Overblog Suivre ce blog
Administration Créer mon blog
22 octobre 2006 7 22 /10 /octobre /2006 11:49

Dossiers

Dossier du 19/09/06


Persécution judiciaire


Affaire des timbres postes de Vitrolles :

Déclaration liminaire de Bruno Mégret devant le tribunal correctionnel de Marseille

.



Pour moi les faits sont d'une très grande simplicité. Dans le cadre de l'élection présidentielle de 2002, j'ai souhaité que deux lettres signées du maire de Vitrolles soient envoyées aux maires de France pour les inviter à parrainer ma candidature. Quelque temps après, j'apprends que ces deux envois ont été financés à tort par la mairie. Je demande que la commune soit immédiatement remboursée sur mes fonds officiels de campagne. Ce qui a été fait sans délai.

Voilà pourquoi je me trouve aujourd'hui traîner devant votre tribunal et j'en conçois un sentiment de profonde injustice. Et cela d'autant plus que j'ai déjà été très lourdement puni pour cette malencontreuse erreur. C'est en effet sous le prétexte de cette affaire que le Conseil constitutionnel a rejeté mon compte de campagne et que les dépenses occasionnées par ma candidature ne m'ont pas été versées à hauteur de 5 MF. J'ai même dû rembourser à titre personnel le million de francs que l'État m'avait avancé et qui bien sûr avait été dépensé.

Il s'agit donc d'un détournement de fonds unique dans l'histoire de la République puisque les fonds en question sont dès l'origine dans les caisses de la collectivité publique et que ce prétendu détournement a permis à la collectivité de faire 5 MF d'économie ! Des détournements de fonds de ce type, il en faudrait tous les jours pour renflouer les caisses de l'État.

J'ai donc le sentiment d'être victime d'une véritable persécution judiciaire. À lui tout seul le nombre de procès dont nous avons été victimes, mon épouse et moi-même, depuis que nous avons entrepris de conquérir électoralement la ville de Vitrolles en est la preuve car c'est un record de près d'un procès par an pendant six ans.

Et je n'affabule pas : l'avocat général à la cour d'Aix-en-Provence qui jugeait la dernière affaire en date, l'affaire Quadri-système, a très explicitement déclaré qu'il ne faisait pas partie de ces magistrats qui s'acharnent sur les hommes politiques et qu'il se désolidarisait des propos tenus en première instance par le procureur de la République.

Je constate d'ailleurs que sont mis en examen tous les acteurs de la chaîne hiérarchique de la commune de Vitrolles à l'exception du secrétaire général et du trésorier payeur. N'ont été retenus en effet que ceux qui étaient membres du MNR. Je constate également que, lorsque l'ancien maire socialiste de Vitrolles M. Anglade a été jugé et condamné pour un véritable détournement de fonds, la commune qui s'était portée partie civile a été déboutée. Cette fois-ci elle ne le sera certainement pas. Deux poids deux mesures.

J'ajoute que ces procès surviennent toujours comme par hasard dans les mois qui précèdent une élection à laquelle je suis candidat. Le dernier procès en date, le procès Quadri-système, a eu lieu, je vous le rappelle, les 15 et 16 décembre 2003, quelque temps avant l'élection régionale du 21 mars 2004 à laquelle j'étais candidat. Aujourd'hui, après avoir traîné pendant près de cinq ans, cette affaire vient à l'audience, comme par hasard, au moment où s'ouvre la campagne électorale pour les élections présidentielles à laquelle je suis candidat.

Il s'agit donc d'une scandaleuse persécution, d'autant plus injuste que le MNR a toujours recherché la gestion la plus rigoureuse possible sur le plan éthique. Je rappelle que, lorsque mon épouse est arrivée à la mairie, elle a réduit les émoluments des élus et divisé par deux les frais de représentation. Lorsque l'équipe socialiste a pris les rênes, sa première décision a été de doubler le budget relatif aux émoluments des élus. J'ajoute également que la municipalité MNR a subi trois contrôles de la Chambre régionale des comptes en six ans alors que l'équipe socialiste précédente n'en n'avait subi aucun au cours des quinze années précédentes.

Nous sommes victimes d'un véritable acharnement et donc d'une réelle injustice. Or, si la justice devient injuste il y a plus de justice. Car, avec ce genre de procès, ce n'est pas moi qui suis discrédité dans l'opinion mais la justice et je crois réellement qu'elle n'a pas besoin de cela en ce moment.

 

 

 

Imprimer cette page




 Persécution judiciaire
 Immigration: Sarko se dégonfle
 Football: le Prozac du peuple
 Le retour des Tartuffe
 Motion concernant 2007
 Sur la loi Sarkozy
 Mégret pour le rassemblement
 À propos du crime de Fofana
 Déclaration sur les émeutes
 Motion sur les émeutes
 Lettre à Villepin
 Pourquoi le vote Non
 Archives

 Consulter notre magazine
 Contactez-nous
 Découvrez le MNR
 Adhérez au MNR
 Visitez le site de B. Mégret
 Notre position sur la Turquie
 Lettre internet de B. Mégret
 Déclaration sur les émeutes
 Colloque sur l'Europe
 Colloque l'Islam jusqu'où ?

    Culture
    École
    Économie
    Environnement
    Europe
    Famille
    Identité
    Immigration
    International
    Islam
    Libertés
    MNR
    Mondialisation
    Nation
    Politique
    République
    Sécurité
    Social
    Travail
    Turquie
    Valeurs


 note personnelle :

rappelons nous que depuis des années , l 'ensemble des ministres

Gauche et Droite

se prenaient des revenus

" en espèces "

" non déclarés"

fiscalement

n'oublions pas l'augmentation

IMMEDIATE de

70 %  !§§

DES SALAIRES DES MINISTRES

DE LA CHIRAKIE

EN 2002 .

70 % de plus !

Remonter en haut de la page
 

 

Dossiers
 
Imprimer cette page




 Persécution judiciaire

 Consulter notre magazine
 Contactez-nous
 Découvrez le MNR
 Adhérez au MNR
 Visitez le site de B. Mégret
 Notre position sur la Turquie
 Lettre internet de B. Mégret
 Déclaration sur les émeutes
 Colloque sur l'Europe
 Colloque l'Islam jusqu'où ?

    Culture
    École
    Économie
    Environnement
    Europe
    Famille
    Identité
    Immigration
    International
    Islam
    Libertés
    MNR
    Mondialisation
    Nation
    Politique
    République
    Sécurité
    Social
  
  

 

 
 
 

Repost 0
Published by Le comte vert - dans HOME ACCUEIL
commenter cet article
21 octobre 2006 6 21 /10 /octobre /2006 11:19

 

 

The Eurabia Code, Part 4:

We Have to Destroy

 the European Union in Order to Save Europe

The European Union gave the Palestinians $342.8 million in aid in 2005 — or, more accurately, $612.15 million when assistance from the 25 EU governments is included. Even the United States has repeatedly donated millions of American tax dollars to the Palestinian Authority, though not at EU levels. In July 2005, as a response to the Islamic terrorist attacks on London a few days earlier, leaders of the G8, the group of influential industrialized nations, offered the PA some $9 billion, dubbed an “alternative to the hatred.”

The West’s largesse continued despite a demographic study in 2005 which revealed that the number showing the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza had been inflated by 50% by the government.

Almost all of the new infrastructure in the Palestinian territories from the beginning of the Oslo Peace Process in the 1990s — schools, hospitals, airports — were arranged and paid for by Brussels. As Jihad was once again unleashed with the second Intifada in 2000, Israel stopped its transfer of payments to the Palestinians. So the EU stepped in with another 10 million Euros a month in direct budgetary assistance to the Palestinian Authority. EU Commissioner for External Affairs Chris Patten stated in 2002 that “there is no case for stating that EU money has financed terrorism, has financed the purchase of weapons, or any similar activities.”

However, a report by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies later found that: “There is indisputable evidence that PA money has been used to fund terrorist activities.” This was confirmed by Fuad Shubaki, who used to serve as the finance chief in the Palestinian security forces. According to him, former Palestinian Authority chairman Yasser Arafat ordered millions of dollars, taken from international aid funds, tax money transferred by Israel and from Arab countries, to be used to purchase weapons and ammunition, including the 50 tons of armaments on board the ship Karine A. The transaction was coordinated between the PA, Hizballah in Lebanon and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

Al-Aksa Martyrs BrigadesIn May 2006, Mahmoud Abbas — President of the Palestinian Authority after Arafat’s death in November 2004 and a leading politician in Fatah — talked to the European Parliament about the peace process. At the same time, the al-Aksa Martyrs Brigades, the armed wing of Fatah, threatened to strike at US and European economic and civilian interests in response to international sanctions on the PA. Financial support evokes no gratitude in the Palestinians. However, they will threaten you with violence if aid is not forthcoming. This is plainly extortion.

This shakedown corresponds to the Muslims’ view of the Jizya, the tributary tax paid by non-Muslims in exchange for not being killed. Documents from the Euro-Arab Dialogue frequently mention about “financial assistance” from the EU to Arab countries. Bat Ye’or points out that some of this Jizya tax is extracted from Europeans without their awareness.

In November 2005, the EU’s official financial watchdog refused to approve the EU’s accounts for the 11th year in a row because they were so full of fraud and errors. The European Court of Auditors refused to give a statement of assurance on the EU’s $160.3 billion budget for 2004. “The vast majority of the payment budget was again materially affected by errors of legality and regularity,” it said. It specifically refused to approve the budgets for the EU’s foreign policy and aid programs, many of which are geared towards Arab countries. Half the project budgets approved by the European Commission were inadequately monitored.

The European Commission is considered the EU’s “government,” and thus the government of nearly half a billion people. But it can release accounts with massive flaws for over a decade straight because it is largely unaccountable to anybody and was intended to be that way.

Muslims use deception to advance Jihad until it is almost too late for the infidels to stop them. The EU federalists and Eurabians have taken a page out of the Islamic playbook, and have been approaching their goals by stealth for decades, buried beneath a mass of detail and technocratic newspeak all but incomprehensible to non-bureaucrats.

In a frank moment, Jean-Claude Juncker, Luxemburg’s prime minister, once described the EU’s “system” in this way: “We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait and see what happens,” he explained. “If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don’t understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back.”

In The Economist, columnist Charlemagne [Gideon Rachman] wrote: “What Mr Juncker and those who think like him are trying to do is, in essence, to drown opposition to European federation in a mass of technical detail, to bore people into submission. As a strategy, it has gone a long way. [My emphasis] The greatest single transfer of sovereignty from Europe’s nations to the European Union took place, in 1985, as part of the project to create a single European market. Even [British Conservative PM] Margaret Thatcher, not usually slow to spot a trick, later claimed that she had not fully appreciated the ramifications of what she was then signing up to.”

Writer Christopher Booker has called this the EU’s ”culture of deceit”:

“What in fact has been taking place has been a transfer of power […] to Brussels on a scale amounting to the greatest constitutional revolution in our history. But much of this has remained buried from view because our politicians like to preserve the illusion that they are still in charge. The result is that remarkably few people now have any proper understanding of how the political system which rules our lives actually works.”

I have used the term “neo-Feudalism” to describe the EU. There are definitely certain elite groups in Europe who think that everything that is wrong with Europe is because of “populism” — what others call democracy. The motive force behind the EU aims to cede national sovereignty to a new ruling class of bureaucrats, a new aristocracy. This is a throwback to the pre-democratic age. Karl Zinsmeister notes that: “The EU apparatus is exceedingly closed and secretive. Relatively few of the confederation’s important decisions are currently made by democratically accountable officials. On front after front, bureaucratic mandarins are deciding how everyday Europeans will live. […] Many Europeans, in a way Americans find impossible to understand, are willing to let their elites lead them by the nose. There is a kind of peasant mentality under which their ‘betters’ are allowed to make the important national judgments for them.”

MP Gisela Stuart was a member of the Praesidium which drafted the proposed EU Constitution. She sums up her experiences thus:

“The Convention brought together a self-selected group of the European political elite, many of whom have their eyes on a career at a European level, which is dependent on more and more integration, and who see national parliaments and governments as an obstacle [...] Not once in the sixteen months I spent on the Convention did representatives question whether deeper integration is what the people of Europe want, whether it serves their best interests or whether it provides the best basis for a sustainable structure for an expanding Union.”

In 2005, an unprecedented joint declaration by the leaders of all the British political groups in Brussels called for an end the “medieval” practice of European legislation being decided behind closed doors. Critics claim that the Council of Ministers, the EU’s supreme law-making body, which decides two thirds of all Britain’s laws, “is the only legislature outside the Communist dictatorships of North Korea and Cuba to pass laws in secret.”

