Tel-Chai Nation

Now that I think of it, it would be premature to think that the riots by Islamic youth in France are totally over. Most importantly, as The Brussels Journal points out, the French and even the Belgian media appear to be trying to censor any further coverage of what crimes remain in progress for now:

The fifteenth consecutive night of unrest in France. According to the French police 463 cars were torched last night, which is just a tad higher than the previous night. This ends the decreasing trend of the last three nights. Perhaps we are in for a status-quo. In the media, however, the decreasing trend in reporting continues. Rioting seems to have become a non-event.

In Belgium, too, the ministry of the Interior said that it has been “a relatively calm night.” Relative calmness means that in Brussels six cars and a school bus were torched, that there was an attempt to set a school on fire and that molotov cocktails were thrown at a hotel. There were also car fires and acts of vandalism in Mechelen, Liège, Frameries and Seneffe. “These were all isolated incidents that have been dealt with in an adequate way by the police and the fire brigade,” the ministry stressed in a press release. In short, it is not really worth mentioning in the media. Yesterday Patrick Dewael, the Belgian minister of the Interior, criticised the newspaper La Dernière Heure for reporting that an extremist weblog is calling upon Muslim radicals to start large-scale rioting in Brussels on Saturday. The newspaper did not make the story up, but it should not have told the public about it.

If that's not bad enough, wait'll you see this next part!

Meanwhile France’s leading news executives are censoring their coverage of the riots for fear that their viewers might turn to the right. “Politics in France is heading to the right and I don’t want rightwing politicians back in second, or even first place because we showed burning cars on television,” Jean-Claude Dassier, the director general of the rolling news service TCI, says.

Unfortunately, the entry takes a turn for the bad when it says the following:

Apparently Jean-Marie Le Pen, the president of the French-nationalist Front National (FN), is a bigger threat to democracy than “youths” who burn cars.

Sorry to say, but, Le Pen, who's an anti-Semitic racist, is just as bad, if not more so, in the ways of a wolf in sheep's clothing. Look out!

Hence Dassier’s channel, which is owned by the private broadcaster TF1, has decided not to show footage of burning cars. Dassier also criticised the “excessive” coverage of the riots by international (read: Anglo-Saxon) news networks. “Journalism is not simply a matter of switching on the cameras and letting them roll. You have to think about what you’re broadcasting.” Indeed, “think, think, think,” as Winnie the Pooh always says, and “avoid encouraging the resurgence of extreme rightwing views in France.”

Early this week the public television station France 3 had already stopped broadcasting the daily number of torched cars, while other TV stations followed suit. “Do we send teams of journalists because cars are burning, or are the cars burning because we sent teams of journalists?” Patrick Lecocq, editor-in-chief of France 2, asks. Think, Monsieur Lecocq, when people in France vote FN next year, will they be doing so because they want to have the international (read: Anglo-Saxon) media flock to France, or is it the other way round?

I couldn't be sure, but I most certainly can say that this is quite offensive that the MSM in France and in Britain too, you can be sure, is trying to cover things up. What happens when the next defenseless person in France is murdered and sent to the great reward along with the middle-aged man who was murdered last week?

The BJ also had some very interesting news of note on the internet:

Today a French weblog reports that the government might even be censoring the blogosphere. Several “conservative and ‘islamophobic’ sites” have been difficult to access since November 9. As I find it hard to believe that islamist websites would be left alone while conservative ones would be singled out, I am sceptical about this story. Moreover, there may be other reasons for these technical problems. Nevertheless, The Brussels Journal, too, was not accessible for some time yesterday evening – which made us fear that we were being hacked. It is not difficult, however, to see what would happen if the United Nations or the European Union were to gain control over the internet rather than the United States.

Whether this was just a power failure or an attempt to crash some of the best websites in France, after reading this recent article by Mark Tapscott, on how universities in the US were threatening free speech rights involving religion, I think it would be strongly advised to pay sharp attention to the part at the end, where he says:

"Don’t think it can’t happen here."

And don't think it can't happen anywhere else in the world either. That's why we've got to be on our guard at all times for violations of free speech.

See also these entries for more on what's happening that the MSM in Europe may be concealing, plus discriminations that are taking place.

And lest we forget, it's not just the Euro-MSM that's being dishonest with the public, but the US-MSM as well. As One Jerusalem noted recently, the ultra-PC Washington Post has once again been resorting to apologia by claming that "It is not the European version of an intifada." Right. And if that's not bad enough, the newspaper even claims, "Islamic ideology and leaders play no role in the disturbances." Really? Pray tell me, Post-propagandists, just what credentials do you have to prove that you understand what's been going on?

