Understanding Islam, page 22
Symbolising the blindness that has stricken the weak French authorities, our Interior Minister, Bernard Cazeneuve, made the following statement shortly after the riots that ravaged Nanterre and Barbes and saw the raising of Palestinian flags and several attacks on synagogues and Jewish shops: ‘When it comes to the merit of things, it is obvious that the cause for which the demonstrators mobilised was a just one.’ (in a statement given to Mediapart, a web page led by Marxist activist and Islamophile Edwy Plenel, on August the 15th 2014). François d’Orcival was absolutely right when he declared: ‘How does one fight an opponent when one is convinced that he is right?’ (Valeurs Actuelles, 20–26/11/2014).
Jihadist Carnage: Objective Achieved, Lesson Unlearnt
Let us now return to the carnage that occurred at Charlie Hebdo on January the 7th 2015, in the kosher shop and in Montrouge, which were but the beginning. All in all, the toll was seventeen fatal casualties, including ten journalists, four Jews and three police officers, in addition to around thirty wounded victims. Nothing could ever put a stop to this confrontation, except for a victory on one side or the other, for no war ever ceases on its own through truce without there being victors and vanquished ones.
The massacres followed the murderous attacks perpetrated by ‘lone wolves’ shouting ‘Allahu Akbar!’ as they sat in a car and ploughed into crowds or attacked people with knives (whether in Joué-les-Tours, Nantes, Dijon or neighbouring Great Britain). After the killings committed by Merah in Toulouse and Nemmouche in the Jewish Museum in Brussels, the bloody saga endures. The police barely managed to foil the attacks that targeted the church in Villejuif and the Basilica of Montmartre. Those who are reading these lines written in August 2015 will likely have further attacks to add to the list. And the gullible ones cry: ‘there is no clash of civilisations!’ Indeed, they are right, from a certain point of view, because the ongoing war actually opposes civilisation to barbarism.
Paradoxically, thanks to their symbolic significance, the January 2015 attacks are as important as those of September the 11th 2001 in New York, which were admittedly far deadlier (with nearly 3,000 fatalities). At the time, we had not yet witnessed such a mobilisation, with enormous demonstrations in Paris that attracted 50 heads of state and government. Indeed, the Paris attacks, which were conducted from within, were a military operation of commandos that struck hard at people’s minds. These raids, these rezzous, could go on forever, unlike the September the 11th attacks which, similarly to those in Madrid and London, involved heavy logistics. Such is the logic of field guerrillas, whose tactics are far more frightening and inexorable than those of organised, large-scale terrorism...
Demonstrations were held on January the 11th 2015 in support of freedom of expression and Charlie Hebdo — much more than for the protection of Jews. This seems rather hypocritical coming from a State and a dominant ideology which otherwise strive to repress freedom of expression as soon as it stems from those who criticise it. In 2000, I was sentenced by a French court to pay a heavy fine for my book The Colonisation of Europe, An Honest Discourse On Immigration and Islam. (L’Aencre), despite the fact that the latter did not include any caricatures or offensive statements, but merely comprised arguments against immigration and Islamisation. As for the justification behind such a strict sentence, it was none other than Islamophobia. Eric Zemmour, after facing his own share of legal troubles, was thanked by I-Télé for his book The French Suicide. And Valeurs Actuelles is being prosecuted for making use of covers that are hostile to Islamisation. Where is this ‘freedom of expression’? It is double standards that actually prevail. When it comes to Charlie Hebdo, on the other hand, it has enjoyed a kind of immunity against prosecution due to being Left-oriented (and not subversive in any way). In fact, the French government, Left and Right wing, has paved the way for Islamic intolerance by criminalising ‘Islamophobia’, which is true of both the Left and the Right. The purpose is for them to preserve their own electorate and purchase civil peace. They have missed the mark, however. In the name of tolerance, one is punished for criticising intolerant Islam! It is no use asserting, hypocritically, that one admires Voltaire! Let us not forget that a performance of his Mahomet was recently banned in Geneva.