According to British Conservative politician Daniel Hannan, this is how the EU was designed. “Its founding fathers understood from the first that their audacious plan to merge the ancient nations of Europe into a single polity would never succeed if each successive transfer of power had to be referred back to the voters for approval. So they cunningly devised a structure where supreme power was in the hands of appointed functionaries, immune to public opinion. Indeed, the EU’s structure is not so much undemocratic as anti-democratic.”

The European Union has been compared to the Roman Empire, but such comparisons are not very apt. Rome was the military superpower of its time, while the EU is but a military midget. However, there is one intriguing commonality: Julius Caesar was murdered because he wanted to crown himself king. This was not a popular move among the powerful elite in the Senate, who reminded Caesar that Rome had become a Republic precisely because they had rebelled against the “tyrant” kings of old.

Caesar AugustusCaesar’s successor Octavian, better known today as Caesar Augustus, is considered both the first and one of the most important Roman Emperors. He downplayed his own position by preferring the title princeps, usually translated as “first citizen”. He also preserved the outward form of the Roman Republic, paid lip service to the old elite, and veiled the changes to make them seem less upsetting to the public. He may have been a monarch, but he never called himself one.

Some might see a parallel in the present-day EU. When up to three-quarters of our national laws originate in Brussels, what is then the point of holding national elections? Just as in Octavian’s Rome, the real power has been moved elsewhere, but the old order is draped over reality as a democratic fig leaf in order not to upset the common people. The EU operates largely by stealth; its edicts are implemented through traditional parliaments, which are increasingly reduced to decorative appendages.

The funny aspect of this is that those who are against the EU are labelled xenophobes, nationalists or simply anti-democratic forces. The EU is an organization where unelected bureaucrats dismantle democracy, yet denounce their critics as anti-democratic forces.

In order to create this new entity, the old nation states must be deliberately crushed. Massive numbers of non-European immigrants are introduced, and the resulting situation is termed a “Multicultural society”. This demolition is followed by the demand that our entire society be changed accordingly.

Since Europeans feel less “European” than they experience themselves as French, Italian, Dutch, etc., national allegiances have to be broken down. At the same time, an external rival must be created. The closest model is Bismarck’s unification of Germany. The numerous German states rallied to Prussia’s side against the French in the Franco-Prussian War in 1870, thus paving the way for a new, powerful German federation.

The EU federalists strive to build a united European state through a shared animosity against the USA, while constructing a Eurabian entity of Europe and the Arab world via their common hostility towards Israel. One tactic is the deliberate use of the media to whip up anger against these countries and to demonize them.

However, Bismarck’s German states were united by a common language. Even if a “new us” could be constructed from dozens of nations — which is highly questionable — melding various ethnic groups into a cohesive nation takes centuries. Without a shared identity, without a European demos, how can the EU be anything but authoritarian? Perhaps the EU elites believe that a large mass of people lacking a distinct cultural identity would be easier to control?

George OrwellThe problem is that the nation state itself has been declared evil or obsolete, not collectivism, anti-individualism or totalitarianism. But there is a crucial distinction between nationalism and patriotism, which George Orwell saw clearly:

Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power.”

Totalitarian regimes can be national, such as Nazi Germany, but they can also be supranational, such as the Soviet Union, which sought to suppress all pre-existing national loyalties.

How was a project as big as the creation of Eurabia pulled off? I have thought a lot about this question, and come to the conclusion that it succeeded precisely because of its size. St. Augustine tells the story of a pirate captured by Alexander the Great. “How dare you molest the sea?” asked Alexander. “How dare you molest the whole world?” the pirate replied. “Because I do it with a little ship only, I am called a thief; you, doing it with a great navy, are called an emperor.”

It is a matter of scale. If a small group of people sideline the democratic process in one country and start imposing their own laws on the public, it is called a coup d’état. If they do so on an entire continent, it is called the European Union.

Adolf Hitler’s autobiography Mein Kampf described a propaganda technique known as “the Big Lie”. The EU has adopted this strategy, which consists of telling a lie so “colossal” that it would be impossible to believe anyone “could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.” This has been combined with the technique, perfected by Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels in Nazi Germany, of repeating a point until it is taken to be the truth.

Here are some Big Lies:

  • Diversity is always good;
  • Multiculturalism is inevitable, as is continued EU integration;
  • Those opposing it are ignorant racists standing against the tide of history;
  • Muslim immigration is “good for the economy” and is necessary for funding the welfare state in the future, despite the fact that it drains away enormous resources.

The creation of Eurabia ranks as one of the greatest betrayals in the history of Western civilization. Does that mean that all EU federalists or those who participate in the various instruments of the Euro-Arab Dialogue are evil? No, reality isn’t that simple. As Hugh Fitzgerald points out, “A whole class of people has gotten rich from Arab money and bribes; lawyers, public relations men, and diplomats, journalists, university teachers and assorted officials.”

However, while ignorance, corruption and the self-serving search for personal power explains some of the behavior of the Eurabian elites, it cannot explain the behavior of ALL those thousands of people who have been involved in these networks. Some of them must have convinced themselves that what they were doing was for a just cause, if for no other reason than because human vanity demands that we justify our actions by covering them with a veneer of goodness.

In the science fiction movie Serenity, the two great superpowers, the United States and China, have merged into the Alliance, which has moved humanity to a new star system. On the little-known planet Miranda, a gas called Pax was added to the air processors. It was intended to calm the population, weed out aggression. It worked. The people stopped fighting. They also stopped doing everything else, including breeding and physical self-preservation. A small minority of the population had the opposite reaction to this pacification. Their aggression increased beyond madness, and they killed most of the others. Tens of millions of people quietly let themselves be wiped out.

Movie director Joss Whedon is careful to point out that the Alliance is not some evil empire, but rather a force that is largely benevolent. They meant it for the best, to create a better world, a world without sin. However, according to Whedon, “Whenever you create Utopia, you find something ugly working underneath it.”

Former Europeans who fought against Jihad fought for a number of things: Their religion, their culture and their nation. EU federalists and Eurabians are deliberately suppressing all of these instincts in their quest to create a New Man and weed out aggression. However, because they have wrongly identified the nation state as the root cause of all evil, they are suppressing not just aggressive nationalism, but defensive patriotism. And since some of the Muslims have actually become even more aggressive in response to what they perceive as our nihilism, the Eurabians have suicidally disarmed their own people, literally and metaphorically, and put them up for slaughter.

Many Communists, at least in the beginning, really believed in their ideology. The result was mass slaughter; tens of millions of people were killed in the quest for a world without oppression or exploitation. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Regardless of how good your intentions may be, you cannot use millions of people as guinea pigs in massive social experiments without also causing massive harm.

Perhaps one of the reasons why this has been allowed to happen in Western Europe and the European Union is because we never fully understood or attempted to confront the reasons for the abysmal failure of Communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union following the Cold War. The concept of massive social experiments to create a New Man was allowed to survive. It mutated and then migrated West. Jean Monnet, who set in motion the process of European integration, reflected on how the European civil service constituted a ‘laboratory’ in which a new kind of ‘European Man’ would be born. But the New European Man, just like the New Soviet Man before him, is all but certain to fail.

Can the European Union be reformed? I doubt it. The EU is bound together by a self-serving class of bureaucrats who want to expand their budgets and their power, despite the harm they do. These functionaries will use traditional methods of deception to counteract any calls for reforms so they can retain control.

It is instructive to watch the reactions of the EU elites to the popular rejections in France and Holland of the EU Constitution in 2005. They put together a “wise” group of European politicians, led by Giuliano Amato, Italian Interior Minister in “super-Eurabian” Romano Prodi’s government, to come up with possible solutions to this impasse. Suggestions discussed included dropping the name “constitution” in favor of “treaty.”

The same Amato, who is a former Italian Prime Minister and also the Vice-President of the EU Convention which drafted the Constitution, has earlier stated that:

“In Europe one needs to act ‘as if’ — as if what was wanted was little, in order to obtain much, as if states were to remain sovereign to convince them to concede sovereignty [...] The Commission in Brussels, for example, should act as if it were a technical instrument, in order to be able to be treated as a government. And so on by disguise and subterfuge [my emphasis].”

That a man who has openly bragged about how EU federalist goals are advanced by “disguise and subterfuge” leads the attempts to “renew” the EU Constitution tells ordinary Europeans everything we need to know about the EU. If the EU elites have deliberately deceived us for decades to achieve their goals, why should we suddenly trust them now? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. These people have fooled us enough.

“I think that the European Union, like the Soviet Union, cannot be democratized,” says Vladimir Bukovksy. “There will be a collapse of the European Union pretty much like the Soviet Union collapsed. But do not forget that when these things collapse they leave such devastation that it takes a generation to recover. […] Look to the huge number of immigrants from Third World countries now living in Europe. This was promoted by the European Union. What will happen with them if there is an economic collapse? We will probably have, like in the Soviet Union at the end, so much ethnic strife that the mind boggles.”

In their book about the EU, Richard North and Christopher Booker conclude: “The project Monnet had set on its way was a vast, ramshackle, self-deluding monster: partly suffocating in its own bureaucracy; partly a corrupt racket […] The one thing above all the project could never be, because by definition it had never been intended to be, was in the remotest sense democratic.” They believe the EU is doomed and will “leave a terrible devastation behind it, a wasteland from which it would take many years for the peoples of Europe to emerge.”

I understand concerns that the destruction of the EU could cause “instability” in Europe. It will. But we will probably end up with “instability” anyway, given the number of Muslims the EUrabians have let in. The choice is between a period of painful years in which most of Europe prevails, and death, where Europe simply ceases to exist as a Western cultural entity.

Some would hope that we could keep the “positive” aspects of the EU and not “throw out the baby with the bath water.” I beg to differ.

The EU is all bath water, no baby. There never was a baby, just a truckload of overpaid babysitters.

Multiculturalism separates people into “tribes” below the nation state level. This is precisely the situation we had in Europe in the Middle Ages. Likewise, the idea that we should “respect” other cultures by not criticizing them means turning the clock back several centuries to the pre-Enlightenment era. Multiculturalism is merely a medieval ideology, and will generate medieval results.

Although the EU will fail in creating a pan-European identity, it has already partly succeeded in weakening the traditional nation states. Across Western Europe, Muslim immigrants tend to settle in major cities, with the native population retreating into the countryside. This destruction of the coherence of society is triggering a return to tribalism, as people no longer trust the nation state to protect them.

The process has been explained by Ernest Baert: “Over many centuries, Western Europe has replaced the tribe or clan by the nation state.” The result was that “European citizens tend to have equal trust in all other citizens of the same nation state outside their immediate family and circle of friends.” This “high-trust society” was a necessary precondition not only for the success of a capitalist economy in Europe, but also for the rise of democracy.

A different worldview prevails in the Muslim world or in Africa. There, individuals have no choice but to fall back on their clan for protection. So what effect will the introduction of massive numbers of individuals from “low-trust societies” have on our own culture? Baert is pessimistic:

“There is little doubt that we live in the dying days of the multicultural fantasy. It will end in misery and may lead to the loss of Europe as a part of Western civilisation. Our children and grandchildren will look back to our days and wonder why so many so easily accepted what patently contradicted history and common sense.”

While ordinary Europeans live in fear of Muslim violence in their own cities and trust in their own leaders is plummeting, EU elites meet in cocktail parties and congratulate each other for bringing peace to Europe.

The Eurabia Code, Part 4: We Have to Destroy the European Union in Order to Save Europe

The European Union gave the Palestinians $342.8 million in aid in 2005 — or, more accurately, $612.15 million when assistance from the 25 EU governments is included. Even the United States has repeatedly donated millions of American tax dollars to the Palestinian Authority, though not at EU levels. In July 2005, as a response to the Islamic terrorist attacks on London a few days earlier, leaders of the G8, the group of influential industrialized nations, offered the PA some $9 billion, dubbed an “alternative to the hatred.”

The West’s largesse continued despite a demographic study in 2005 which revealed that the number showing the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza had been inflated by 50% by the government.

Almost all of the new infrastructure in the Palestinian territories from the beginning of the Oslo Peace Process in the 1990s — schools, hospitals, airports — were arranged and paid for by Brussels. As Jihad was once again unleashed with the second Intifada in 2000, Israel stopped its transfer of payments to the Palestinians. So the EU stepped in with another 10 million Euros a month in direct budgetary assistance to the Palestinian Authority. EU Commissioner for External Affairs Chris Patten stated in 2002 that “there is no case for stating that EU money has financed terrorism, has financed the purchase of weapons, or any similar activities.”

