that deal with the omerta of the French media about Taguieff’s book, « La nouvelle propagande anti juive ». I have already posted on this issue when Robert Redeker lost his position as book reviewer for a small Luxembourgeois paper for daring to review it favorably. Now two articles, including one in the Nouvel Observateur have taken up the cudgels for Taguieff.

Both point to Taguieff’s work on the Al Durah case as one of the main causes of the silence of the MSNM on his work. I reproduce the two passages on Al Durah below.

Note also an interesting incident in the French Senate during hearings for the new head of France2, in which a Senator put the appointee on the spot about the Al Durah story. This story is covered in still greater detail by the indefatigable Veronique Chemla in which she points out that a) the Senator in question (Plancade) gave the new head of France2 (Pflimlin) Taguieff’s book; and b) that none of the MSNM mentioned Plancade’s intervention. (HT/Eliyahu)

Vladimir Vladimirovitch A Lire

Par ailleurs il décrit et démontre la complicité des médias dans le processus précédent. En s’appuyant noatamment sur l’affaire Al Dourah qui lui permet de décrire par quels processus la classe médiatique, au mépris de toute déontologie, a manifesté sa solidarité avec Charles Enderlin, auteur du reportage contesté dans sa véracité (bien qu’il n’ait pas été présent au moment des faits). Israël ne pouvant être que coupable et les Palestiniens des victimes, il n’était en effet pas possible de revenir sur cette version des faits présentant les soldats israéliens comme des tueurs d’enfants palestiniens sans défense. Pourtant bien des éléments méritent qu’une enquête soit menée sur la validité de ce reportage. Ce qu’ont fait d’ailleurs des journalistes allemands demontant point par point la thèse d’Enderlin.

[Among other things he describes and demonstrates the complicity of the media in the preceding process (i.e., the alliance between the left and the islamists – rl). He emphasizes the al Durah affair to describe the way the “media class” (information professionals – rl), acting in violation of all professional ethics, showed its solidarity with Charles Enderlin, author of the contested report (even though he wasn’t present at the time of the events). Since Israel can only be guilty and the Palestinians only victims, it was impossible to revise this version of events in which the Israeli soldiers were killers of defenseless Palestinian children. And yet many aspects of the case indicate that an investigation be carried out on the validity of the report… which German journalists did, dismantling point by point Enderlin’s contentions.]

Les médias ne présenteront donc pas ce livre. Parce qu’il les met en cause et parce qu’il navigue à contre courant en démontrant que cette nouvelle propagande antijuive dont ils sont les porteurs constitue une arme de l’islamisme non pas contre Israël simplement, mais contre les démocraties. Ouvrage donc iconoclaste.

[The media will therefore not present this book. Because it questions them, and because it sails against the prevailing winds, dhowing that this new anti-Jewish propaganda of which they are the carriers constitutes an arm of Islamism not only aimed at Israel, but against democracies. Therefore, an iconoclastic work.]

Tarnero’s article is longer, published in a relatively new and iconoclastic publication, Causeur, which has taken on the Al Durah case already. Again, I only cite the segment directly concerned with Al Durah.

Public Secrets and Conspiracies of Silence: How French media reported riots taking place in Paris, on June 20th

The following is a report “from the field” (i.e., the MSNM wars), by Michelle Schatzman about the coverage of a riot in the troubled streets of Paris itself (Zones Urbaines Sensibles – ZUS) of Paris. It illustrates the dynamics of a society in the process of decomposition, and probably sheds more light on the decline and fall of the Roman Empire than many ancient texts. What we see at work is the presence of gang culture of territorial expansion and confrontation – the Arabs and their sub-Saharan black allies – operating in an area supposedly (and previously) governed by the rule of law. In the case of the Roman Empire, it was imperial law, in 20th century France, it was democratic (isonomic) law.

The open aggression of the Arab/African street in France goes back to the last decade of the 20th century, but has become much more prominent since the first riots/demonstrations of the new millennium, those of October 6, 2000 in Paris.

This phenomenon of Muslim aggression on a civic level, which reached a momentary paroxysm in the riots of 2005, is perhaps the single most pervasive evidence that Muslims populations in Europe are grabbing power both by street violence and by taking over streets for prayer and (in practice) policing them as part of “their (Islamic) turf.” The same police-gang entente against citizens marked for dhimmitude seems to operate in England as well.

The story at Belleville seems to indicate that a) the cops are, as policy, protecting the Muslims from the law, and b) the news media does not know how to talk about this: it will name the “Chinese” (even when they’re lumping together the folks from far-east Asia), but not the Muslims or the sub-Saharan African street gangs. In the end they end up doing the same thing the police do – cover for the aggressors.

The parallels with what probably happened at the fall of Rome are startling.

A demonstration by 8500 people, mostly from far-eastern origin, took place yesterday afternoon in Belleville, an area in the north-east of Paris.