The slaughter of those Charlie Hebdo journalists is part of an intimidation strategy that relies on fear. The aim is to discourage any and every criticism of totalitarian Islam. This endeavour could actually be crowned with success. As a result of some strange coincidence, the attack that was conducted against Charlie Hebdo took place on the very same day when Houellebecq’s tragically prophetic novel entitled Submission was released, a book in which the author depicts Islam’s rise to power in France by 2022, as it capitalises on our elites’ cowardice and collaboration. This prediction is proof of good judgment on his part. However, following the recent events, the author decided, in a self-censorship act of sorts, to cancel the promotion of his novel. It is understandable that Michel Houellebecq is afraid: in 2004, filmmaker Theo Van Gogh directed the film Submission (which, as a faithful translation of ‘Islam’, bore the same title as Houllebecq’s novel). Featuring brave Somali Ayaan Hirsi Ali, it dealt with the oppression of women in Islam and gave Allah a prominent role. As a result, Van Gogh was murdered by a Moroccan Muslim. Houellebecq lacks the necessary courage to enter the trenches and expose himself to danger by promoting his novel. This is one of the foremost examples of the Islamic intimidation process.
Aristotle identified several highly diverse causes as the source of any process, fact or event (in Metaphysics, Book I). The most significant one was the efficient cause, the ‘engine’ without which nothing would have taken place.
Criticising the ‘national unity’ which François Hollande called for, Jean-Marie Le Pen made this very truthful remark: ‘I do not wish to support the helpless and inconsistent government action to combat a problem (Muslim terrorism) that is obviously very closely related to the mass immigration experienced by our country for the past forty years’. For this is the very core of the issue itself. This denial of reality (whether in this field or that of economics) and stupidity have reached a pathological climax which, historically speaking, was only equalled by the events of the 4th century, when the Roman elites allowed the Barbarians to enter the romanitas to protect them against ... barbarian invasions, as demonstrated by Michel de Jaeghere in The Ultimate Days, The End of the Western Roman Empire, (Les Belles Lettres, 2014).
The Jewish Community — in the Firing Line
The Jewish community was initially traumatised by the crimes committed by Mohammed Merah in Toulouse, a man who is revered as a ‘martyr’, I must point out, and is seen as a symbol of sacrifice and a role model in both the French suburbs and the rest of the Muslim world. Anxiety was then further exacerbated under the impact of the massacre that took place inside the Jewish Museum of Brussels at the hands of Mehdi Nemmouche. Due to the toll of four fatal casualties and numerous wounded which resulted from Coulibaly’s attack on that kosher store, the resilience threshold was exceeded. It is likely that the pace of Jewish emigration — 10,000 people in 2013, including 7,000 who went to Israel (aliyah) — will increase further. Incidentally, the expulsion of French Jews happens to be one of the objectives that jihadists strive for, an effort that is applauded by some of their co-religionists. From now on, the police and army will ensure the safety of all synagogues and Jewish schools! Who would have thought this possible as recently as ten years ago? In Muslim countries, save for very few exceptions, Jews are no longer granted residence, which will soon enough apply to Christians in the Middle East as well. Yet this triggers no reaction, and no questions are asked, at a time when the Muslim community of France keeps swelling on a daily basis!
Coulibaly’s attack against the kosher store is far more serious and meaningful than the one perpetrated by the Kouachi brothers against the journalists of Charlie Hebdo. In fact, the latter only paid the price for their own actions (having ‘blasphemed’ against Muhammad), whereas those Jews were massacred because of who they actually were. The importance of such an act, directly connected to the teaching of the Koran as much, if not more so than to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, has been minimised (meaning sidelined) in the huge mobilisation against jihadist killings. The killing of blaspheming journalists and French policemen, including a Muslim ‘traitor’ (a ‘colla-Beur’, so to speak — TN: in French, the word ‘Beur’ refers to a person of Maghrebian descent) was deemed more important by the media that the slaughter of anonymous Jews. The fundamental and aggressive anti-Semitism that characterises Muslim immigrants is simply ignored by the authorities. TV channels highlight the infinitely rare cases of harmonious coexistence between Muslims and Jews (as if such instances were common) in the suburbs where the latter still reside, barricaded. One prefers making excessive and hollow declarations against anti-Semitism, without naming the new causes that account for it. Moreover, jihadist murderer Coulibaly planned to surpass his co-religionist Merah in terms of horror, having intended to strafe children in a certain Jewish school. As for Alain Jakubowicz, the president of the LICRA, who still views the National Front (and the ‘far Right’) as being the primary source of danger for the Jewish community, what planet does he live on, exactly? The moon, I reckon.