However, a report by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies later found that: “There is indisputable evidence that PA money has been used to fund terrorist activities.” This was confirmed by Fuad Shubaki, who used to serve as the finance chief in the Palestinian security forces. According to him, former Palestinian Authority chairman Yasser Arafat ordered millions of dollars, taken from international aid funds, tax money transferred by Israel and from Arab countries, to be used to purchase weapons and ammunition, including the 50 tons of armaments on board the ship Karine A. The transaction was coordinated between the PA, Hizballah in Lebanon and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

Al-Aksa Martyrs BrigadesIn May 2006, Mahmoud Abbas — President of the Palestinian Authority after Arafat’s death in November 2004 and a leading politician in Fatah — talked to the European Parliament about the peace process. At the same time, the al-Aksa Martyrs Brigades, the armed wing of Fatah, threatened to strike at US and European economic and civilian interests in response to international sanctions on the PA. Financial support evokes no gratitude in the Palestinians. However, they will threaten you with violence if aid is not forthcoming. This is plainly extortion.

This shakedown corresponds to the Muslims’ view of the Jizya, the tributary tax paid by non-Muslims in exchange for not being killed. Documents from the Euro-Arab Dialogue frequently mention about “financial assistance” from the EU to Arab countries. Bat Ye’or points out that some of this Jizya tax is extracted from Europeans without their awareness.

In November 2005, the EU’s official financial watchdog refused to approve the EU’s accounts for the 11th year in a row because they were so full of fraud and errors. The European Court of Auditors refused to give a statement of assurance on the EU’s $160.3 billion budget for 2004. “The vast majority of the payment budget was again materially affected by errors of legality and regularity,” it said. It specifically refused to approve the budgets for the EU’s foreign policy and aid programs, many of which are geared towards Arab countries. Half the project budgets approved by the European Commission were inadequately monitored.

The European Commission is considered the EU’s “government,” and thus the government of nearly half a billion people. But it can release accounts with massive flaws for over a decade straight because it is largely unaccountable to anybody and was intended to be that way.

Muslims use deception to advance Jihad until it is almost too late for the infidels to stop them. The EU federalists and Eurabians have taken a page out of the Islamic playbook, and have been approaching their goals by stealth for decades, buried beneath a mass of detail and technocratic newspeak all but incomprehensible to non-bureaucrats.

In a frank moment, Jean-Claude Juncker, Luxemburg’s prime minister, once described the EU’s “system” in this way: “We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait and see what happens,” he explained. “If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don’t understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back.”

In The Economist, columnist Charlemagne [Gideon Rachman] wrote: “What Mr Juncker and those who think like him are trying to do is, in essence, to drown opposition to European federation in a mass of technical detail, to bore people into submission. As a strategy, it has gone a long way. [My emphasis] The greatest single transfer of sovereignty from Europe’s nations to the European Union took place, in 1985, as part of the project to create a single European market. Even [British Conservative PM] Margaret Thatcher, not usually slow to spot a trick, later claimed that she had not fully appreciated the ramifications of what she was then signing up to.”

Writer Christopher Booker has called this the EU’s ”culture of deceit”:

“What in fact has been taking place has been a transfer of power […] to Brussels on a scale amounting to the greatest constitutional revolution in our history. But much of this has remained buried from view because our politicians like to preserve the illusion that they are still in charge. The result is that remarkably few people now have any proper understanding of how the political system which rules our lives actually works.”

I have used the term “neo-Feudalism” to describe the EU. There are definitely certain elite groups in Europe who think that everything that is wrong with Europe is because of “populism” — what others call democracy. The motive force behind the EU aims to cede national sovereignty to a new ruling class of bureaucrats, a new aristocracy. This is a throwback to the pre-democratic age. Karl Zinsmeister notes that: “The EU apparatus is exceedingly closed and secretive. Relatively few of the confederation’s important decisions are currently made by democratically accountable officials. On front after front, bureaucratic mandarins are deciding how everyday Europeans will live. […] Many Europeans, in a way Americans find impossible to understand, are willing to let their elites lead them by the nose. There is a kind of peasant mentality under which their ‘betters’ are allowed to make the important national judgments for them.”

MP Gisela Stuart was a member of the Praesidium which drafted the proposed EU Constitution. She sums up her experiences thus:

“The Convention brought together a self-selected group of the European political elite, many of whom have their eyes on a career at a European level, which is dependent on more and more integration, and who see national parliaments and governments as an obstacle [...] Not once in the sixteen months I spent on the Convention did representatives question whether deeper integration is what the people of Europe want, whether it serves their best interests or whether it provides the best basis for a sustainable structure for an expanding Union.”

In 2005, an unprecedented joint declaration by the leaders of all the British political groups in Brussels called for an end the “medieval” practice of European legislation being decided behind closed doors. Critics claim that the Council of Ministers, the EU’s supreme law-making body, which decides two thirds of all Britain’s laws, “is the only legislature outside the Communist dictatorships of North Korea and Cuba to pass laws in secret.”

According to British Conservative politician Daniel Hannan, this is how the EU was designed. “Its founding fathers understood from the first that their audacious plan to merge the ancient nations of Europe into a single polity would never succeed if each successive transfer of power had to be referred back to the voters for approval. So they cunningly devised a structure where supreme power was in the hands of appointed functionaries, immune to public opinion. Indeed, the EU’s structure is not so much undemocratic as anti-democratic.”

The European Union has been compared to the Roman Empire, but such comparisons are not very apt. Rome was the military superpower of its time, while the EU is but a military midget. However, there is one intriguing commonality: Julius Caesar was murdered because he wanted to crown himself king. This was not a popular move among the powerful elite in the Senate, who reminded Caesar that Rome had become a Republic precisely because they had rebelled against the “tyrant” kings of old.

Caesar AugustusCaesar’s successor Octavian, better known today as Caesar Augustus, is considered both the first and one of the most important Roman Emperors. He downplayed his own position by preferring the title princeps, usually translated as “first citizen”. He also preserved the outward form of the Roman Republic, paid lip service to the old elite, and veiled the changes to make them seem less upsetting to the public. He may have been a monarch, but he never called himself one.

Some might see a parallel in the present-day EU. When up to three-quarters of our national laws originate in Brussels, what is then the point of holding national elections? Just as in Octavian’s Rome, the real power has been moved elsewhere, but the old order is draped over reality as a democratic fig leaf in order not to upset the common people. The EU operates largely by stealth; its edicts are implemented through traditional parliaments, which are increasingly reduced to decorative appendages.

The funny aspect of this is that those who are against the EU are labelled xenophobes, nationalists or simply anti-democratic forces. The EU is an organization where unelected bureaucrats dismantle democracy, yet denounce their critics as anti-democratic forces.

In order to create this new entity, the old nation states must be deliberately crushed. Massive numbers of non-European immigrants are introduced, and the resulting situation is termed a “Multicultural society”. This demolition is followed by the demand that our entire society be changed accordingly.

Since Europeans feel less “European” than they experience themselves as French, Italian, Dutch, etc., national allegiances have to be broken down. At the same time, an external rival must be created. The closest model is Bismarck’s unification of Germany. The numerous German states rallied to Prussia’s side against the French in the Franco-Prussian War in 1870, thus paving the way for a new, powerful German federation.

The EU federalists strive to build a united European state through a shared animosity against the USA, while constructing a Eurabian entity of Europe and the Arab world via their common hostility towards Israel. One tactic is the deliberate use of the media to whip up anger against these countries and to demonize them.

However, Bismarck’s German states were united by a common language. Even if a “new us” could be constructed from dozens of nations — which is highly questionable — melding various ethnic groups into a cohesive nation takes centuries. Without a shared identity, without a European demos, how can the EU be anything but authoritarian? Perhaps the EU elites believe that a large mass of people lacking a distinct cultural identity would be easier to control?

George OrwellThe problem is that the nation state itself has been declared evil or obsolete, not collectivism, anti-individualism or totalitarianism. But there is a crucial distinction between nationalism and patriotism, which George Orwell saw clearly:

Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power.”

Totalitarian regimes can be national, such as Nazi Germany, but they can also be supranational, such as the Soviet Union, which sought to suppress all pre-existing national loyalties.

How was a project as big as the creation of Eurabia pulled off? I have thought a lot about this question, and come to the conclusion that it succeeded precisely because of its size. St. Augustine tells the story of a pirate captured by Alexander the Great. “How dare you molest the sea?” asked Alexander. “How dare you molest the whole world?” the pirate replied. “Because I do it with a little ship only, I am called a thief; you, doing it with a great navy, are called an emperor.”

It is a matter of scale. If a small group of people sideline the democratic process in one country and start imposing their own laws on the public, it is called a coup d’état. If they do so on an entire continent, it is called the European Union.

Adolf Hitler’s autobiography Mein Kampf described a propaganda technique known as “the Big Lie”. The EU has adopted this strategy, which consists of telling a lie so “colossal” that it would be impossible to believe anyone “could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.” This has been combined with the technique, perfected by Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels in Nazi Germany, of repeating a point until it is taken to be the truth.

Here are some Big Lies:

  • Diversity is always good;
  • Multiculturalism is inevitable, as is continued EU integration;
  • Those opposing it are ignorant racists standing against the tide of history;
  • Muslim immigration is “good for the economy” and is necessary for funding the welfare state in the future, despite the fact that it drains away enormous resources.

The creation of Eurabia ranks as one of the greatest betrayals in the history of Western civilization. Does that mean that all EU federalists or those who participate in the various instruments of the Euro-Arab Dialogue are evil? No, reality isn’t that simple. As Hugh Fitzgerald points out, “A whole class of people has gotten rich from Arab money and bribes; lawyers, public relations men, and diplomats, journalists, university teachers and assorted officials.”

However, while ignorance, corruption and the self-serving search for personal power explains some of the behavior of the Eurabian elites, it cannot explain the behavior of ALL those thousands of people who have been involved in these networks. Some of them must have convinced themselves that what they were doing was for a just cause, if for no other reason than because human vanity demands that we justify our actions by covering them with a veneer of goodness.

In the science fiction movie Serenity, the two great superpowers, the United States and China, have merged into the Alliance, which has moved humanity to a new star system. On the little-known planet Miranda, a gas called Pax was added to the air processors. It was intended to calm the population, weed out aggression. It worked. The people stopped fighting. They also stopped doing everything else, including breeding and physical self-preservation. A small minority of the population had the opposite reaction to this pacification. Their aggression increased beyond madness, and they killed most of the others. Tens of millions of people quietly let themselves be wiped out.

Movie director Joss Whedon is careful to point out that the Alliance is not some evil empire, but rather a force that is largely benevolent. They meant it for the best, to create a better world, a world without sin. However, according to Whedon, “Whenever you create Utopia, you find something ugly working underneath it.”

Former Europeans who fought against Jihad fought for a number of things: Their religion, their culture and their nation. EU federalists and Eurabians are deliberately suppressing all of these instincts in their quest to create a New Man and weed out aggression. However, because they have wrongly identified the nation state as the root cause of all evil, they are suppressing not just aggressive nationalism, but defensive patriotism. And since some of the Muslims have actually become even more aggressive in response to what they perceive as our nihilism, the Eurabians have suicidally disarmed their own people, literally and metaphorically, and put them up for slaughter.

Many Communists, at least in the beginning, really believed in their ideology. The result was mass slaughter; tens of millions of people were killed in the quest for a world without oppression or exploitation. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Regardless of how good your intentions may be, you cannot use millions of people as guinea pigs in massive social experiments without also causing massive harm.

Perhaps one of the reasons why this has been allowed to happen in Western Europe and the European Union is because we never fully understood or attempted to confront the reasons for the abysmal failure of Communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union following the Cold War. The concept of massive social experiments to create a New Man was allowed to survive. It mutated and then migrated West. Jean Monnet, who set in motion the process of European integration, reflected on how the European civil service constituted a ‘laboratory’ in which a new kind of ‘European Man’ would be born. But the New European Man, just like the New Soviet Man before him, is all but certain to fail.

Can the European Union be reformed? I doubt it. The EU is bound together by a self-serving class of bureaucrats who want to expand their budgets and their power, despite the harm they do. These functionaries will use traditional methods of deception to counteract any calls for reforms so they can retain control.

It is instructive to watch the reactions of the EU elites to the popular rejections in France and Holland of the EU Constitution in 2005. They put together a “wise” group of European politicians, led by Giuliano Amato, Italian Interior Minister in “super-Eurabian” Romano Prodi’s government, to come up with possible solutions to this impasse. Suggestions discussed included dropping the name “constitution” in favor of “treaty.”

The same Amato, who is a former Italian Prime Minister and also the Vice-President of the EU Convention which drafted the Constitution, has earlier stated that:

“In Europe one needs to act ‘as if’ — as if what was wanted was little, in order to obtain much, as if states were to remain sovereign to convince them to concede sovereignty [...] The Commission in Brussels, for example, should act as if it were a technical instrument, in order to be able to be treated as a government. And so on by disguise and subterfuge [my emphasis].”

That a man who has openly bragged about how EU federalist goals are advanced by “disguise and subterfuge” leads the attempts to “renew” the EU Constitution tells ordinary Europeans everything we need to know about the EU. If the EU elites have deliberately deceived us for decades to achieve their goals, why should we suddenly trust them now? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. These people have fooled us enough.

