Banned: Anti-Islam Rallies in France and Germany

The banning of today’s Pegida rally and other ‘open-air gatherings’ in Dresden has been well publicised following a ‘concrete threat’ against the group, specifically its most prominent member, Lutz Bachmann. Pegida, on the other hand, has claimed that it took the decision to scrap the rally following an order from Islamic State to assassinate Bachmann. The ban, imposed by Dresden police, will last for 24 hours, but thereafter it is unclear what will happen regarding further protests. Clearly, the safety of leading Pegida members and their supporters is paramount, but it is chilling that these death threats have led to the cancellation of a peaceful and perfectly legitimate demonstration. Nothing could more clearly validate Pegida’s case that Islamisation is a real and growing danger for Germany and other European societies, than this death threat.

Additional evidence that the violent Islamist fifth column is successfully manipulating European politicians to further embed and privilege Islam within our societies comes from France, where another banning order was implemented in Paris yesterday. The ban related to an anti-Islamisation rally – 'Islamists out of France’ – which had been planned well in advance of the Islamist terror attacks in Paris earlier this month. The two organising groups - Riposte Laïque and Résistance Républicaine – have for a number of years been campaigning and warning against the Islamisation of France, but have hitherto not managed to mobilise mass support for their cause in their demonstrations. The latest rally has been banned upon the grounds that it would incited ‘hatred’ and ‘division’. The organisers correctly advised their supporters not to turn up, understanding that the authorities would use this as a pretext for manufacturing potentially violent confrontation and arrests.

 

 

Melanie Dittmer of Pegida, along with anti-Islamisation activists from Belgium (Pierre Flip), Italy (Armando Manocchia) and Switzerland (Jean-Luc Addor), had also been invited to the cancelled Paris rally. In its place, they, together with the organisers, held a press conference which provided an overview of resistance to Islamisation in their various countries. Elsewhere in France, sister rallies took place in Montpellier, Bordeaux and Lyon. It was noted that Pegida had now also established itself in Belgium, Spain, Italy and Switzerland.

 

Anti-Islamisation Protesters in Montpellier 



 

The official reaction to the Islamist attacks in France has possessed a clear agenda: to exonerate Islam, and to reinforce Islam’s place in France in the name of a non-existent ‘unity’. Correspondingly, Minister of Justice Christianne Taubira has announced a strengthening of so-called ‘anti-racist laws’ in connection with the right to criticise immigration and Islam, seeking to criminalise the non-existent phenomenon of ‘Islamophobia’. Riposte Laïque and Résistance Républicaine are correct in drawing the conclusion that the French state is likely to make them illegal, along with other kindred groups in the identitarian movement such as Bloc Identitaire, on the grounds that they incite ‘hatred’ and ‘division’ amongst the French people. If indeed, this does happen, Islam would effectively have been provided with immunity from criticism in France; an Islamic blasphemy law would have been enforced.

Whilst the ‘Islamists out of France’ rally against a growing fifth column was banned, a ‘Muslim-leftist protest’ was permitted to take place in Paris yesterday at the time scheduled for the former. It was accompanied by cries of “Allahu-akbar” (see video below).

We therefore see that despite the recent apparent mass demonstration in favour of freedom of speech and expression in Paris and across France, the Hollande administration does not genuinely believe in the concept of free speech should it involve criticism of Islamisation and other negative impacts of mass immigration on French society. It is also worth noting that although Marine Le Pen has recently been criticised by another leading Front National figure for going soft on Islam, she was excluded from the recent officially-sanctioned ‘Je suis Charlie’ march in Paris. What we are witnessing therefore, is an uncanny parallel to the political scenario outlined in Michel Houellebecq’s most recent novel ‘Soumission’ which was published on the very day of the Charlie Hebdo murders. In this, French political parties of Left and Right make common ground in 2017 to prevent the Front National from winning the presidential election, and thereafter an Islamist becomes leader of the Socialist Party and wins the presidential election of 2022, implementing Shariah in France. Houellebecq himself has admitted that the timescale employed in the novel has been somewhat accelerated, although he has emphasised that its scenario could well play out over the longer term. That said, the anti-Front National coalition in the 2017 elections appears to be a certainty, and the actions of a handful of violent Islamist fanatics has seemingly helped to cement Islam’s official place in France, rather than generating a wave of revulsion against the source of Islamism – Islamic doctrine – amongst the French political class.