This article by Daniel Pipes gives a better perspective on what's been going on these past weeks in France. And, as one of the One Jerusalem contributors notes following a meeting with some press sources in Britain:

There seems to be a widely shared opinion that France is suffering because of high unemployment and lack of integration. But when pressed everyone ended up agreeing that the "riots" are too organized to be spontaneous.

There is no sense of urgency that such lawlessness is a threat to Britain. This is surprising given the July underground bombings and the riots in Birmingham.

Everyone agrees that what is happening in France and the bombings in Jordan demonstrates that the Islamists see everyone, including those countries that opposed the United States action in Iraq as fair game for their murderous acts.

As for the those who think that France is a victim because it failed to integrate its minorities into French society (yes, this is a popular argument) please read this statement by the head of the European Arab League: "We reject integration when it leads to assimilation."

Once again, I urge policymakers to take these people at their word.

Me too.

Conservative Cat also points out something said by a French police chief in this FOX News article that I hadn't quite noticed before:

"We returned to an almost normal situation in Ile de France," said [National Police Chief Michel] Gaudin, referring to the Paris region. He said that 86 vehicles were burned, which he said was about normal.

Pardon, monsieur? Since when was any number of cars burned what one would call "normal"? Plus, as Cat points out, they're most definately not out of the woods yet, and may not be so for a very long time.

Update: I'm also featuring an older item worth noting Front Page Mag has an article by Oliver Guitta first published in the Weekly Standard, on how some schools located in segragated "ghetto neighborhoods", if to draw an analogy with US descriptions of slum areas, are having severe problems with religious Islamist fanatics trying to force their ideology upon the schools, and teenaged Arab girls have suffered the most as result:

Scores of informants told the Obin team that these neighborhoods were undergoing a "rapid and recent swing" toward Islamization, thanks to the growing influence of religious activists. These young men, intense and highly intellectual in their piety, are sometimes former residents of the neighborhood who have been to prison, where they were converted to Islam. More often, however, they are educated men with degrees from universities in France, North Africa, or the Middle East. They have come to be known as "bearded ones" (distinctive beards are a marker of Muslim purists and extremists--think of bin Laden) or "big brothers" (a name evocative of the worldwide jihadist movement's Muslim Brotherhood), and they offer young people a proud identity--Muslim--in place of the dismal identity of unassimilated immigrant.

The biggest social change entailed by this Islamization, Obin reports, is a deterioration in the position of females. Teenage girls are forbidden to play sports and are constantly watched by an informal religious police made up of young men, sometimes their own younger brothers. Makeup, skirts, and form-fitting dresses are forbidden; dark, loose trousers are the strongly recommended attire. To go to the blackboard in front of a class, some Muslim girls put on long coats. Often, they are forced to wear the headscarf, or hijab, and forbidden to frequent coed movie theaters, community centers, and gyms, or even to go out at all on weekends. Lots of young women were afraid to tell the Obin team what punishments are in store for them if they disobey. Not only female students but also female teachers, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, are frequently subjected to sexist remarks by male teenagers.

We should be glad for the internet and the blogosphere to get to know about things like these going on. Yes indeed, it is a very serious concern that something akin to a mafia operation is going on in suburbia.

As if that weren't bad enough, as discovered in this report, also from FPM, an allegedly feminist professor at the bigoted campus of Columbia University, Lila Abu-Lughod, actually upholds apartheid against women in Muslim-run countries like Afganistan:

When Western (or Muslim) feminists try to intervene to better the lot of Afghan, or other women in Muslim countries, Abu-Lughod finds this deplorable, for it could “reinforce a sense of Western superiority.” When Western (or Muslim) feminists object to hijab or burka, Abu-Lughod replies that the women welcome this kind of costume, which offers them a “portable seclusion” from the prying eyes of men. When Western (or Muslim) feminists attack polygamy, Abu-Lughod defends it, and complains that “companionate marriage” is overrated while in the privacy of the polygamous women’s quarters, so much fun is to be had that Western women cannot possibly understand.

Oh yeah, I'll bet. If there's going to be such an attitude towards women as nothing other than property, as nothing other than to make children who according to Islamic customs are seen primarily as the property of the father, then any "fun" she talks about is statistically ZERO. And must one really have to point out that to treat women as nothing more than property and objects is the superiority that she implies western society as being full of? Puh-leez.

Others on the subject include Irish Pennants, The Pink Flamingo Bar Grill, Live From Brussels.

Labels: Europe, France, islam, jihad, misogyny, msm foulness