“I think that the European Union, like the Soviet Union, cannot be democratized,” says Vladimir Bukovksy. “There will be a collapse of the European Union pretty much like the Soviet Union collapsed. But do not forget that when these things collapse they leave such devastation that it takes a generation to recover. […] Look to the huge number of immigrants from Third World countries now living in Europe. This was promoted by the European Union. What will happen with them if there is an economic collapse? We will probably have, like in the Soviet Union at the end, so much ethnic strife that the mind boggles.”

In their book about the EU, Richard North and Christopher Booker conclude: “The project Monnet had set on its way was a vast, ramshackle, self-deluding monster: partly suffocating in its own bureaucracy; partly a corrupt racket […] The one thing above all the project could never be, because by definition it had never been intended to be, was in the remotest sense democratic.” They believe the EU is doomed and will “leave a terrible devastation behind it, a wasteland from which it would take many years for the peoples of Europe to emerge.”

I understand concerns that the destruction of the EU could cause “instability” in Europe. It will. But we will probably end up with “instability” anyway, given the number of Muslims the EUrabians have let in. The choice is between a period of painful years in which most of Europe prevails, and death, where Europe simply ceases to exist as a Western cultural entity.

Some would hope that we could keep the “positive” aspects of the EU and not “throw out the baby with the bath water.” I beg to differ.

The EU is all bath water, no baby. There never was a baby, just a truckload of overpaid babysitters.

Multiculturalism separates people into “tribes” below the nation state level. This is precisely the situation we had in Europe in the Middle Ages. Likewise, the idea that we should “respect” other cultures by not criticizing them means turning the clock back several centuries to the pre-Enlightenment era. Multiculturalism is merely a medieval ideology, and will generate medieval results.

Although the EU will fail in creating a pan-European identity, it has already partly succeeded in weakening the traditional nation states. Across Western Europe, Muslim immigrants tend to settle in major cities, with the native population retreating into the countryside. This destruction of the coherence of society is triggering a return to tribalism, as people no longer trust the nation state to protect them.

The process has been explained by Ernest Baert: “Over many centuries, Western Europe has replaced the tribe or clan by the nation state.” The result was that “European citizens tend to have equal trust in all other citizens of the same nation state outside their immediate family and circle of friends.” This “high-trust society” was a necessary precondition not only for the success of a capitalist economy in Europe, but also for the rise of democracy.

A different worldview prevails in the Muslim world or in Africa. There, individuals have no choice but to fall back on their clan for protection. So what effect will the introduction of massive numbers of individuals from “low-trust societies” have on our own culture? Baert is pessimistic:

“There is little doubt that we live in the dying days of the multicultural fantasy. It will end in misery and may lead to the loss of Europe as a part of Western civilisation. Our children and grandchildren will look back to our days and wonder why so many so easily accepted what patently contradicted history and common sense.”

While ordinary Europeans live in fear of Muslim violence in their own cities and trust in their own leaders is plummeting, EU elites meet in cocktail parties and congratulate each other for bringing peace to Europe.

The European Union promised a Brave New World where wars and ethnic rivalries were a thing of the past. Will it deliver the Middle Ages? Maybe that is what Utopias tend to do.
 

See also:

The Eurabia Code, Part 1, 1 October 2006

The Eurabia Code, Part 2: A Planned Sell-Out by the EU, 5 October 2006

The Eurabia Code, Part 3: Islamo-Stalinism, 10 October 2006

The Eurabia Code, Part 4: We Have to Destroy the European Union in Order to Save Europe

The European Union gave the Palestinians $342.8 million in aid in 2005 — or, more accurately, $612.15 million when assistance from the 25 EU governments is included. Even the United States has repeatedly donated millions of American tax dollars to the Palestinian Authority, though not at EU levels. In July 2005, as a response to the Islamic terrorist attacks on London a few days earlier, leaders of the G8, the group of influential industrialized nations, offered the PA some $9 billion, dubbed an “alternative to the hatred.”

The West’s largesse continued despite a demographic study in 2005 which revealed that the number showing the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza had been inflated by 50% by the government.

Almost all of the new infrastructure

Repost 0
Published by Le comte vert - dans HOME ACCUEIL
commenter cet article
21 octobre 2006 6 21 /10 /octobre /2006 11:16

 Le Creusot
26 283 habitants

Pour saisir la mesure du Creusot, il faut se rendre sur les hauteurs, au belvédère des Crêtes qui surplombe la plaine des Riaux. C'est ici qu'est née la ville, à la fin du XVIIIe siècle.
 
     
 

les liens
 
 
 
 

Une ville vouée à la transformation de la fonte et la plaine était alors entièrement hérissée de cheminées et de hauts-fourneaux alimentés par une nouvelle énergie, le charbon transformé en coke qui remplaçait le charbon de bois. L'invention était anglaise et les échanges avec les savants anglo-saxons furent nombreux en cette époque où les machines à vapeur révolutionnèrent l'industrie.
Depuis le belvédère, on voit le château de la Verrerie. Il abrite aujourd'hui des bureaux de la Communauté urbaine et l'Ecomusée. C'était également une usine composée des ateliers, des logements et des jardins des ouvriers. Deux constructions étonnantes et coniques émergent de cet ensemble symétrique : les anciens fours de la cristallerie placée sous l'égide de la reine Marie-Antoinette. Puis ce fut le règne des Schneider, dont les statues rappellent le souvenir en de nombreux points du Creusot, ainsi que les églises qui leur étaient vouées. Le château de la Verrerie devint leur demeure et ils transformèrent les fours en un théâtre qu'il faut absolument visiter et en une chapelle devenue salle d'expositions.
Le privilège du parc
Autre privilège rendu à tous : le superbe parc de la Verrerie où il fait si bon flâner. Sous les Schneider, Le Creusot accéda au rang de plus important centre métallurgique français et, toujours depuis le belvédère, on surplombe l'ancienne halle des grues et des locomotives devenue bibliothèque universitaire superbement restaurée dans le respect de son architecture originelle.
Puis, après les Schneider, il y eut un autre empire, celui de Creusot-Loire dont la dissolution au début des années 80 a été une page difficile à tourner. Autre temps, autre époque, la plaine des Riaux a su néanmoins se tourner vers l'avenir avec des entreprises spécialisées dans l'électronique ou avec la Snecma, fleuron dans le secteur de l'aviation. Mais Le Creusot s'enorgueillit toujours d'autres entreprises qui poursuivent la tradition d'un savoir-faire spécifique lié au métal, en particulier dans la production de pièces particulièrement volumineuses qui sont expédiées dans le monde entier.
On ne quittera pas ce panorama de la plaine des Riaux sans évoquer l'IUT et le centre Condorcet, deuxième pôle de l'université en Bourgogne, autre point fort d'un Creusot qui sait se forger un futur.
Du monde du travail, il faut aussi passer à l'univers des loisirs, avec le parc des Combes et ses attractions célèbres comme la luge d'été ou le Déval'Train.
Un label national
Sur le plan culturel, l'Arc propose chaque année un riche programme de spectacles et le label Scène Nationale lui accorde une vocation pédagogique pour faire rayonner l'expression artistique.
En face, l'Alto résonne également des accords de l'école de musique et c'est ici que se dessine un nouveau centre-ville, avec le centre commercial de l'Arche qui préfigure d'autres transformations pour faire cohabiter harmonieusement automobiles et piétons. Ceux-ci peuvent aussi aller rue Foch, artère commerçante, pour s'adonner au lèche-vitrine ou remonter par la rue Leclerc qui débouche sur la place Schneider où les terrasses et les restaurants ne manquent pas.

 

 
 
  haut de page Haut de page Article suivant article suivant
Mise à jour :15/07/2003
 
 

 
 
     
 

 
 
.
 
 
 
 

 

 
 
   
 
 
 

 

 Le Creusot
26 283 habitants

Pour saisir la mesure du Creusot, il faut se rendre sur les hauteurs, au belvédère des Crêtes qui surplombe la plaine des Riaux. C'est ici qu'est née la ville, à la fin du XVIIIe siècle.
 
 
     
 

les liens
 
 
 
 

Une ville

 
     
 

Repost 0
Published by Le comte vert - dans HOME ACCUEIL
commenter cet article
21 octobre 2006 6 21 /10 /octobre /2006 10:12

 

 

Pour compléter les articles de Sfeir et Redeker cités dans un billet précédent, voici deux article intéressants :

celui d’un journaliste suisse signalé par Un swissroll et l’interview d’un écrivain qui se considère volontiers comme un “Voltaire arabe”.

Le premier souligne que ce n’est pas en renoncant à notre liberté d’expression que nous aiderons l’émergence d’un islam moderne, le second rappelle que l’islamisme prend racine dans le Coran.

Voici donc des extraits suivis comme d’habitude des liens vers les sources :

Islam: débattons en adversaires, sans violence, à visage découvert par F.A.Meyer
[Extraits] La question de savoir si le pape, qui pour le Vatican a toujours raison, a cette fois encore raison est sans importance. Quoi qu’il en soit, il a le droit de dire ce qu’il pense. C’est tout simplement une bénédiction que la plus haute autorité catholique tombe sous la pression de menaces islamiques.


Pourquoi ?

 Jusqu’alors seuls des journalistes, des écrivains et des cinéastes ont été exposés à la colère et à la violence du monde de l’islam.

Des Occidentaux partisans de la modération -

 mais aussi des collègues dénonciateurs ! - leur ont conseillé de se taire.

Depuis l’assassinat du réalisateur hollandais Theo van Gogh, puis le soulèvement indigné contre les caricaturistes danois, le monde de la presse, de la politique et de la culture s’autocensure dès qu’il s’agit d’aborder le sujet de l’islam.


Ce serait trop fort de demander au pape de plier devant ses adversaires. La limite est atteinte.
[…] On aurait pu donner au pape des réponses théologiques et historiques, et parmi elles on aurait sûrement pu trouver des réponses plausibles. Il faudrait mener un dialogue critique. Pourquoi donc n’est-il pas mené du côté de l’islam ? Pourquoi la fureur religieuse est-elle la seule voix que nous en percevons ?
Nous devons pouvoir le dire ouvertement :

Ce serait trop fort de demander au pape de plier devant ses adversaires. La limite est atteinte.[…] On aurait pu donner au pape des réponses théologiques et historiques, et parmi elles on aurait sûrement pu trouver des réponses plausibles. Il faudrait mener un dialogue critique. Pourquoi donc n’est-il pas mené du côté de l’islam ? Pourquoi la fureur religieuse est-elle la seule voix que nous en percevons ?

l’islam est une religion en retard. Il lui manque la Réforme et les Lumières; il lui manque la séparation entre l’église et la politique ;

il lui manque la culture de la liberté et l’autodétermination du citoyen ; il lui manque la démocratie et l’Etat de droit; il lui manque une société ouverte.


L’islam règne sur une civilisation enfermée dans son cocon, à qui les médias mondialisés montrent chaque jour à quel point elle est à la traîne dans les domaines comme l’économie, la science, la politique et la culture - distancée, et de loin, dans la compétition que se livrent les continents et les cultures, non seulement par rapport à l’Occident qu’elle abhorre, mais aussi, désormais,

 par rapport à un Orient tout autant incroyant.
[…] Aidons-nous les dissidents islamiques en nous jetant au cou des mollahs orthodoxes et des imams conservateurs ? En renonçant à notre libre parole pour ne surtout pas provoquer des croyants dans leur mosquée ?

 Depuis le fascisme et le communisme, nous avons appris qu’en courtisant les puissants, nous affaiblissons ceux qui les critiquent jusqu’à les condamner à l’impuissance.


Faut-il renoncer au dialogue ? Non, il faut débattre ! Sans violence. A visage découvert. Entre adversaires. Car, oui, nous sommes des adversaires : la culture religieuse fermée de l’islam et la société ouverte de l’Occident sécularisé.
L’islam est notre adversaire. L’islamisme est notre ennemi
. (article complet)

L’islamisme est la maladie de l’islam, mais les germes sont dans le texte interview d’Abdelwahab Meddeb dans Libération
[Extraits] La violence dans l’islam est-elle une réalité ? 
Les musulmans doivent admettre que c’est un fait, dans le texte comme dans l’histoire telle qu’ils la représentent eux-mêmes, en un mode qui appartient plus à l’hagiographie qu’à la chronique. Nous avons à faire à un Prophète qui a été violent, qui a tué et qui a appelé à tuer. La guerre avec les Mecquois fut une guerre de conversion. Il y a eu aussi la guerre avec les juifs et le massacre des juifs à Médine, décidé par le Prophète. Il y avait un jeu d’alliances, une opération politique qui se continue par le militaire.