 

 

 

Europe’s Cuckoos all a-twitter: ‘Je suis Kouachi’

Last night, the Belgian website sudinfo.be ran an article claiming that the top-trending twitter hashtags for Friday 9 January were #JeSuisCoulibaly and #JeSuisKouachi, which, as it notes, presents a rather ‘less positive message’ than the original #JeSuisCharlie that they were modelled upon. That these hashtags proved to be more popular raises the concern that support for their aims, if perhaps not necessarily their methods, amongst large swathes of the Muslim population in Europe is widespread.  

It should be abundantly clear by now, that doctrinaire Islam neither permits nor recognises the principles of freedom of expression and freedom of speech, and that the more people that there are in our countries who hold these views, the less secure our freedoms become. It should now also be equally clear, that this is not some esoteric intellectual debate less relevant to our everyday lives than the economic crisis through which we are living, for it is not only cartoonists, writers and thinkers who are threatened by Islamism, but everyone who does not submit to Islam. All Islamists, irrespective of whether they employ violence or strictly ideological and political methods, desire our submission. It is time that we made clear that we will not submit, and that there should be no place for such people in France, the UK, Germany, Italy, Spain, or anywhere else in Europe. A minority of Europeans are bravely protesting and speaking out against the increasing Islamisation of their countries, in the face of unfounded accusations of racism, and the contempt of the leaderships of those political parties who have long advocated and encouraged large-scale immigration from overseas, irrespective of the values of the incoming population.  

Our message against Islamisation must be heard, taken seriously and acted upon. The Islamic cuckoo is growing restive in its European nest, and these tweets should awaken us to the fact that it must no longer be fed and nurtured with ever more emollient words and concessions, but instead ejected.

 

 

Front National encouraged by Ipsos poll on French attitudes

According to an article appearing in today’s Le Monde, Marine Le Pen is in buoyant mood following the publication of an Ispsos poll of French public opinion in yesterday’s edition of the paper. Why? Well, in Le Pen’s own words, it shows that “the French think like us”. Specifically, it would appear that Front National attitudes and policies with respect to immigration, Islam, globalisation and economic protectionism strike a strong chord with the French electorate.

Overall, the French public is not in an ebullient mood, with the poll suggesting the prevalence of a distinctly pessimistic worldview. That this should be so ought to come as no surprise, for France, like the UK, does not currently find itself in a happy situation either economically or socially. The pie charts reproduced below provide a striking summary of the twin mood of economic and cultural decline that appears to have taken root: 55% of respondents thought that French economic power “has declined a great deal” and a further 35% believe that it “has declined a little”, with only 7% thinking that the economy “has progressed a little”. In the cultural sphere, the mood remains negative, but not in quite so pronounced a fashion as with respect to the economy: 23% thought that French cultural influence “had declined a lot” with a further 40% stating “that it had declined a little”. 

In factually rather than politically correct fashion, 74% of respondents in the poll subscribed to the notion that Islam was an “intolerant” religion; 77% stated that “religious fundamentalism” (code for Islam) was a matter of concern to them; 57% were of the opinion that “anti-white racism is quite common in France”, and 62% “no longer feel at home in France”. Data are not provided with respect to ethnic and faith differences amongst respondents, but the results clearly indicate that France is a cleft society, with a significant proportion of indigenous French citizens feeling a distinct sense of cultural alienation from their own homeland because of the momentous changes wrought by mass immigration in recent decades. My sympathies on this score lie with the French. Whether or not the French have lost Paris as the English (or indeed, the British) have lost London, I do not know, but similar processes driven by the twin ideologies of globalism and permeable borders are leading to a crisis of national self-identity in both countries. However, to express this sense of alienation from one’s own homeland and the political class who implement and advocate the policies that lead to this dispossession is to run the risk in both the UK and France of being branded a ‘far-right extremist’, which is of course a deeply malicious and wounding slur upon the part of those who level it.   

One commentator – Michel Winock – described by Le Monde as a “specialist in the history of politics and ideology in modern France” has used the findings of this poll to make tired and lazy comparisons with France in the 1930s, raising the hoary old spectre of recrudescent ‘fascism’ that is so often wheeled out by defenders of mass immigration and state-sponsored multiculturalism on either side of La Manche when confronted by popular distaste for these two elite-sponsored projects. To equate a desire for national self-preservation and cultural distinctiveness with ‘fascism’ is repugnant, but that does not prevent the likes of Winock from seeking to firmly implant this false association in the public mind with the assistance of a largely eager and compliant mass media.