In order to honour Coulibaly’s victims, a state funeral at Père Lachaise was proposed. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu (who was present during the 11th of January demonstrations) replied that Israel was ‘their real home’. These are very symbolic words, as they express the rejection of France as a land that has become too dangerous for Jews as a result of its Islamisation. Former Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid, the leader of the centre-Right, challenged our European leaders when stating: ‘Everyone now understands that terror must be fought not through increased tolerance or multiculturalism, but using force and arms.’ Quite lucidly put, I must say.
Muslim Duplicity and Complicity
Amar Lasfar, the president of the UOIF who had filed a (dismissed) complaint against the cartoons depicting Muhammad, once said: ‘We must not fall into the trap set by these killers. These terrorists are attempting to drive a wedge between Muslims and the rest of society. However, there is a wall that stands between them and this very same society, namely the presence of five to six million French Muslims! They represent France’s best allies in the war against terrorism. The terrorist attacks are a war that has equally been declared upon the 6 million Muslims of France and their 2,500 mosques’. Utter sophistry is what this is. A significant part of these ‘French Muslims’, especially among the younger generations, actually endorses jihad and has refused to participate in the demonstrations that were organised in the aftermath of the 7th January 2015 killings.
There is an incredible piece of evidence that highlights the blindness and the inconsistency of the French State: a Qatari delegation was received at the Elysee by François Hollande, prior to the ‘Republican march’ held on the 11th of January. Qatar is a country that finances Islamism and radical mosques everywhere in Europe. It is the very pillar of active Wahhabism and Salafism, just like the Turkish, Saudi, and Pakistani regimes, who all practice double talk and double standards, in accordance with a hypocritical ruse that is consubstantial with Islam.
TV programs keep inviting ‘moderate’ Muslim intellectuals to reassure the good people of France with their soothing declarations. Let us examine, for instance, the following lyrical profession made by Dalil Boubaker, the righteous rector of the Parisian mosque: ‘These heinous acts have nothing to do with Islam, and are against the values of our Muslim faith [...] The Great Mosque of Paris has been preaching tirelessly in favour of peace, brotherhood and granting human life and common law the proper respect.’ Alright then. Imam Mohamed Aiouaz, a theologian at the above-mentioned mosque, added: ‘The message of Islam is essentially one of peace, brotherhood and respect’. In this regard, the venerable authorities of the Great Mosque of Paris will either be compelled to censor the suras of the Koran or to interpret them (or misinterpret, maybe?) and endow them with peaceful traits. Here is an example: ‘Kill them wherever you encounter them and expel them whence they have expelled you [...] But if they fight you, slay them. Such shall be the recompense for the infidels’. (2. 191) There are dozens of other Suras of the same ilk, many of them anti-Jewish, which followers learn and recite by heart. Words of peace, you say?
Following the carnage at Charlie Hebdo, a much moved Dounia Bouzar declared, ‘we are at war to guarantee freedom’. Very well then. She is the sympathetic president of the ‘Prevention Center Against Islam-related Sectarian Deviations’. Is there a ‘prevention centre’ against the ‘sectarian deviations’ of Catholicism, Judaism, Buddhism, liberalism, etc.? Why does Islam — and none but Islam — require special surveillance institutions against sectarianism and fanaticism? To ask the question is to answer it. Marxism, Islam’s bastard cousin, would have necessitated such institutions too, regardless of whether it was Stalinist, Trostkyist or Maoist. All of them would have been useless, however, since, as expressed by Aristotle, none can ever escape their own nature.