Pour compléter les articles de Sfeir et Redeker cités dans un billet précédent, voici deux article intéressants : celui d’un journaliste suisse signalé par Un swissroll et l’interview d’un écrivain qui se considère volontiers comme un “Voltaire arabe”. Le premier souligne que ce n’est pas en renoncant à notre liberté d’expression que nous aiderons l’émergence d’un islam moderne, le second rappelle que l’islamisme prend racine dans le Coran. Voici donc des extraits suivis comme d’habitude des liens vers les sources :

Islam: débattons en adversaires, sans violence, à visage découvert par F.A.Meyer
[Extraits] La question de savoir si le pape, qui pour le Vatican a toujours raison, a cette fois encore raison est sans importance. Quoi qu’il en soit, il a le droit de dire ce qu’il pense. C’est tout simplement une bénédiction que la plus haute autorité catholique tombe sous la pression de menaces islamiques.
Pourquoi ? Jusqu’alors seuls des journalistes, des écrivains et des cinéastes ont été exposés à la colère et à la violence du monde de l’islam. Des Occidentaux partisans de la modération - mais aussi des collègues dénonciateurs ! - leur ont conseillé de se taire. Depuis l’assassinat du réalisateur hollandais Theo van Gogh, puis le soulèvement indigné contre les caricaturistes danois, le monde de la presse, de la politique et de la culture s’autocensure dès qu’il s’agit d’aborder le sujet de l’islam.
Ce serait trop fort de demander au pape de plier devant ses adversaires. La limite est atteinte.
[…] On aurait pu donner au pape des réponses théologiques et historiques, et parmi elles on aurait sûrement pu trouver des réponses plausibles. Il faudrait mener un dialogue critique. Pourquoi donc n’est-il pas mené du côté de l’islam ? Pourquoi la fureur religieuse est-elle la seule voix que nous en percevons ?
Nous devons pouvoir le dire ouvertement : l’islam est une religion en retard. Il lui manque la Réforme et les Lumières; il lui manque la séparation entre l’église et la politique ; il lui manque la culture de la liberté et l’autodétermination du citoyen ; il lui manque la démocratie et l’Etat de droit; il lui manque une société ouverte.
L’islam règne sur une civilisation enfermée dans son cocon, à qui les médias mondialisés montrent chaque jour à quel point elle est à la traîne dans les domaines comme l’économie, la science, la politique et la culture - distancée, et de loin, dans la compétition que se livrent les continents et les cultures, non seulement par rapport à l’Occident qu’elle abhorre, mais aussi, désormais, par rapport à un Orient tout autant incroyant.
[…] Aidons-nous les dissidents islamiques en nous jetant au cou des mollahs orthodoxes et des imams conservateurs ? En renonçant à notre libre parole pour ne surtout pas provoquer des croyants dans leur mosquée ? Depuis le fascisme et le communisme, nous avons appris qu’en courtisant les puissants, nous affaiblissons ceux qui les critiquent jusqu’à les condamner à l’impuissance.
Faut-il renoncer au dialogue ? Non, il faut débattre ! Sans violence. A visage découvert. Entre adversaires. Car, oui, nous sommes des adversaires : la culture religieuse fermée de l’islam et la société ouverte de l’Occident sécularisé.
L’islam est notre adversaire. L’islamisme est notre ennemi. (article complet)

L’islamisme est la maladie de l’islam, mais les germes sont dans le texte interview d’Abdelwahab Meddeb dans Libération
[Extraits] La violence dans l’islam est-elle une réalité ? 
Les musulmans doivent admettre que c’est un fait, dans le texte comme dans l’histoire telle qu’ils la représentent eux-mêmes, en un mode qui appartient plus à l’hagiographie qu’à la chronique. Nous avons à faire à un Prophète qui a été violent, qui a tué et qui a appelé à tuer. La guerre avec les Mecquois fut une guerre de conversion. Il y a eu aussi la guerre avec les juifs et le massacre des juifs à Médine, décidé par le Prophète. Il y avait un jeu d’alliances, une opération politique qui se continue par le militaire.

Que dit précisément le Coran ? 
Il est ambivalent. Il y a le verset 256 de la deuxième sourate qui dit «point de contrainte en religion». Mais aussi les versets 5 et surtout 29 de la sourate 9, «le verset de l’épée», où il est commandé de combattre tous ceux qui ne croient pas à «la religion vraie». L’impératif qâtilû, que l’on traduit par «combattez»,  utilise une forme verbale dont la racine qatala veut dire «tuer». Le verset 5 est explicitement contre les païens et les idolâtres, aménageant, en revanche, une reconnaissance aux scripturaires, aux gens de l’écriture. Le verset 29, lui, englobe dans ce combat les scripturaires désignant nommément les juifs et les chrétiens. C’est le verset fétiche de ceux qui ont établi la théorie de la guerre contre les judéo-croisés. L’islamisme est, certes, la maladie de l’islam, mais les germes sont dans le texte lui-même.

D’où des interprétations opposées ? 

Pour compléter les articles de Sfeir et Redeker cités dans un billet précédent, voici deux article intéressants : celui d’un journaliste suisse signalé par Un swissroll et l’interview d’un écrivain qui se considère volontiers comme un “Voltaire arabe”. Le premier souligne que ce n’est pas en renoncant à notre liberté d’expression que nous aiderons l’émergence d’un islam moderne, le second rappelle que l’islamisme prend racine dans le Coran. Voici donc des extraits suivis comme d’habitude des liens vers les sources :

Islam: débattons en adversaires, sans violence, à visage découvert par F.A.Meyer
[Extraits] La question de savoir si le pape, qui pour le Vatican a toujours raison, a cette fois encore raison est sans importance. Quoi qu’il en soit, il a le droit de dire ce qu’il pense. C’est tout simplement une bénédiction que la plus haute autorité catholique tombe sous la pression de menaces islamiques.
Pourquoi ? Jusqu’alors seuls des journalistes, des écrivains et des cinéastes ont été exposés à la colère et à la violence du monde de l’islam. Des Occidentaux partisans de la modération - mais aussi des collègues dénonciateurs ! - leur ont conseillé de se taire. Depuis l’assassinat du réalisateur hollandais Theo van Gogh, puis le soulèvement indigné contre les caricaturistes danois, le monde de la presse, de la politique et de la culture s’autocensure dès qu’il s’agit d’aborder le sujet de l’islam.
Ce serait trop fort de demander au pape de plier devant ses adversaires. La limite est atteinte.
[…] On aurait pu donner au pape des réponses théologiques et historiques, et parmi elles on aurait sûrement pu trouver des réponses plausibles. Il faudrait mener un dialogue critique. Pourquoi donc n’est-il pas mené du côté de l’islam ? Pourquoi la fureur religieuse est-elle la seule voix que nous en percevons ?
Nous devons pouvoir le dire ouvertement : l’islam est une religion en retard. Il lui manque la Réforme et les Lumières; il lui manque la séparation entre l’église et la politique ; il lui manque la culture de la liberté et l’autodétermination du citoyen ; il lui manque la démocratie et l’Etat de droit; il lui manque une société ouverte.
L’islam règne sur une civilisation enfermée dans son cocon, à qui les médias mondialisés montrent chaque jour à quel point elle est à la traîne dans les domaines comme l’économie, la science, la politique et la culture - distancée, et de loin, dans la compétition que se livrent les continents et les cultures, non seulement par rapport à l’Occident qu’elle abhorre, mais aussi, désormais, par rapport à un Orient tout autant incroyant.
[…] Aidons-nous les dissidents islamiques en nous jetant au cou des mollahs orthodoxes et des imams conservateurs ? En renonçant à notre libre parole pour ne surtout pas provoquer des croyants dans leur mosquée ? Depuis le fascisme et le communisme, nous avons appris qu’en courtisant les puissants, nous affaiblissons ceux qui les critiquent jusqu’à les condamner à l’impuissance.
Faut-il renoncer au dialogue ? Non, il faut débattre ! Sans violence. A visage découvert. Entre adversaires. Car, oui, nous sommes des adversaires : la culture religieuse fermée de l’islam et la société ouverte de l’Occident sécularisé.
L’islam est notre adversaire. L’islamisme est notre ennemi. (article complet)

L’islamisme est la maladie de l’islam, mais les germes sont dans le texte interview d’Abdelwahab Meddeb dans Libération
[Extraits] La violence dans l’islam est-elle une réalité ? 
Les musulmans doivent admettre que c’est un fait, dans le texte comme dans l’histoire telle qu’ils la représentent eux-mêmes, en un mode qui appartient plus à l’hagiographie qu’à la chronique. Nous avons à faire à un Prophète qui a été violent, qui a tué et qui a appelé à tuer. La guerre avec les Mecquois fut une guerre de conversion. Il y a eu aussi la guerre avec les juifs et le massacre des juifs à Médine, décidé par le Prophète. Il y avait un jeu d’alliances, une opération politique qui se continue par le militaire.

Que dit précisément le Coran ? 
Il est ambivalent. Il y a le verset 256 de la deuxième sourate qui dit «point de contrainte en religion». Mais aussi les versets 5 et surtout 29 de la sourate 9, «le verset de l’épée», où il est commandé de combattre tous ceux qui ne croient pas à «la religion vraie». L’impératif qâtilû, que l’on traduit par «combattez»,  utilise une forme verbale dont la racine qatala veut dire «tuer». Le verset 5 est explicitement contre les païens et les idolâtres, aménageant, en revanche, une reconnaissance aux scripturaires, aux gens de l’écriture. Le verset 29, lui, englobe dans ce combat les scripturaires désignant nommément les juifs et les chrétiens. C’est le verset fétiche de ceux qui ont établi la théorie de la guerre contre les judéo-croisés. L’islamisme est, certes, la maladie de l’islam, mais les germes sont dans le texte lui-même.

D’où des interprétations opposées ? 
D’où des interprétations opposées ? 

Repost 0
Published by Le comte vert - dans HOME ACCUEIL
commenter cet article
17 octobre 2006 2 17 /10 /octobre /2006 18:09

 

 

SOCIETE
Le Temps I Article
   
La légende dorée de Mahomet
 
RELIGION. Tariq Ramadan signe un livre sur la vie du Prophète de l'islam. Mais il confond biographie et hagiographie.
 
   
 
Patricia Briel
Mardi 17 octobre 2006
 
   
 
L'intellectuel suisse Tariq Ramadan, actuellement Senior Research Fellow à l'Université d'Oxford et à la Loakhi Foundation à Londres, vient de signer une biographie de Mahomet. Comme il le signale dans l'introduction, cette vie du Prophète, qu'il présente comme une «biographie», ne prétend pas apporter du nouveau dans l'exposé des faits ni offrir une réinterprétation originale de l'histoire de la prophétie et de son contexte. Tariq Ramadan s'est intéressé à deux dimensions de Mahomet: «l'humanité de l'homme et l'exemplarité du Prophète». Il s'est plongé au cœur de la vie du fondateur de l'islam pour en extraire «d'abord les enseignements spirituels atemporels». Le résultat? Un portrait dithyrambique de Mahomet, une hagiographie dont le style rappelle celui des histoires de la «Légende dorée» écrite par Jacques de Voragine au Moyen Age.

Dommage. D'un intellectuel de la stature de Tariq Ramadan, et à l'heure où la violence commise au nom de l'islam exige une réflexion approfondie sur ses racines, on attendait plus qu'un long sermon de 336 pages sur les vertus exemplaires de Mahomet. Il n'y a pas trace d'exégèse historico-critique dans cette «biographie», ni de discussion sur l'authenticité des sources biographiques de la vie du Prophète ou sur la composition du Coran. La révélation coranique est prise au pied de la lettre. En confondant biographie et hagiographie, Tariq Ramadan sème le doute et la confusion sur son entreprise. A-t-il voulu montrer un Prophète idéalisé et donc présentable aux yeux des Occidentaux? Ou a-t-il cherché à expliquer aux musulmans comment ils doivent interpréter sa vie?

L'auteur ne cesse de nous rappeler que le Prophète n'était qu'un homme, mais il en fait une icône. En effet, il occulte passablement la part d'ombre du personnage. Et s'il évoque les pages violentes de l'histoire de Mahomet, à savoir les meurtres de juifs, les guerres et les pillages auxquels le Prophète a participé, c'est toujours pour les justifier et louer le comportement du fondateur de l'islam. De plus, l'auteur évite soigneusement de citer certains des épisodes qui contredisent le plus son propos, notamment les assassinats politiques de poètes qui s'étaient moqués du Prophète et de son message. Tous ces épisodes sont pourtant relatés sans fard dans les sources classiques de l'islam, notamment la Sîra, le plus ancien corpus biographique du Prophète. En gommant toutes les aspérités d'un personnage fascinant, qui mariait une spiritualité profonde et un sens politique et militaire hors du commun, Tariq Ramadan est tombé dans le piège de l'idolâtrie, si tant est qu'il ait voulu écrire une biographie.