In conclusion, the policies forwarded by the Front National chime strongly with the concerns of native French voters, but thus far the party has not been able to make a significant electoral breakthrough. What then, will it take for French voters to give voice to their dissatisfaction by voting for a party that offers policies that they favour, and for them to overcome their aversion to voting for Le Pen inculcated by many years of deeply hostile coverage of the FN?

Charlie Hebdo and the Hysteria of Islamists

Once again, the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo has fallen foul of the Islamists by publishing cartoons of Mohammed, leading to the usual threats and security alerts that attend any slight to the fragile sensibilities of ‘the devout’. This is not the first time that it has been targeted, for back in November last year its decision to publish a special issue entitled Charia Hebdo which contained many cartoons of its ‘guest editor’ Mohammed, led to its offices being firebombed. Both incidents highlight a phenomenon first generated by the Danish Jyllands-Posten furore and its publication of a number of Mohammed cartoons in 2005.

Charlie Hebdo published a fresh set of cartoons this week as a response to the violently febrile reaction to the ‘Innocence of Muslims’ film that has been witnessed across much of the Muslim world and amongst some Muslims resident in European states. These reactions serve to illustrate the ugly domineering impulse that lies at the heart of Islamic doctrine, and it is of course crucial that we tackle this challenge in an appropriately robust fashion: we must not cave in to Islamist threats, and their demands to restrict freedom of speech and expression in our nations; blasphemy is no offence.

In Germany, the Pro-Deutschland movement has expressed its desire to publicly screen the ‘Innocence of Muslims’, causing some disquiet amongst the German authorities and sections of the media that have wheeled out the usual demonising ‘racist’ and ‘far-right’ labels to apply to the group. In Russia, Communications Minister Nikolai Nikiforov called for Google to block Russian web access to the film’s Youtube site, threatening to curtail its freedom to operate in the country from November if it failed to do so. Rostelekom, one of Russia’s biggest internet providers, blocked access to Youtube in a number of Russian regions last night, and Yaroslav Nilov, Chairman of the Duma Committee on Social and Religious Organisations, has called upon the Ministry of Culture to ban screenings of the film in Russia on the basis that this would constitute “incitement to religious hatred.” He noted that Russia had a Muslim population of 20 million. The reaction of these influential Russian politicians seems to have been born out of a combination of a desire to appeal to the growing number of Muslim voters in the country, and of fear.

It is time that mainstream broadcasters and politicians in Britain and other European nations stopped pretending that these violent outbursts, threats and intolerance are not connected to Islamic doctrine, which is incompatible with a modern, civilised political and social worldview. In our countries, Muslims should not only be seen to respect our right to freedom of speech and expression and to acknowledge the supremacy of secular law, but they should also give active support to these principles. If not, then they should give serious consideration as to where they ought to live: is it to be here, or somewhere more conducive to their mental and cultural universe, such as their ancestral familial homeland(s)? The recent violent reactions to the ‘Innocence of Muslims’, the Charlie Hebdo cartoons and Tom Holland’s ‘Islam: The Untold Story’, have followed swiftly upon the anniversary of 9/11, which makes it apparent that all of these attacks upon freedom of expression are part of a wider Islamist political agenda.

Given this reality, how can anyone still give credence to what is printed in the pages of The Guardian upon such matters? That paper, and the BBC, to name but two influential players in the mass media, ought to offer us an explanation as to why they have systematically distorted reporting about Islamic issues so as to provide Islamic doctrine with a veneer of respectability, helping to embed it within our country and to facilitate its spread. We never wanted it, and we certainly do not need it. Now is as good a time as any to make this fact crystal clear.

Charlie Hebdo's latest cover

 

Maghrebian Monster shames France

Bullying is an exceedingly nasty trait, and it would seem that for ‘French’ athlete Mahiedine Mekhissi-Benabbad, aggressive bullying is an intrinsic part of his character, most recently illustrated by his attack upon a 14-year-old girl dressed as a mascot following his win at Sunday’s Helsinki 3000m Steeplechase (see video below). Thankfully, the Daily Mail reports that the girl was only winded, but the manner in which he treated her reveals him to be a damaged character with an anger problem. Such behaviour has occurred before, as shown in the second clip, where at around a minute and 30 seconds into the video he is seen to contemptuously push a mascot into a kneeling position before him. He also received a 10-month suspension for attacking a teammate in Monaco in 2011.