This demonstration was organized by franco-chinese associations, and motivated by insécurité, i.e. a high level of crime, directed mainly against Chinese-looking people in the Belleville area, where this population is now residing in significant numbers. There have been several waves of immigration to France from the Far-East. The Belleville immigrants have been coming from China in the last ten years. The main other two waves are the wave which arrived in the seventies from Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam, at the time of the boat people, and the wave of the nineties.

The demonstration started quietly and ended in riots between some demonstrators, some non-demonstrators and the police. Eventually, the quiet was restored around 10 pm. So, we got reports in the three most important national newspapers : Libération, Le Figaro and Le Monde. In fact, Le Monde was content with a commented diaporama.

Taqiyya, Territorial Expansion, and the Western European Future

On my class list-serv (class of ’71), we’ve had a discussion of the relationship of Muslim demographics to aggressive behavior. I posted these remarks based on two remarkable pieces, one by Raymond Ibrahim on Taqiyya and Islam, and one a video made by a exceptionally courageous Parisian of the take-over of some public streets in Paris every Friday for 2 and a half hours.

As everyone who’s spent some time with the Quran knows, it’s full of contradictions, especially on the subject of the use of violence. “No coercion in matters of religion” (sura 2) vs “Fight against the infidel till they either convert or submit” (suras 8, 9). The Muslim commentators came up with the principle of abrogation, in which the later passages (the suras are not listed chronologically, but the later Medina suras are the more coercive) abrogated the earlier ones.

In a very important article Raymond Ibrahim lays out the implications of this for Islam:

However interpreted, the standard view [among Muslim scholars] on Qur’anic abrogation concerning war and peace verses is that when Muslims are weak and in a minority position, they should preach and behave according to the ethos of the Meccan verses (peace and tolerance); when strong, however, they should go on the offensive on the basis of what is commanded in the Medinan verses (war and conquest). The vicissitudes of Islamic history are a testimony to this dichotomy, best captured by the popular Muslim notion, based on a hadith, that, if possible, jihad should be performed by the hand (force), if not, then by the tongue (through preaching); and, if that is not possible, then with the heart or one’s intentions.[23]

In a study of tolerance in the Protestant Reformation, Andrew Pettegree came to the conclusion that “tolerance was a loser’s creed” (p. 198), that when they began, Protestant movements were in favor of free speech and dissent (protest), but as soon as they were in a position to take power, then they argue that God gave them their strength because they are right, and imposing their belief is what God wants. Thus, the US constitution is the first time in the history of Christianity that tolerance is a winner’s creed.

Now how that happened, and how it can happen in Islam is not something we will figure out by making arguments about moral equivalence (we were just as bad) or moral inversion (we’re worse).

I strongly recommend the Ibrahim article for many reasons, not the least being the problem it sets before us on this issue: while in Christianity there is no hint of the principle that drove so many Christians to seek power to impose their beliefs on others — on the contrary, everything “argues” against it — the Quran has actually embedded in its collection of suras that very argument, formalized by later commentators across the board (all four schools of jurisprudence). If libido dominandi (the lust to dominate) can have that affect on Christians whose texts are against these principles, a fortiori, will it be difficult for Muslims to confront them… especially if we don’t confront them about these matters.

Before 2000, virtually every book on Islam argued that it was overwhelming a fatalistic religion (inshallah — if God wills it), an attitude that permits many today to argue that the “vast majority of Muslims are moderate.” In the 1960s and 70s sociologists, working on the “secularization model” were depicting its imminent demise.

1979 marks the beginning and 2000 marks a key turning point in Muslim attitudes globally (aided by both media and the second intifada/9-11), in which allahu akhbar as a war cry became more and more widespread. This “awakening” has changed many Muslim attitudes towards both themselves and their neighbors.

There is a territorial battle going on that we are losing because we don’t/won’t even recognize it.

I recommend watching the video full screen in order to read the English subtitles.

The Child, Death, and the Truth: Esther Schapira Weighs in Again

Esther Schapira, whose groundbreaking work on al Durah represented the earliest reconsideration outside Israel, and whose material I used extensively (with her generous permission) in my own documentaries, has now come out with a new study. Given how much (she has subsequently admitted), intimidation played a role in her modest conclusions last time (“the Israelis didn’t do it,” but nothing on what did happen), this claim of staging is an important stage in the al Durah critique.

As soon as I can, I’ll put up a translation.

Be Afraid and Learn the Lessons of Eurabia: Nidra Poller nails it, alas!

I went yesterday night to a talk at a synagogue in Stoughton by Geert Wilder, the Dutch lawmaker now on trial in his homeland for “hate speech” as a result of his movie Fitna, and recently ejected from the UK by an administration cowed by the threat of 10,000 Muslims besieging Parliament if they let Wilder show his movie. No one’s problems better illustrates the pathetic condition of Europe than Wilder.

