Monday, March 10, 2008

Le Vrai Changement

It appears that ‘real change’ is coming to Strasbourg, or is attempting to, as one Mohamed Latrèche runs for the post of Mayor of Strasbourg for the PMF (‘Parti des Musulmans de France’ - Party of the Muslims of France). For a Muslim to become mayor might indeed constitute very real change, but it largely depends on precisely what genre of Muslim Mohamed Latrèche professes to be.

And Cranmer is not talking of Sunni, Shi’a or Sufi - though he would hazard a guess that Monsieur Latrèche is of the Sunni persuasion – but whether he is a moderate extremist or an extreme moderate; a political Muslim or a religious Islamist.

His manifesto reads like a list of demands: it is not so much what Monsieur Latrèche will do for Strasbourg, but what Strasbourg must do for Monsieur Latrèche. The PMF demands, inter alia:

1 A Muslim cemetery with rights in perpetuity.
2 A school for girls who are deprived of an education through the ‘ban on the hijab’.
3 Halal meals in school, cafeterias, hospitals, etc.
4 Dignified places of worship responding to the needs of the Muslims of Strasbourg.
5 Special schedules at swimming pools for Muslim girls.

The reality is that the PMF is a strongly anti-Semitic and Holocaust-denying party, which Mohamed Latrèche founded in 1997. It strives to participate in all elections, but has never polled more than 0.67 percent locally (Strasbourg, 1997). On 7 October 2000 it led a 3,000-strong demonstration against Israel, during which the slogan ‘Death to the Jews’ was heard.

But there is an interesting dimension to the rise of this group, as Gaëlle Mann observes: ‘Is it normal in a “laic” country (where Church and State are separate), for a purely religious party such as the PMF to vie for the votes of the electorate?’

A helpful reader offers a response: ‘Of course, dear Gaëlle, it is perfectly normal for a Muslim religious party to present candidates in the election, since we live in a “laic” country. On the other hand it would be abnormal for a Catholic religious party to present candidates, since we live in a “laic” country.’

With 0.67% of the vote, there is no changement coming Strasbourg’s way, vrai or otherwise, but France is developing prophetic antennae that future strife may be prevented now, and she would do well to consider 30 years down the line. As long as she continues to ignore her traditions, culture and history, she is heading inexorably for another bloody revolution.

Laïcité by itself ‘does not necessarily imply any hostility of the government with respect to religion. It is best described as a belief that government and political issues should be kept separate from religious organisations and religious issues (as long as the latter do not have notable social consequences). This is meant to protect both the government from any possible interference from religious organisations, and to protect the religious organisation from political quarrels and controversies.’

It is indeed ironic that the very mechanism by which Christianity is removed from a system of government appears to admit Islam, and doubtless does so under some minority ‘rights’ legislation. But why is a ‘Muslim Party’ not as constitutionally unacceptable to secular France as a Catholic Party?

10 Comments:

Blogger Cranmer said...

Hmm...

5.50 and not one post. This is a record.

Obviously, matters Gallic are of little interest to His Grace's communicants.

This is most disappointing. His Grace was merely displaying his impeccable Europhile credentials.

10 March 2008 at 17:51  
Blogger mongoose said...

Lonely, Your Grace?

It is perfectly reasonable for any religious group to form a party and stand for election. Our Socialist friends have been doing this for years.

10 March 2008 at 18:34  
Anonymous mickey said...

Anyone for boules?

10 March 2008 at 18:53  
Anonymous red despot spotter said...

"but of course"

your grace
highlights just how it can work , i pressume any support for him will be illegal if you refuse!

10 March 2008 at 19:15  
Anonymous Sir Henry Morgan said...

Anon 21.01

Any day now you will have an opportunity to bust a blood vessel.

Fitna will soon be posted online. And because so much fuss has been made of it by muzbots and their dhimmis everyone in the civilised world will watch it.

Remember "Spycatcher"? Same effect will happen here.

Islam's losing, people like me are winning. I expect to see Islam entirely removed from my country before I die. Because people like me are going to provoke islam again and again and again until the outrages you attempt to perpetrate make even our pathetic politicians see no alternative to removing you.

We can only do this because you are so pathetically easy to provoke.

Oh - and Enoch was right.

10 March 2008 at 22:53  
Anonymous j. hari said...

Further proof that the Muslims aren't taking over Europe.

11 March 2008 at 01:21  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your grace wrote:
"But why is a ‘Muslim Party’ not as constitutionally unacceptable to secular France as a Catholic Party?"

Or a Jewish Party, a Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Shinto Party?

It is well known that Islam has become a "special needs" entity, and it is for reasons unknown to me, it is always catered for.

11 March 2008 at 07:11  
Blogger Snuffleupagus said...

No Anonymous. The Muslims are rarely catered for in France. It isn't like this country. The French have a schizophrenic relationship with the Arabs and have done for years. They love them and they hate them. They love them because of the French love of the exotic, the food, the dress, the souk bars and so on. And then they hate them, and I mean really hate them, for a whole variety of ridiculous reasons, which I suppose stem from the Algerian war.

Muslim communities in France are insular and very much divided from the rest of French society - even more so than here, I would argue.

Given France's usual conduct around religion and politics, it is surprising that a Muslim Party would be allowed. Perhaps the Party is such a joke that it is as if they were tossing a bone to a dog.

11 March 2008 at 16:58  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm very surprised that a blog of the quality of yours quotes the blog of gaelle mann, a self-confessed National front supporter and white supremacist...

13 March 2008 at 11:54  
Blogger Cranmer said...

His Grace does not usually respond to anonymice, but do you not appreciate that one may quote a source without necessarily agreeing with either its politics or religion? As it happens, His Grace had no idea of the views of this blog (and now only has your observations from which to make a judgement), but even if had, it is possible for odious individuals or organisations to express accurate observations, in this case concerning the French Constitution. A single quotation does not imply an endorsement of every opinion they hold or view they may have expressed.

His Grace recalls that His Holiness got into a bit of hot water when he decided to quote a 14th-century Byzantine emperor on Mohammed. Your objection rather strikes the same chord as all of those Muslims who protested at this. Do you not realise that His Grace even occasionally quotes from The Guardian?

If you believe that His Grace's blog should only quote from sources of which you approve, he shall be pleased to receive the authorised list which he shall then consider. Perhaps the world's Muslims shall do the same for His Holiness, and then we shall all be much clearer on what is and is not acceptable.

13 March 2008 at 12:44  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older