What will happen to this arrogant 'Frenchman' of Algerian descent following this latest act of ill-tempered aggression? If I were French, I would not be happy to see this man representing my country and bringing it into disrepute, and would rather that he ran for Algeria instead. He may run for France, but he is neither French nor a sportsman. Kick him out of France. He's a liability. 

Unsporting Maghrebian masquerading as Frenchman
 

Mekhissi-Benabbad's spiritual Brother

 

The French Presidential Elections: a Muslim Bloc Vote?

In what would appear to be an interesting parallel to the recent behaviour displayed by Muslim voters in Bradford West and their election of George Galloway, Al Jazeera notes that in today’s first round of the presidential election French Muslims are ‘likely to vote for the far left’. It notes:

Throughout the duration of the campaign for France's presidency, one issue has come up over and over again.

Islam, and whether it has a place in French society, has been a favourite issue of the two right wing candidates, the National Front's Marine Le Pen and Nicolas Sarkozyof the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP). 

France’s Muslim population is even larger than that of Britain’s both in terms of its overall size and share of the national total, and as has occasionally been documented on the pages of this blog, concern over cultural and demographic Islamisation has been growing in France, wedded as it is to its central national idea of laïcité, an approximate translation of which is secularism. Given the tenets of doctrinaire Islam, the two were bound for inevitable collision, resulting in agonised national debates over the veil, the burqa, minarets, praying in the streets and most recently the unwitting consumption of halal meat, particularly in the Paris area, by ordinary Frenchmen and women. One opponent of Islamisation - Christine Tasin - even received a fatwa demanding her death for her robust secularist stance, so the debate about secularism in France does possess a real implications for the lives of the country's citizens; it is not some petty theoretical debate.

Marine Le Pen has not been backward in articulating popular concerns over the various facets of Islamisation, and although doing reasonably well in the opinion polls, having often scored in the high teens or low twenties, unfortunately does not appear to be on course to participate in the second round of the presidential context. If allegations published on the GalliaWatch blog relating to Le Pen ballots being withheld from 16 departments in France as well as from many voters resident overseas prove to be true, her vote could be considerably lower than anticipated. Instead, it would appear that Sarkozy will go head-to-head with the Socialist Party candidate François Hollande, with the two being almost neck and neck in recent polls. Who wins will very much depend upon where Le Pen’s and Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s (the Left Party candidate) supporters cast their votes in the run-off. The majority of Muslims however, have made it quite that Sarkozy will not secure their support because of his perceived ‘Islamophobic’ attitude and pronouncements (in reality Sarkozy talks tough but does little so as to undermine support for Le Pen). This is very much in line with the presidential elections of 2007, for as The Washington Times observes:

In April 2007, polls found that French Muslims voted mainly for the Socialist presidential candidate: Segolene Royal won 64 percent of their vote, while Mr. Sarkozy got just 1 percent in the first round and 5 percent in the second.

“People who would have originally voted for the center or the right-wing are now determined to vote against Nicolas Sarkozy,” Ms. Lorcerie said.

So it therefore seems likely that Muslim voters in France will throw their support behind Moroccan-born Jean-Luc Mélenchon today, and then François Hollande in the second round. George Galloway and Ken Livingstone are but the most notable politicians to have participated in the creation and the exploitation of the Muslim bloc vote in Britain, and it would appear that a parallel process could be underway in France. Could it be that across Europe a pattern is emerging in which Muslims are casting their votes en bloc for particular candidates and parties that specifically pander to their demands? Will this register with the rest of the electorate? The Washington Times notes that it has certainly registered with sociologists:

France’s Muslim community is mobilizing voters to reject President Nicolas Sarkozy in Sunday’s election to punish the conservative leader for his anti-immigrant and anti-Islam rhetoric.

“[French] Muslims can’t stand it anymore. They are fed up with these debates about national identity, halal meat, the veil or fundamentalism all over the place,” said Francoise Lorcerie, a sociologist with the Institute of Studies on the Arab and Muslim World near Marseille.

“The terms [Islam, immigration and fundamentalism] are being used interchangeably, without care, with people being targeted, denigrated and used for [votes].”

Nicolas Sarkozy: erase the French; respect the Arabs

Nicolas Sarkozy has talked tough on the question of immigration and on dealing with rioters (coincidentally mainly of Maghrebian origin) on a number of occasions, whilst serving either as French Prime Minister or President, whilst repeatedly not matching his words with action. As the presidential race is now effectively underway, the BBC reports that he is now stating that there are too many foreigners in France, and that the country’s system for integrating them is increasingly failing. Thus, offering the French people a message somewhat familiar to British voters from the ‘promise’ of David Cameron to reduce our mass immigration to the “tens of thousands” per annum, Sarkozy has stated that he wishes to reduce immigration from circa 180,000 to 100,000 a year.