Despite the efforts exerted by the media to highlight (in bold) the solidarity of the Muslims of France in this ordeal, their underrepresentation in the massive demonstrations of January the 11th against the terrorist attacks conducted four days earlier was easily noticeable. A strange fact: in Lyons, whose agglomeration comprises 1 million inhabitants, 300,000 demonstrators participated in the protests, while in Marseille, it was 60,000, and in Lille-Roubaix-Tourcoing as few as 40,000. These three conglomerations are of a comparable size. True enough, but ... in the latter two, a massive proportion of the population is of Muslim immigrant descent. Therein lies the problem. It quickly became apparent that, throughout France, the number of demonstrators was inversely proportional to the size of the local Muslim community.
The Muslim authorities’ peaceful proclamations and good intentions (whether those of the CFCM, UOIF, or the various ‘moderate’ rectors and imams), which are often hypocritical, by the way, are despised by many young Muslims. They harbour the sentiment that their tutelary authorities are traitors, as they have ‘sold out to the West and France’. According to sociologist Philippe Tournier, the general secretary of our National Education’s Personnel Management Union, ‘one must concede that a certain part of our young generation has embraced secession’, which is a euphemism for young people of Muslim origin.
In prisons, cries of ‘Allahu Akbar!’ were heard in response to the minute of silence that was decreed on Thursday, January the 8th 2015, while in suburban schools, we were faced with a general objection to the above-mentioned minute. (Left-oriented) teachers, in a state of collapse, were ordered to keep quiet about this highly inconvenient fact. Let us not shatter the dogma of ‘integration’, shall we? ... Many violent incidents occurred during the days that followed the two January 2015 massacres. On social networks, one witnessed an eruption of the most hateful anti-French and anti-Jewish statements, in addition to numerous jihadist declarations, relayed by thousands of anonymous users. Here is an example, which was posted on Facebook: ‘My respect goes out to Said, Cherif and Coulibaly for defending Islam, they were not terrorists’. In the eyes of these people, those killers are actually partisans, meaning perfectly legitimate warriors.
The massive ‘republican marches” of January the 11th, which were but an emotional reaction and not one of determination, were rejected on all social networks. The ‘I am Kouachi’ slogan was the third most discussed catchphrase on Facebook. Let it be known that one of the stars of this population is rapper Booba, a man who chants ‘I wash my penis in holy water’ in one of his songs. Faced with these new and increasingly radicalised immigrant generations, we definitely have a lot to look forward to.
The Army of Shadows
According to Andrew Parker, head of the British domestic intelligence services (MI5), ‘we have identified an Al-Qaeda terrorist group in Syria which is planning large-scale attacks against the West’. The British Intelligence Services fear both an increase in medium-intensity terrorist activities and the emergence of another ‘September the 11th’ in a Western city. In addition to the Muslim leaders of the IS (Daesh), numerous Islamic authorities worldwide and several Muslim websites proceeded to praise the killers of January 2015 in Paris as a ‘heroes of Islam’. Their actions will be emulated in a kind of morbid competition to determine who will slaughter the highest number of ‘infidels’. 20,000 online messages approving of the Paris attacks have been singled out by the British intelligence services, who subsequently alerted their French counterparts.
Dormant networks enjoy huge funding, whose simultaneous sources lie in criminality and foreign Islamist financial support. The Kouachi brothers were both trained and financed by their openly declared sponsors, the AQAP (Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula). The merging of mob rule and Islamic radicalisation has been confirmed in all suburbs. The stockpiling of war weapons and explosives is on the rise. Only a tiny minority of those who engage in such activities is ever apprehended, not to mention the presence of thousands of fanatics on the Syrian and Iraqi fronts, who, having originally come from France, will be returning in large numbers and bringing war into our country.
Their recruitment and support foundation is being increasingly extended. A shadow army is under construction on the French national territory, comprising both straightforward warriors and passive or active logistics and recruited from the huge pool of 6 million Muslims currently living in France. Many of them are ready to take action at the slightest spark. The ever extending domain of civil war, ranging from the lowest to the highest intensity, poses a serious threat. Especially since lawlessness zones, counted in hundreds and abandoned by the State, can serve as terrorist action sanctuaries and withdrawal shrines throughout the whole country. Owing to a lack of manpower, the police, the gendarmerie and the army, all of whom are on the brink of collapse, already find themselves unable to implement both the Vigipirate surveillance operation and their anti-delinquency missions; one can thus imagine the outcome should the fire of insurgency consume several cities ...