While this was a last-minute affair with announcements going on a mere days before the talk, the room was full (not just of Jews, Miss Kelley and a number of her friends, appropriately marked with ash on their foreheads were also there); and Wilder got three standing ovations. The talk will be posted on the internet shortly.

His message was: “It’s not 8:55, it’s 11:55… We are in the last stages of islamization of Europe… and it’s closer than we imagine… It could happen very quickly… the USA is losing an ally to an ideology of hatred… the European political and intellectual elites have been intimidated and are now behaving like Dhimmi.”

Wilders has run into problems because, apparently, he called for the Quran to be banned, although according to Bostom that was not so much a serious call for banning the Quran as a ploy to emphasize that if you’re going to ban texts for hate-speech then the Quran should be at the top of the list. In honor of Wilder’s struggle, I post here a thoughtful, eloquent, and hard-hitting piece by Nidra Poller on what the USA can learn from European folly.

MARCH 2009 OUTPOST NOW ONLINE

Europe’s Woes America’s Warning
by Nidra Poller

It is difficult to imagine how European nations could find the will and the ways to counter the subversive forces they have invited upon themselves and allowed to flourish for more than three decades. The current phase of global jihad, already underway in the much vaunted decolonization process, coalesced with the seizure of power in Iran by Ayatollah Khomenei (who had been living as a pampered refugee in France). But the American reader should be wary of concluding that Europe is lost…and the United States is standing firm.

On the contrary, all of Western civilization is under fire. As promised during the campaign, Barack Hussein Obama is making a radical change in American policy. Not of course the glorious change his worshippers promised themselves, but a troubling shift toward dhimmitude. The newly elected president lost no time in pleading guilty as charged by Muslim authorities and promising to refrain from further rebellion in order to receive their benevolent indulgence.

Similar methods produce similar results. Jihad forces in Europe — and in the United States — used Israel’s Cast Lead operation in Gaza as a pretext to organize virulent, violent pro-Hamas demonstrations. Because Europe is further down the path to surrender, the enraged pro-Hamas mobs were more violent, destructive, and physically threatening here than in the United States. But in both cases they advanced their dominion. This should be recognized as authentic conquest of territory by enraged mobs bearing down on hapless victims in an ominous show of force and not, as claimed and widely accepted, citizen demonstrators exercising their right to free speech.

Absolutely. As I argued almost five years ago, one of the major results of the al Durah affair was to allow the Arab street to take root in Europe. This is just the latest stage, and it’s most worrisome. Anyone reading this as “citizen demonstrators exercising their right to free speech,” is a useful idiot.

If you can carry signs equating the Magen David with the swastika, if you can scream “Jews to the ovens” in the face of Zionists in Ft. Lauderdale Florida, if you can storm into a synagogue in Caracas, Venezuela and terrorize the congregation, if you can bully the police in England, smash up the Place de l’Opéra in Paris, burn Israeli and American flags, shout Allahu Akbar without meeting resolute opposition, it means you can keep going and ultimately fulfill those murderous promises. Do American Jews understand what was acquired by these phony demonstrations that are really paramilitary operations? Wherever those enraged mobs set foot they transformed the streets into de facto waqf territory.

Precisely. This is a war that concerns gangs and territory. We in the West are badly equipped to handle it and (hence) to recognize it (i.e., if we can’t handle a problem, don’t have a solution, then don’t identify it as a problem).

Each successive crisis is an opportunity to ratchet up Jew hatred and the concomitant assault on Western civilization, achieving, step by step, tacit acceptance of the unspeakable. Here is how it works: first, the provocation. Jihadist attacks — thousands of rockets launched against Israel, a few airplanes flown into the WTC, capture and beheading of hostages, roadside bombs, inhuman pizzeria bombers, nuclear weapons programs — finally provoke a riposte. Bingo! The Muslim wailing machine goes into action. It is immediately picked up by complicit Western media and transmitted, with a Good Journalism stamp of approval, to public opinion. Israel, the United States and anyone else who dares to fight back is accused of war crimes, peace crimes, and original sin. This justifies subsequent acts of subversion and aggression against the free world.

It is a brilliant strategy, even if it involves the sacrifice of Muslim lives in order to pull it off. The pathetic, outrageous, inconceivable aspect of it is the role played by our own media.

When the United States used its formidable military force and assumed its international responsibilities, European nations, with rare exceptions, exploited opposition to “the war in Iraq” to undermine the American superpower. This agitation was exploited in turn by jihad interests to advance the Islamization of Europe… and by ricochet to influence domestic politics in the United States as Obamamania surfed on the theme of repairing America’s battered image.

So European resentment causes them to behave in self-destructive ways (striking at the only nation that has and can save them from their folly for what would be a third time), and American insecurity (which I run into among my colleagues all the time), takes European bad faith and cowardice as a model for us to imitate. It’s pretty amazing.