Clearly, Sarkozy is making a cynical ploy to undercut support for rival candidate Marine Le Pen of the Front National, who is enjoying a degree of popularity with French electors, but is unlikely to win the presidential race. The issue of mass immigration is becoming increasingly acute for the French because of the serious Islamisation that it is now being inflicted upon French society, for last month it was revealed that all Parisian abattoirs used only halal slaughter. This fact has rightly shocked the native French.

Sarkozy however, is no friend of the French. His ethnic roots of course are not French, so it should come as no surprise that he is a keen advocate of an attenuated and insipid civic version of French national identity. Indeed, if you have not seen it, the video below should give an insight into the true thoughts of Nicolas Sarkozy. Here he can be seen calling for obligatory “métissage”, that is, the interbreeding of the French with non-Europeans, whilst at the same time calling for obeisance to be displayed towards the Saudis and other Arabs. Clearly, Sarkozy is not fit to lead the French people, whom in reality he wishes to see wiped from the pages of history. Hopefully, French electors will realise this, and will not cast their ballots for him in the forthcoming presidential election.

Comment te dire adieu?

Thus sang chanteuse Françoise Hardy in her 1968 hit of the same title. A similar question, if not the sentiments underpinning the song, must be passing through the minds of many Frenchwomen and men this week following the fire-bombing of the offices of the French satirical paper Charlie Hebdo: how to bid farewell to France’s Islamic problem? French society – by which I mean that comprised of its autochthonous population – needs a divorce from its unbidden Maghrebian spouse. The forced marriage of Marianne to Mohammed must be brought to an end. This is no rift between lovers as explored in Hardy’s wistful melancholic lyrics, but something more akin to an attempted rape by the Mohammedan interloper.

In 2005 the printing of cartoons of Mohammed by the Danish paper Jyllands-Posten led to death threats being issued against the cartoonists and the paper’s editors, as well as demands from some Muslims that freedom of speech and expression be curtailed so as not to offend their delicate sensibilities. Sensibilities so delicate in fact that the actions of enraged Islamic mobs are said to have claimed the lives of some 50 people worldwide. On this occasion, nobody has as yet admitted responsibility for the petrol bombing of the Charlie Hebdo offices, but it is of course highly likely that the individual or group of people involved were ‘aggrieved’ Muslims. Moreover, on the same day as the firebombing the Charlie Hebdo website was taken out by Islamist hackers based in Turkey, and the paper’s Belgian website host Bluevision took the site offline after its staff received a number of death threats from Muslim malcontents.

 

This Muslim reaction is wearisomely familiar, and yet what is more troubling is that our politicians continue to stick their heads in the sand and their fingers in their ears: “Islam is a religion of peace” and “such actions have nothing to do with Islam,” they say. Likewise, this is the message of the mainstream media. Ah, if only it were so mes amis, but I am afraid that it is patently not the case. Instead, mainstream politicians across Europe continue to open our borders to Muslims in growing numbers. Do the people who advocate this suicidal policy really believe what they say, or do they pursue this line because they and sections of the media have effectively been bought off with Saudi petrodollars? It may of course be a case of simple cowardice in the face of Muslim willingness to employ violence in the cause of Islamisation, or indeed a combination of all of these factors and still more not listed.

Reporting of this assault upon French liberty slotted neatly into the habitual cultural masochistic editorial lines defined by the BBC and the Guardian. In the BBC’s case, its initial report was equivocal, which is to say, cowardly and a de facto sop to the Islamists. In the case of the Guardian, it was not those who destroyed Charlie Hebdo’s office or who issued death threats against staff at its web-hosting company who were judged to be in the wrong, but the satirical magazine itself. Unsurprisingly, the Guardian also used this incident as another opportunity to attack the French claiming that ‘Muslims feel discriminated against and unwelcome’ in their French host society. The French, like the English, Germans, Swiss and many other European peoples, did not wish their countries to be settled by Islamic colonists, and yet we find ourselves burdened with an intensifying clamour for submission to Islam from this rapidly growing population of ingrates. Thus, despite the words of Paris Mosque head Dalil Boubakeur that ‘French Muslims have nothing to do with political Islam’, political Islam, as well as demographic Islamisation, is on the rise across Europe.