Prenons les rapports du Prophète avec les juifs. L'auteur nous explique que Mahomet n'aura de cesse «de montrer le plus grand respect à l'égard des croyances et des individus», et que son enseignement – «la non-imposition de la conversion, le respect de la différence et l'égalité de traitement» – allait rester le même malgré les difficultés, les trahisons et les guerres. Ce n'est pas ce que dit une autre biographie de Mahomet parue récemment, pourtant très positive elle aussi à l'égard du Prophète. Son auteur, Salah Stétié, explique au contraire comment Mahomet en est venu à considérer les juifs et les chrétiens comme des «ennemis de l'islam». Si les relations de Mahomet avec les fidèles de ces deux religions se sont dégradées, c'est parce que ceux-ci avaient refusé de se convertir à l'islam. Il dit par exemple que «la raison essentielle de l'inimitié grandissante de l'islam à l'égard du christianisme est, on ne le répétera jamais assez, le dogme de la Trinité, et lui seul quasiment, dans la mesure où il présuppose l'Incarnation.» Quant à l'égalité de traitement, on sait que Mahomet imposa des traités de capitation à des populations qui avaient refusé de se convertir à l'islam.

C'est un exemple, mais tout le livre est à l'avenant, notamment en ce qui concerne la question du rapport que Mahomet entretenait avec le sexe féminin. Tariq Ramadan nous donne à voir un homme doux et bon avec les femmes. Mais il ne prend aucune distance avec la Révélation, même quand celle-ci semble opportuniste, comme lorsqu'elle justifie le mariage du Prophète avec la femme de son propre fils adoptif ou lorsqu'elle menace de répudiation ses épouses rebelles.

Cela dit, ce livre a une utilité si on le lit comme un commentaire religieux de la vie de Mahomet. En ne montrant que les aspects positifs du personnage, en développant sa spiritualité et en insistant sur sa tolérance, Tariq Ramadan propose en effet une lecture pacifique de l'islam, qui appelle à la maîtrise des instincts les plus grossiers de l'homme. Finalement, c'est peut-être l'essentiel. Mais pourquoi ne pas l'avoir dit clairement?

Tariq Ramadan, Muhammad. Vie du Prophète. Les enseignements spirituels et contemporains , Presses du Châtelet, 336 p.



 
 
© Le Temps, 2006 . Droits de reproduction et de diffusion réservés.
 
 
Acheter les droits de reproduction de cet article.
SOCIETE
Le Temps I Article
   
 
 
 
 
   
 
Patricia Briel
Mardi 17 octobre 2006
 
   
 



 
 
© Le Temps, 2006 . Droits de reproduction et de diffusion réservés.
 
 
Acheter les droits de reproduction de cet article.

Repost 0
Published by Le comte vert - dans HOME ACCUEIL
commenter cet article
17 octobre 2006 2 17 /10 /octobre /2006 13:00

 

 

The Case for Reducing Immigration from over One Million

to

100,000 a Year
 

Donald Mann*
February 1995


 

 

 

 

The Implications of Current Trends
Steps to Put the United States on the Path Toward a Smaller Population
Three Scenarios
   Figure 1
Analysis of the Three Projections
The Problem with Counting on Declines in Fertility
Apportioning the 100,000 Slots for Legal Immigration
Can Illegal Immigration be Stopped?
Reasons for not Halting Legal Immigration Completely
Is NPG Anti-Immigrant?
Our Responsibility to the World Community
Summing Up
 


 

 

 

 

The evidence is overwhelming that with its present population of over 260 million, the U.S. is already vastly overpopulated in terms of the long range carrying capacity of its resources and environment.

Yet we continue to grow rapidly, by 25 to 30 million each decade.

Contrary to our own national interest, we now permit over a million immigrants to settle here each year.

Because it contributes to the growth of our population, immigration is basically, and most importantly, an environmental issue. Indeed it is the driving force behind the population growth that is propelling our nation rapidly down the road to environmental ruin.

Projections show that if present trends continue, 89 percent of our population growth in the next century will come from post-2000 immigrants and their descendants.

If we are to have any hope of achieving a smaller, more sustainable population size, we must halt illegal immigration and sharply reduce legal immigration.
 

The Implications of Current Trends

If our fertility remains at its present rate of 2.0 (an average of two children per woman) and if immigration at the present level continues, we will grow to nearly 500 million before the end of the next century, almost twice our present size.

It could be even worse. According to demographers Dennis S. Ahlburg and James W. Vaupel we could easily have a population of 811 million (near the present population of India) by 2080.

 They write:

A U.S. population of 800 million may seem incredible, but the annual average growth rate that produces it runs at only 1.3 percent per year. This is the same as the average annual growth rate that has prevailed in the United States over the last half-century, and not too much above the one percent average growth rate of the last decade.


And even worse scenarios are possible.

Demographer Leon Bouvier has asked the question: But what if American women had an "extra" child from now on (that is, three births as advocated by some) and what if immigration doubled to two million (as advocated by some)?

What would that mean demographically?

Dr. Bouvier's answer: By 2050, the U.S. population would surpass 677 million; by 2075 it would have reached one billion and still be growing rapidly!

We simply cannot allow any of those scenarios to happen. Such growth would destroy our environment, our standard of living and the quality of our lives.

We at NPG believe that our goal must be to stabilize our population at not more that 150 million, our nation's size in 1950. We consider that to be the optimum size for sustainable use of our resources.

There is no need, however, for agreement now on the exact size of the smaller population we need. Even small reduction in today's numbers, as we shall see, will at best take many decades to achieve. For now we need only agree on the urgent need to halt, and then reverse, U.S. population growth.
 

Steps to Put the United States on the Path Toward
a Smaller Population

To Halt as quickly as possible, and then reverse, the disastrous growth of our population, we need to do three things:

1) We need to reduce legal immigration from the present level of 900,000 a year to a maximum of 100,000 a year, which would include all relatives, refugees, asylees, and skilled workers.

2) We need to halt illegal immigration. Over 300,000 illegal immigrants now settle here each year, joining the estimated four to five million illegal aliens already residing here permanently. Those numbers must be reduced to near zero.

3) We need to make every effort to reduce our fertility from the present 2.0 to 1.5, a goal NPG has long recommended. If most women had no more than two children, our fertility would fall to 1.5 because many women choose to have no children, or only one.

The first goal would be the easiest to achieve. It would only require Federal legislation. The second and third goals would be more difficult, but, given the political will, can be achieved.
 

Three Scenarios

Figure 1: U.S. Population Projections


The graph above projects three different paths that our population growth might follow, depending on different levels of fertility and immigration.

For all three of these projections it is assumed that both illegal immigration (entering) and emigration of citizens (leaving) are gradually reduced to roughly the same very low level so that their net effect on population is neutral.

The particular assumptions for each projection are as follows:

Line A - That present rates of fertility (2.0) and net immigration (legal and illegal) or one million a year will continue.

Line B - That our fertility rate, now 2.0, is gradually reduced to 1.5 by the year 2050, while net immigration remains at its present level of one million a year.

Line C - That our fertility rate, now 2.0, is gradually reduced to 1.5 by the year 2050 (the same as Line B), and that, starting in 1996, legal immigration is capped at 100,000 per year, including all relatives, refugees, asylees, and skilled workers, and remains at that level thereafter.
 

Analysis of the Three Projections

Projection A 

 The only comment possible is a simple one: this line leads straight to disaster.

Projection B

Under these assumptions (reduced fertility, but immigration at the current level) our population would continue to grow for another 55 years, not peaking until 2050 at 227 million, some 75 million greater than our population today.

U.S. population would then begin a slow decline, reaching 298 million by the end of the next century. Population then would still be some 36 million larger than our present 262 million, and 121 million greater than in Projection C (low fertility and low immigration).

The conclusion to be drawn is obvious: If massive immigration is allowed to continue, it will be well over a century before our population gets back to its present unsustainable level, even if fertility is drastically reduced.

Projection C

This scenario (lower fertility and drastically reduced immigration) demonstrates the gravity of our predicament. Even with drastic reductions in both fertility and immigration our population would still grow for 25 more years. It would not peak until 2020 at 300 million, and then begin a very slow and gradual decline.

It would then take another 35 years after 2020 for our population to return to its present size of around 260 million. Under the best case scenario, therefore, with low fertility and with immigration reduced to 100,000 a year, it would still take at least 60 years for our population to get back to its present size. That is an astonishing, and even frightening, fact that says much about the awesome momentum of population growth.

Reducing our population to a smaller, sustainable level would, of course, take much longer. Only by the end of the next century would our population decline to around 180 million, still a considerable distance from the optimum of 150 million, but far less burdensome to the environment than our present numbers.

In a few more years, however, our population would decline to the level we consider optimum ?150 million? and could then be stabilized at that level, even allowing a slight increase in fertility and/or immigration.
 

The Problem with Counting on Declines in Fertility

The projections represented by Lines B and C were based on the assumption that our fertility rate would gradually decline from its present 2.0 to 1.5 by 2050.

Is that being overly optimistic? Probably it is. Dr. Bouvier has pointed out that no country has ever exhibited for so long a time the low rate of fertility that we have assumed for Projections B and C.

Fertility rates are unpredictable: even with tax and other incentives to encourage lower fertility (long recommended by NPG) there is no guarantee that fertility rates will not increase rather than decrease. Over the last 19 years, for example, the trend has been upward, from a low of 1.7 in 1976 to 2.0 in the last few years.

And, in any case, lowering our fertility to the rate assumed for Projections B and C would be virtually impossible if high immigration continued (as in Projection B) since the fertility of most current immigrants typically remains high in the early generations.

That is all the more reason why we must reduce immigration to a level consistent with our long-term national interest. Reducing immigration is a much faster and more certain way to get results than counting on fertility decline.
 

Apportioning the 100,000 Slots for Legal Immigration

If legal immigration were capped at 100,000 per year as we propose, how might those numbers best be allocated to meet the country's essential needs? Recognizing that the political process must decide, NPG believes that the following allocation would be reasonable:

                     75,000 -  Spouses and minor children of American citizens.
                       5,000 -  Persons with extraordinary skills.
                     20,000 -  Refugees and asylees.
                   100,000

Immediate relatives of citizens now enter without limit, outside of quota. The 75,000 yearly quota on this category of immigrants would include only spouses and unmarried children under 18, and not parents, as is now the case.

For the first few years, the number of immediate relatives seeking to immigrate might exceed the yearly quota; some waiting might therefore be required. After an initial period, however, a quota of 75,000 for immediate relatives should be adequate.

To discourage chain migration, immigrants entering under the "skilled" and "refugee" categories would only be allowed to immigrate as family units, with spouses and any minor, unmarried children charged against the ceiling at that time.

The Attorney General should have the authority to shift numbers among the categories according to need, but under no circumstances should the total number exceed 100,000 per year.
 

Can Illegal Immigration be Stopped?

Yes, it can and must be stopped. Any reduction in legal immigration would be futile if illegal immigration were allowed to continue. If legal immigration were reduced, continuing our present lax controls at the border and ports of entry would invite even higher illegal entries.

What can be done? The means for stopping illegal immigration and reducing to near zero the number of illegal immigrants living here permanently will be the subject of an NPG Policy Paper to be published soon. We will include here only a brief summary.

1. First and foremost we must have a secure national system of identification. This is a fundamental requirement without which there is simply no hope of controlling illegal immigration.

A secure system of identification must include an upgraded, tamper-proof Social Security card with personal identifiers such as a photograph and fingerprints. Manufacture or possession of false identification documents should be made a felony punishable by long prison terms, and, in the case of aliens, deportation.

Closely linked to the secure ID system should be a national computer registry, as proposed by Barbara Jordan, Chair of the U.S. commission on Immigration Reform. A centralized registry would permit telephone verification by employers that a job applicant was either a citizen or a legal resident, and therefore eligible to work.

A registry would also allow local officials to easily determine the eligibility of applicants for a driver's license, school enrollment, or public assistance. The telephone verification procedure would place verification responsibility where it should be, and should always have been, on the shoulders of Federal authorities.

2. We must stop rewarding illegal aliens with jobs and benefits and start penalizing them severely for breaking U.S. laws. Illegal aliens who have been deported once should forfeit forever their right to seek legal entry. If they return here, they should be penalized by a mandatory prison term, and a fine or confiscation of property.

3. We must reduce to near zero the population of illegal aliens now living here, now estimated at four to five million. Their presence is a magnet for millions of others who perceive, correctly, that there is little risk in entering our country illegally, and, once here, remaining indefinitely.

Congress must increase the budget for the Immigration and Naturalization Service so that it can identify and deport large numbers of illegal aliens. The INS should set as its goal at least 400,000 deportations a year, but it does not now have the resources for such a program. In 1992 it deported only 38,000 illegal aliens.