It is time to bid our Muslim ‘lovers’ adieu, for they have only entered into this relationship for the sake of obtaining our money and our belongings (land).  I am afraid that no amount of ‘interfaith dialogue’ (which would seem to be the political equivalent of Relate, but one that always seems to side with the abusing party rather than acting as a neutral arbiter) can resolve our differences, for we need to live separate lives. Let our separation be peaceful, and let us put this unhappy experience of forced cohabitation behind us. Adieu!

So as not to end on too gloomy a note, take time to enjoy the songs below, with Brigitte Bardot’s Moi je joue offering a breezy light-hearted contrast to Françoise Hardy’s Comment te dire adieu? Bardot herself is of course a tireless campaigner against the cruelty of halal slaughter and Islamisation who has scandalously found herself successfully prosecuted five times for “inciting racial hatred”. Her stance has, in more than one respect, been admirable. Where would such women be in an Islamised France? Wrapped in cloth and rendered mute. What a drab, ugly and joyless existence Islam gives rise to!

Muslims call for War in France

When symbolic gestures are expressive of real political intent rooted in an underpinning ideology, they possess much power; but when such gestures are made with the objective of generating public approbation through tapping into culturally resonant themes without such intent, they are nothing more than cynical opportunism.

In France this month, we have witnessed the political Establishment passing two laws which tap directly into French national and cultural identity, and on the surface, appear to address two manifestations of a vigorous challenge to France’s secular identity – laïcité – by the country’s burgeoning Muslim population: street prayers and the wearing of the veil. Both have now been banned, yet there has been no effective enforcement of these laws. Many Muslim women continue to wear the veil, and many Muslims in general continue to ignore the prohibition of praying en masse in the street. By failing to observe the letter of the law, the French state has generated an even greater degree of contempt for its authority amongst the many millions of Muslims resident within its borders, for the latter can see that they can flout the law at will. This will serve to encourage the growth of parallel Sharia-governed Muslim enclaves that will be a drain on the state and a danger to indigenous French society.

Does what I have written mean that I approve of the veil or of street prayers? Of course not! However, simply banning the overt manifestations of doctrinaire Muslim identity does nothing to remove the ideology from its human carriers, and that is where the danger lies. Banning burqas, niqabs and street prayers does not stop the growth of France’s Muslim population, particularly when the bans are not enforced. If they were to be enforced, this would at a minimum act as a minor deterrent to further Muslim immigration, but as there seems to be no intention to compel observance, such immigration will continue on a mass scale. Given the spectacular demographic growth of the Muslim component resident within French borders, such measures would anyway be rendered redundant at some point in the none-too-distant future, for once Muslims reach a critical demographic threshold they will be able to introduce Islamic dress codes, street prayers and Sharia via ‘democratic’ means. This is where the concepts of secularism and democracy fall apart when not rooted in nationalist identitarian politics.

Returning to the concrete situation in France, the ban on street prayers came into force on Friday 16 September and was immediately ignored by militant Muslims in Paris. Indeed, in the first of the videos below, you can see Muslims calling for war against the French state (and by extension the French people). The first three minutes or so consists mainly of an interview with one of these hotheads, before going on to show a sizeable group of Muslims marching through the streets of Paris letting forth some of their favourite chants such as “Allahu-akbar!” and “Death to the Jews!” At 4:51, the marchers stop to occupy a street and pray. For some reason, no police come forth to stop any of this. The protesters simply did as they wished, making the French state appear weak and irresolute, which is absolutely the wrong kind of message to send to colonising doctrinaire Islamic thugs such as these. Moreover, the makers of the video note that in Paris 28 million Euros of public money is being offered for the construction of a mosque masquerading as a “cultural centre”, money which could instead have been used to fund crèches and schools for Parisians. What a waste! 

Given the French state’s lack of desire to stand up to Islamisation on behalf of its people, it has fallen to political parties and movements outside of the Establishment to defend the French way of life and identity. The activists of Bloc Identitaire have been at the forefront of this struggle, and have sought to block the construction of two mosques in the past year by ‘contaminating’ the proposed building sites with pig’s blood and other pork products, as shown in the second and third videos below. This is of course imaginative and harms nobody, although it is a shame to see good ham and suckling pig go to waste. Unfortunately, these actions incurred the ire of two French organisations which can be seen as the equivalent of the UK’s UAF and Hope Not Hate: LICRA (League internationale contre le racisme et l’antisémitisme) and SOS Racisme, which called for the videos to be removed and those involved to be prosecuted for "incitement to racial hatred". Rather than desiring the activists of Bloc Identitaire to be prosecuted, I wish them luck in their endeavours and congratulate them for their innovative responses to Islamisation. Vive le Bloc Identitaire! Their symbol – a black boar against a blue background – should serve as a totemic device around which Europeans opposed to Islamisation can unite. 

Marine Le Pen on Muslim Street Prayers

Marine Le Pen is of course the Front National’s candidate in the 2012 French presidential elections and is riding high the country’s opinion polls, which suggest that she is likely to be one of the three most popular candidates. Unfortunately, if she does manage to make it through to the second round of voting, it is probable that as in the 2002 presidential election when her father went head-to-head with incumbent President Jacques Chirac that the other parties will unite to call for their supporters to vote for whoever is left standing against her. The likelihood of a Front National victory is thus slim, but nonetheless should not be discounted altogether.

Back in 1998, Guillaume Faye made a number of observations re political opposition to the Front National, noting that it arose from a fear of the party’s genuinely radical alternative. As in the UK, where nationalists of all stripes are routinely and unjustly tarred with the ‘Nazi’ brush, Faye notes that this tactic has been repeatedly used in an effort to baselessly stigmatise the Front. In his opinion, its opponents have sought to:

‘gag and undermine the Front because it seeks to re-establish the moral contract between the people and its leaders. Hence, it is accused of being immoral. But facts will speak for themselves – the politicians and the media will not be able to twist them. So the only path open to the system is not to ban the Front National but abolish the people. It is already trying to do so. Immigration is one of its weapons, but it is a double-edged sword, for the system – and I will stress this once more – is forgetting about an essential player: Islam.’ (Faye, Guillaume (2010/1998), Archeofuturism, Arktos, United Kingdom, p. 142).

Faye’s concern with Islamisation – which he sees as being Europe’s primary existential threat, rooted in the de facto colonisation of the continent – is something that separates him from a number of figures in the Nouvelle Droite - such as Alain de Benoist - from which he sprang. More generally however, Islamisation has emerged as a contentious political problem in France, for doctrinaire Islam’s inability to allow a separation between the secular and the ‘spiritual’ strikes at the very heart of French republican identity with its strict tradition of secularism – laïcité.

As elsewhere across the world and in other European countries in particular, Muslims are becoming emboldened with respect to public displays of religiosity, a symptom of this being their willingness to break the law by holding Friday prayers and blocking streets in cities such as Paris, Nice and Marseilles. This sense of boldness and willingness to disregard the law has been bolstered by the fact that Muslims are now estimated to comprise somewhere in the region of 5-10% of the population; a proportion that has grown rapidly through mass immigration and a birth rate which greatly exceeds that of the native French population. Moreover, the authorities have generally turned a blind eye to this phenomenon, thereby allowing it to become entrenched and grow.

Given the reluctance of the French political establishment to acknowledge let alone deal with the Islamisation problem, Marine Le Pen has decided to take a symbolic stand on Muslim street prayers which she roundly condemns in her video address below. This is sure to strike a chord with a significant section of the native French electorate, but you can be sure that there will be a media storm in which Madame Le Pen is accused of the non-existent phenomenon of ‘Islamophobia’ as well as ‘racism’, and that her opponents will attempt to avoid rational debate because there is no rational debate to be had: Muslims who block the streets with their prayers are breaking the law. Can you imagine a contender for high office voicing such sentiments in the UK? Me neither, which is a pity.

The text below preceding the video is translated from the Bivouac-ID blog as it provides an interesting insight into a French secularist perspective on Le Pen’s speech:

Marine Le Pen’s Speech on Street Prayers

A speech which should certainly be viewed against the backdrop of the forthcoming electoral contest, but where real questions are clearly and courageously posed without evasive political language. Why aren’t the nominees of the other parties able or willing to do as much?

The problem posed by Islam is posed to the whole French nation, and must naturally transcend political rivalries.

Grenoble Riots: Street Jihad?

Friday night bore witness to rioting in the French city of Grenoble, where Muslim ‘youths’ torched cars and shot at the police. It is also reported that the following night also witnessed unrest. The death of the armed robber Karim Boudoudha in a gun battle with the police 24 hours earlier served as the catalyst for the violence. His unknown accomplice in the robbery of the Uriage-les-Bains casino escaped with more than 20,000 euros. Boudoudha was no innocent, having received three previous convictions for armed robbery, and yet certain elements within Grenoble’s young Muslim population appear to have regarded him as some sort of hero and thus decided to go on the rampage in a petulant display of anger with the French authorities.