Congress must also simplify the rules on deportation, and Federal, state and local investigative agencies must be required to cooperate fully with federal immigration officials.

Some of our proposals may seem harsh, especially when compared with our Federal government's present ineffective measures. We must bear in mind, however, that as poverty and social unrest increase in most third world countries (the direct result of overpopulation and continued population growth) the number of poor and desperate people seeking to enter our country illegally is bound to increase greatly.

Strong measures to halt illegal immigration are the only realistic response to the fact that tens of millions of people are absolutely determined to flout our laws by entering our country illegally.
 

Reasons for not Halting Legal Immigration Completely

An NPG member wrote me recently and asked, "Since our country is already overpopulated, and needs above all to halt and then reverse its population growth, why does NPG advocate any legal immigration at all, since immigration adds to our population growth?"

That is a difficult question. In an already seriously overpopulated country such as the United States how can any immigration be justified?

Demographically speaking, there is no question that our nation would be far better off with zero immigration. But given our history and long traditions, it would be virtually impossible to stop all immigration, and NPG does not advocate doing so.

The United States cannot, and should not, turn its back on all legitimate refugees, even though we can only hope to take in a tiny fraction of all the hundreds of millions who have a well-founded fear of persecution, or who live under oppressive regimes, or who suffer from economic or environmental distress.

In addition, our country will benefit from admitting a small number of scientists and other exceptionally skilled persons. A limit of 5,000 a year, including spouses and minor children, should not cause a serious brain-drain from other nations.

Finally, it would be difficult indeed to sustain an immigration policy that denied American citizens the right to bring their spouses and minor children here.

A maximum immigration ceiling of 100,000 yearly would allow us to meet our core domestic and international obligations. However, if illegal immigration is not halted with the next few years, then ALL legal immigration should be suspended until illegal immigration has been stopped.
 

Is NPG Anti-Immigrant?

No, it is not. We believe that those who have already settled here legally deserve our respect and the full protection of our laws. Nor does it follow that we harbor negative feelings toward would-be immigrants because we advocate restricting immigration to a level consistent with our own national interest.

Is NPG anti-mass immigration? Yes, unequivocally, for all the reasons we have  discussed.

Could our recommendations be accurately and fairly characterized as being xenophobic, nativism, racist, isolationist or any other label that proponents of massive immigration commonly apply to those who advocate reasonable levels of immigration?

Certainly not. Immigration of 100,000 a year is, by world standards, a generous number. It appears small only in comparison with today's astronomical numbers. Curiously, well-intentioned advocates of massive immigration never reckon with the likely impact of their recommendations on our population and environment.
 

Our Responsibility to the World Community

Our primary responsibility is to present and future generations of Americans, not to the entire world. As responsible stewards we have, first and foremost, a moral obligation to preserve for future generations of Americans the magnificent land we have inherited.

We cannot fulfill that obligation unless we succeed in stabilizing our population at a lower, more sustainable level. If we fail to do that, we will be unable to maintain a viable society and economy, and will become powerless to help either our own people or the community of nations.

At the same time we sympathize with the plight of less fortunate people in other countries who want to come here. We should do all we can to help their nations improve their standards of living in a sustainable way. That would mean, above all, helping them (if, of course, they want our help) to halt and then reverse their catastrophic population growth.

But while overpopulation is a global problem, in a world of sovereign nations the solutions must ultimately be worked out at the local level, that is, by each nation. The problems of already overpopulated, and still rapidly growing, developing countries are beyond solution by emigration: the numbers are too vast.

The population of the developing countries is growing by some 80 million a year. Their population increase over the next 15 years or so will by itself exceed the present population of all the developed countries, roughly 1.2 billion.

Developing countries can never relieve their poverty and permanently improve their standard of living until they stabilize their numbers at a sustainable level. In most cases that level is only a small fraction of their present numbers. the time required to achieve this goal will have to be measured in centuries.

Perhaps the greatest contribution our country could make toward eliminating world poverty would be to serve as an example of a nation that is committed to working toward a population size that is in balance with its resources and environment, and sustainable indefinitely.
 

Summing Up

Because we have allowed our nation to become seriously overpopulated, we are in deep trouble. A quick and painless solution does not exist.

As the projections have shown, it will be virtually impossible for the United States to achieve a sustainable level of population in less than a century. We must waste no more time in taking the actions that will get us on the path toward that goal.

Changes in fertility rates are difficult, slow, and unpredictable. We must, therefore, quickly reduce immigration to a level consistent with our long-term national interest. Reducing immigration, while at the same time trying to lower fertility, offers the best hope of getting results.

Repost 0
Published by Le comte vert - dans HOME ACCUEIL
commenter cet article
17 octobre 2006 2 17 /10 /octobre /2006 09:30

 

AGENCE REUTERS

Gallery scraps art, fearing Muslim rage -curator

Fri Oct 6, 2006 5:57 PM BST172
Email This Article | Print This Article | RSS
[-] Text [+]

PARIS (Reuters) -

A London gallery has decided not to show some works of art because it fears they would upset Muslims,

 a curator said on Friday,

a week after a German opera house canned a Mozart production for the same reason. ( PS  Idomeneo  )

 

The director of the Whitechapel Art Gallery decided to remove works by surrealist artist Hans Bellmer from an exhibition the day before it was due to open, one of the museum's curators, Agnes de la Beaumelle, told Reuters.

"The motive was simply to not shock the population of the Whitechapel neighbourhood, which is partly Muslim," she said.

The Whitechapel area in east London is home to many ethnic minorities including a large Bangladeshi community.

 

The gallery issued a statement saying that some works were not included in the exhibition because of space constraints but declined to comment specifically on what Beaumelle said.

Last week, Berlin's Deutsche Oper reignited a heated debate in Europe over free speech and had to fend off charges of cowardice after it cancelled performances of Mozart's "Idomeno", fearing they could enrage Muslims and pose a security risk.

Beaumelle said the exhibition had already been to Paris and Munich without provoking any protests and Bellmer, who died in 1975, is well-known in the art world, which made the decision by gallery director Iwona Blazwick all the more surprising to her.

Bellmer's work includes dolls of naked young girls.

"It surprised me because Bellmer's work is very well known. She already knew it well and by committing to take our exhibition she must have known what would be on the walls," Beaumelle said.   Continued...


Repost 0
Published by Le comte vert - dans HOME ACCUEIL
commenter cet article
17 octobre 2006 2 17 /10 /octobre /2006 09:18

 

 

liquidation judiciaire !

medium_ibt.jpgSérie noire pour l’emploi dans notre ville après l’annonce de la mise en liquidation judiciaire de IBT (ex-Electrolux) par le tribunal de Commerce de Béthune.

Après Faurécia, Sublistatic et les difficultés d’Energy-Plast,

l’hypothétique licenciement de 74 salariés d’IBT s’ajoute à la très longue liste d’emplois menacés.

L’économie d’Hénin-Beaumont est en train de décrocher littéralement, victime des effets du mondialisme, et d’une Europe incapable de protéger ses emplois, sacrifiant ses salariés sur l’autel du libre-échangisme.

Il semblerait que la décision du Tribunal soit empreinte d’erreurs matérielles et c’est la raison pour laquelle la direction et les salariés ont fait appel de cette décision devant la plus haute juridiction de la région à Douai.

Certes l’entreprise a des difficultés financières depuis quelques temps mais son activité semblait viable avec commandes jusqu’en 2007.

Reste que la masse salariale parait trop importante et quelques soient les futures décisions de justice, un plan social sera immanquablement mis en place.

Steeve Briois apporte tout son soutien aux salariés victimes des internationalistes de tous poils.

07:15 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (2) | Trackbacks (0) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, le pen, front national

jeudi, 12 octobre 2006

Insécurité sociale chez Energy Plast

medium_energy_plast.jpgCertes, il n’y a rien d’officiel. Pourtant, la situation d’Energy Plast (ex-Samsonite) à Hénin-Beaumont a de quoi inquiéter.

 

Les 200 salariés du boulevard Darchicourt sont dans l’attente depuis la fermeture, en mai dernier,  du site de la Somme. Sur ce site, on leur avait pourtant promis de la production photovoltaïque en vain… comme à Hénin.

 

Même si la direction de l’usine se veut rassurante en indiquant que les deux sites ne sont pas liés, on reconnaît une crise avec période de chômage partiel pour les salariés.

 

A Hénin-Beaumont, l’insécurité sociale est à son comble. Entre Faurecia, Sublistatic et maintenant Energy Plast, ce sont plus de 600 emplois menacés. L’économie Héninoise peut donc décrocher d’un moment à l’autre. C’est exactement ce que nous avions pronostiqués il y a plus de dix ans…

07:30 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (5) | Trackbacks (0) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

mercredi, 04 octobre 2006

Finances municipales : tout va très bien….Madame la marquise !

medium_mairie.2.jpgCe matin, VDN consacre une page sur les finances municipales qui seraient, selon le maire, au beau fixe et libérées de la chambre régionale des comptes. Et le maire de promettre (année électorale oblige) une nouvelle baisse de 4 points de la taxe d’habitation pour 2007.

 

Bref, une situation idyllique qui serait due à sa bonne gestion. Allons-donc ! Heureusement que nous avons, nous, lu le nouvel avis de la chambre régionale des comptes qui ne félicite nullement la gestion municipale. Bien au contraire ! Steeve Briois ne manquera pas de décoder tout cela lors du conseil municipal de jeudi. Et lorsque l’avis de la CRC sera disponible dès vendredi, sur votre blog préféré, vous verrez alors que la situation financière n’est pas rose !

 

Et que le soi-disant redressement de la ville n’est que conjoncturel et apparent…

07:00 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (17) | Trackbacks (0) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

vendredi, 22 septembre 2006

Une envie de s’évader…

medium_attente_gare.jpgEtait-ce une fausse bonne idée ? En accordant 50 000 allers TGV à 5 euros sur toute la France, la SNCF a provoqué une véritable ruée, hier, et beaucoup de frustrations.

 

Dès midi il était impossible d’obtenir le serveur vocal de la SNCF, plus d’une heure d’attente. Quant au site Internet de la SNCF, il se bloquait. Impossible donc d’acheter le moindre billet à 5 euros. Direction la gare d’Hénin-Beaumont où une file de plus de 60 personnes attendait de pied ferme. (40 dans la gare et 20 à l'extérieur).

 

Là encore, grosse désillusion. A 13 heures, la gare d’Hénin annonçait la fin de l’opération, toutes les places étant vendues. Ce qui provoqua un légitime mouvement d’humeur (avec noms d’oiseaux) chez les personnes (elles étaient nombreuses) qui attendaient depuis longtemps. La direction de la SNCF invoquera le succès de l’opération (plus de 200 000 billets en moins d’une heure). Elle aurait pu cependant limiter l’offre à deux billets par personne et non six, ce qui aurait permis de faire davantage d’heureux…

 

Cette affaire est symptomatique de l’état d’esprit des Français en général et des Héninois en particulier. Ils ont envie de s’évader, de voyager, de se changer les idées. Premiers consommateurs d’anti-dépresseurs en Europe, les Français veulent oublier leur quotidien morose. Et ils ne peuvent pas à cause des prix.

 

La SNCF a maintenant la preuve qu’elle devrait baisser ses tarifs. Cette baisse serait rentabilisée par l’augmentation des voyages.

 

En attendant, les Français rêvent d’un autre monde, d’une autre vie.

06:55 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (3) | Trackbacks (0) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

lundi, 04 septembre 2006

Les hausses de la rentrée

medium_panier_menagere.2.jpgC’est un sérieux avertissement à l’iNSEE et à tous les organismes officiels délivrant les mensonges de l’Etat.

 

Des associations indépendantes comme la CLCV (Consommation, Logement et Cadre de vie) et 60 millions de consommateurs remettent en cause le fameux indice des prix à la consommation de l’INSEE. Il y a, en effet, un fossé entre les statistiques officielles et la réalité quotidienne des ménages. Les chiffres de l'Insee font état d'une inflation assez sage : +1,9 % sur les douze derniers mois alors que tout flambe.

 

L’INSEE est là pour mentir aux Français, pour rassurer. Mais plus personne n’est dupe. Il suffit de regarder l’augmentation de l’essence, du fuel, du gaz, des loyers, des aliments et des boissons pour se rendre compte de l’état catastrophique du panier de la ménagère. Comment font les Français pour s’en sortir et pour tenir ?

06:35 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (2) | Trackbacks (0) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

mercredi, 30 août 2006

Les mensonges de la maison du commerce

medium_commerce.2.jpgCe matin, La Voix du Nord donne la parole à l’union commerciale dont le président, Jean-Claude Pigeyre, passe la plupart de son temps aux côtés du maire d’Hénin-Beaumont. Vous trouverez, ci-dessous, la lettre que j’ai envoyée à l’ensemble des commerçants et artisans d’Hénin-Beaumont courant juillet. Le commerce local est présenté comme un doux rêve sans difficultés.