Grenoble residents therefore had to suffer as dozens of cars were torched and the sound of unrest filled the night air as an armed mob roamed the city, shooting at the police and threatening members of the public. It is reported that a tram was held up in the city’s Villeneuve district and its passengers forced to disembark by a mob of 30 carrying baseball bats and iron bars. Two men have been arrested.

Video Footage of Grenoble Riots

In general, mainstream reporting of the event has not focused upon the obvious Islamic aspect of this unrest, but has instead deployed the standard narrative of this being a product of socio-economic deprivation and referring to its perpetrators simply as ‘youths’. Although one expects this sort of approach from the BBC which strenuously seeks to avoid mention of Islam if at all possible when reporting such matters, even the Daily Telegraph employs this approach in this instance:

These high-rise neighbourhoods, built in the 1950s and 1960s to house a growing population of industrial workers and immigrants, have become near-ghettos where unemployment is high, public services are poor, and resentment boils.

During the 2005 riots, some 300 buildings and 10,000 cars were burned, while 130 police and rioters were hurt. Since then, unrest has flared often after residents have run ins with the police.

Police and government officials have a lingering fear that the poor suburbs could explode again because the underlying causes – high unemployment, few opportunities, drug trafficking and a sense of exclusion from society – have changed little.

Police unions have raised concerns about a rise in violent crime spurred by the recession and a resurgence of drug trafficking in some areas.

The Telegraph avoids mentioning the faith background of the perpetrators and their ethnicity, but the people conducting this violence, as everyone knows, are not French ‘youths’: they are Muslim immigrants or those descended from the Muslim immigrant population. It is probable that this outburst of violence in Grenoble was also a sign of discontent connected to the National Assembly’s decision this week to ban various types of Islamic veil such as the burqa and niqab, but we won’t see mainstream media outlets joining the dots to reveal an all-too apparent and obvious picture of seething Islamist resentment in France.

Prior to Nicolas Sarkozy’s election as President, many amongst the French electorate had been given the impression that he would deal with such rioters in a suitably condign fashion, having referred to those who participated in the 2005 riots as “canailles” and “racailles”, but he has not. Moreover, he has shown considerable accommodation towards Islam, which is not something that ordinary French voters would desire, particularly those who have the misfortune to live cheek by jowl with Muslim populations.

As in the UK, the French mass media is predisposed towards citing “socio-economic” causative factors for such violence, mistakenly attributing it to relative economic deprivation and ‘racism’. However, only a certain type of youthful malcontent is prone towards such wanton acts of hatred and destruction: the doctrinaire Muslim male. The roots of this violence are ideological, and the only effective way in which it can be prevented is through removing an ideology which commands its adherents to look upon all non-adherents as innately inferior.

When resident in a non-Muslim majority society, the doctrinaire Muslim male looks around himself and thinks not only that he is superior, but also that it is his divinely ordained duty to lord it over the kuffar. It is felt to be his ‘duty’ to use any means necessary to either change that society so that it conforms to his ideology, or to physically attack it and its symbols should its people refuse to submit. This latter course of action is only undertaken once a critical demographic mass has been reached so that there is a secure and supportive Islamic refuge out of which such people can operate. That threshold has now been reached in France.

There is no positive connection between the host society and the doctrinaire Muslim population, for the latter exists within the former as a parasite, drawing economic sustenance from the wider society and weakening its vitality and ability to resist. Although I will not be popular with mainstream opinion for choosing to characterise the problem of Islamisation in a metaphorical manner that in a bygone age would have been non-contentious, it is appropriate to treat it as an infection of the body politic of the host society. The bearers and replicators of the lethal virus (those who embody and propagate its meme-complex – doctrinaire Muslims) need to be either rendered harmless through apostasy/conversion or removed to return the societal body to a state of normalcy and health. At best, our mainstream politicians seek to administer palliative care to the patient, and thus seek to provide society with anodynes such as banning veils and minarets, which although dealing with some of the external symptoms of Islamisation, allow the virus to rage unchecked and grow stronger.

Geert Wilders is the only ‘doctor’ to have diagnosed the cure for the ailing patients of Europe: a purging of the body politic from doctrinaire Islam and establishing a cordon sanitaire to prevent further infection. I hope that France is not beset by further violence, and that her politicians finally face up to the task of confronting Islamisation head-on, for anything less is a betrayal of the French people. Vive la France!