 

Sachez également que la Voix du Nord indique que seulement trois commerces (sic) ont fermé leurs portes sur Hénin. C’est totalement faux. Pour preuve, rien que dans le bâtiment de la Poste du rond-point des villes jumelées, le coiffeur a mis la clef sous la porte, le constructeur de maisons individuelles est parti et le carré pro a définitivement fermé. Sans oublier le vidéo club situé à côté de l’autre poste, rue Robert Aylé et le bar « l’hexagone »qui viennent de s’arrêter. Quand la propagande municipale cessera-t-elle de nous manipuler ?

 

Pour lire la lettre de Steeve Briois envoyé à l’union commerciale, cliquez ci-dessous :

union_commerciale2.doc

07:45 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (3) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

vendredi, 25 août 2006

Qui va payer ?

 

medium_marianne.jpgLes Français doivent savoir :

1 – Que le squat de Cachan n’est pas une exception. Depuis des années, partout en France, des étrangers en situation irrégulière s’entassent de plus en plus nombreux dans des milliers de squats.

2 – Que Nicolas Sarkozy malgré les promesses dont il les abreuve depuis 2002 est incapable de faire appliquer les lois de la République qui imposent le renvoi des clandestins dans leurs pays d’origine.

3 – Ils apprennent aujourd’hui que les centaines de clandestins de Cachan comme d’autres avant eux, vont être en priorité relogés dans des hôtels ou des logements sociaux, aux frais des contribuables français qui n’en peuvent plus d’assumer la politique d’immigration ruineuse du gouvernement UMP.

Le Front National propose donc que ces clandestins soient relogés dans les résidences secondaires de Nicolas Sarkozy et Ségolène Royal.
 
 
Louis Aliot

 

07:25 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (2) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

samedi, 19 août 2006

Les bobos d’Hénin-Beaumont

medium_renaud.2.jpgA la différence des Bobos Parisiens de Renaud, nos Bobos à nous sont très peu nombreux. N’existant que dans le microcosme, les bobos Héninois ne sont guère appréciés par la population qui les juge comme des parvenus, faux bourges, superficiels, intéressés et mégalos. Ils se nomment Tavernier, Deshayes, Bombecke, Policante ou encore Legrand…Mais attention, tous ne se ressemblent pas, ce ne sont pas des copies conformes.

 

Les Bobos d'Hénin-Beaumont

Lire la suite

07:25 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (6) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

Toutes les notes

Repost 0
Published by Le comte vert - dans HOME ACCUEIL
commenter cet article
17 octobre 2006 2 17 /10 /octobre /2006 09:18

 

 

liquidation judiciaire !

medium_ibt.jpgSérie noire pour l’emploi dans notre ville après l’annonce de la mise en liquidation judiciaire de IBT (ex-Electrolux) par le tribunal de Commerce de Béthune.

Après Faurécia, Sublistatic et les difficultés d’Energy-Plast,

l’hypothétique licenciement de 74 salariés d’IBT s’ajoute à la très longue liste d’emplois menacés.

L’économie d’Hénin-Beaumont est en train de décrocher littéralement, victime des effets du mondialisme, et d’une Europe incapable de protéger ses emplois, sacrifiant ses salariés sur l’autel du libre-échangisme.

Il semblerait que la décision du Tribunal soit empreinte d’erreurs matérielles et c’est la raison pour laquelle la direction et les salariés ont fait appel de cette décision devant la plus haute juridiction de la région à Douai.

Certes l’entreprise a des difficultés financières depuis quelques temps mais son activité semblait viable avec commandes jusqu’en 2007.

Reste que la masse salariale parait trop importante et quelques soient les futures décisions de justice, un plan social sera immanquablement mis en place.

Steeve Briois apporte tout son soutien aux salariés victimes des internationalistes de tous poils.

07:15 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (2) | Trackbacks (0) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, le pen, front national

jeudi, 12 octobre 2006

Insécurité sociale chez Energy Plast

medium_energy_plast.jpgCertes, il n’y a rien d’officiel. Pourtant, la situation d’Energy Plast (ex-Samsonite) à Hénin-Beaumont a de quoi inquiéter.

 

Les 200 salariés du boulevard Darchicourt sont dans l’attente depuis la fermeture, en mai dernier,  du site de la Somme. Sur ce site, on leur avait pourtant promis de la production photovoltaïque en vain… comme à Hénin.

 

Même si la direction de l’usine se veut rassurante en indiquant que les deux sites ne sont pas liés, on reconnaît une crise avec période de chômage partiel pour les salariés.

 

A Hénin-Beaumont, l’insécurité sociale est à son comble. Entre Faurecia, Sublistatic et maintenant Energy Plast, ce sont plus de 600 emplois menacés. L’économie Héninoise peut donc décrocher d’un moment à l’autre. C’est exactement ce que nous avions pronostiqués il y a plus de dix ans…

07:30 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (5) | Trackbacks (0) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

mercredi, 04 octobre 2006

Finances municipales : tout va très bien….Madame la marquise !

medium_mairie.2.jpgCe matin, VDN consacre une page sur les finances municipales qui seraient, selon le maire, au beau fixe et libérées de la chambre régionale des comptes. Et le maire de promettre (année électorale oblige) une nouvelle baisse de 4 points de la taxe d’habitation pour 2007.

 

Bref, une situation idyllique qui serait due à sa bonne gestion. Allons-donc ! Heureusement que nous avons, nous, lu le nouvel avis de la chambre régionale des comptes qui ne félicite nullement la gestion municipale. Bien au contraire ! Steeve Briois ne manquera pas de décoder tout cela lors du conseil municipal de jeudi. Et lorsque l’avis de la CRC sera disponible dès vendredi, sur votre blog préféré, vous verrez alors que la situation financière n’est pas rose !

 

Et que le soi-disant redressement de la ville n’est que conjoncturel et apparent…

07:00 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (17) | Trackbacks (0) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

vendredi, 22 septembre 2006

Une envie de s’évader…

medium_attente_gare.jpgEtait-ce une fausse bonne idée ? En accordant 50 000 allers TGV à 5 euros sur toute la France, la SNCF a provoqué une véritable ruée, hier, et beaucoup de frustrations.

 

Dès midi il était impossible d’obtenir le serveur vocal de la SNCF, plus d’une heure d’attente. Quant au site Internet de la SNCF, il se bloquait. Impossible donc d’acheter le moindre billet à 5 euros. Direction la gare d’Hénin-Beaumont où une file de plus de 60 personnes attendait de pied ferme. (40 dans la gare et 20 à l'extérieur).

 

Là encore, grosse désillusion. A 13 heures, la gare d’Hénin annonçait la fin de l’opération, toutes les places étant vendues. Ce qui provoqua un légitime mouvement d’humeur (avec noms d’oiseaux) chez les personnes (elles étaient nombreuses) qui attendaient depuis longtemps. La direction de la SNCF invoquera le succès de l’opération (plus de 200 000 billets en moins d’une heure). Elle aurait pu cependant limiter l’offre à deux billets par personne et non six, ce qui aurait permis de faire davantage d’heureux…

 

Cette affaire est symptomatique de l’état d’esprit des Français en général et des Héninois en particulier. Ils ont envie de s’évader, de voyager, de se changer les idées. Premiers consommateurs d’anti-dépresseurs en Europe, les Français veulent oublier leur quotidien morose. Et ils ne peuvent pas à cause des prix.

 

La SNCF a maintenant la preuve qu’elle devrait baisser ses tarifs. Cette baisse serait rentabilisée par l’augmentation des voyages.

 

En attendant, les Français rêvent d’un autre monde, d’une autre vie.

06:55 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (3) | Trackbacks (0) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

lundi, 04 septembre 2006

Les hausses de la rentrée

medium_panier_menagere.2.jpgC’est un sérieux avertissement à l’iNSEE et à tous les organismes officiels délivrant les mensonges de l’Etat.

 

Des associations indépendantes comme la CLCV (Consommation, Logement et Cadre de vie) et 60 millions de consommateurs remettent en cause le fameux indice des prix à la consommation de l’INSEE. Il y a, en effet, un fossé entre les statistiques officielles et la réalité quotidienne des ménages. Les chiffres de l'Insee font état d'une inflation assez sage : +1,9 % sur les douze derniers mois alors que tout flambe.

 

L’INSEE est là pour mentir aux Français, pour rassurer. Mais plus personne n’est dupe. Il suffit de regarder l’augmentation de l’essence, du fuel, du gaz, des loyers, des aliments et des boissons pour se rendre compte de l’état catastrophique du panier de la ménagère. Comment font les Français pour s’en sortir et pour tenir ?

06:35 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (2) | Trackbacks (0) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

mercredi, 30 août 2006

Les mensonges de la maison du commerce

medium_commerce.2.jpgCe matin, La Voix du Nord donne la parole à l’union commerciale dont le président, Jean-Claude Pigeyre, passe la plupart de son temps aux côtés du maire d’Hénin-Beaumont. Vous trouverez, ci-dessous, la lettre que j’ai envoyée à l’ensemble des commerçants et artisans d’Hénin-Beaumont courant juillet. Le commerce local est présenté comme un doux rêve sans difficultés.

 

Sachez également que la Voix du Nord indique que seulement trois commerces (sic) ont fermé leurs portes sur Hénin. C’est totalement faux. Pour preuve, rien que dans le bâtiment de la Poste du rond-point des villes jumelées, le coiffeur a mis la clef sous la porte, le constructeur de maisons individuelles est parti et le carré pro a définitivement fermé. Sans oublier le vidéo club situé à côté de l’autre poste, rue Robert Aylé et le bar « l’hexagone »qui viennent de s’arrêter. Quand la propagande municipale cessera-t-elle de nous manipuler ?

 

Pour lire la lettre de Steeve Briois envoyé à l’union commerciale, cliquez ci-dessous :

union_commerciale2.doc

07:45 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (3) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

vendredi, 25 août 2006

Qui va payer ?

 

medium_marianne.jpgLes Français doivent savoir :

1 – Que le squat de Cachan n’est pas une exception. Depuis des années, partout en France, des étrangers en situation irrégulière s’entassent de plus en plus nombreux dans des milliers de squats.

2 – Que Nicolas Sarkozy malgré les promesses dont il les abreuve depuis 2002 est incapable de faire appliquer les lois de la République qui imposent le renvoi des clandestins dans leurs pays d’origine.

3 – Ils apprennent aujourd’hui que les centaines de clandestins de Cachan comme d’autres avant eux, vont être en priorité relogés dans des hôtels ou des logements sociaux, aux frais des contribuables français qui n’en peuvent plus d’assumer la politique d’immigration ruineuse du gouvernement UMP.

Le Front National propose donc que ces clandestins soient relogés dans les résidences secondaires de Nicolas Sarkozy et Ségolène Royal.
 
 
Louis Aliot

 

07:25 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (2) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

samedi, 19 août 2006

Les bobos d’Hénin-Beaumont

medium_renaud.2.jpgA la différence des Bobos Parisiens de Renaud, nos Bobos à nous sont très peu nombreux. N’existant que dans le microcosme, les bobos Héninois ne sont guère appréciés par la population qui les juge comme des parvenus, faux bourges, superficiels, intéressés et mégalos. Ils se nomment Tavernier, Deshayes, Bombecke, Policante ou encore Legrand…Mais attention, tous ne se ressemblent pas, ce ne sont pas des copies conformes.

 

Les Bobos d'Hénin-Beaumont

Lire la suite

07:25 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (6) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

Toutes les notes

Repost 0
Published by Le comte vert - dans HOME ACCUEIL
commenter cet article
17 octobre 2006 2 17 /10 /octobre /2006 09:03

 

 

jeudi, 12 octobre 2006

Insécurité sociale chez Energy Plast

medium_energy_plast.jpgCertes, il n’y a rien d’officiel. Pourtant, la situation d’Energy Plast (ex-Samsonite) à Hénin-Beaumont a de quoi inquiéter.

 

Les 200 salariés du boulevard Darchicourt sont dans l’attente depuis la fermeture, en mai dernier,  du site de la Somme.

 Sur ce site, on leur avait pourtant promis de la production photovoltaïque en vain…

comme à Hénin.

 

Même si la direction de l’usine se veut rassurante en indiquant que les deux sites ne sont pas liés, on reconnaît une crise avec période de chômage partiel pour les salariés.

 

A Hénin-Beaumont, l’insécurité sociale est à son comble.

Entre Faurecia,

Sublistatic et maintenant

 Energy Plast

ce sont plus de 600 emplois menacés.

L’économie Héninoise peut donc décrocher d’un moment à l’autre.

C’est exactement ce que nous avions pronostiqué il y a plus de dix ans…

07:30 Publié dans Infos | Lien permanent | Commentaires (5) | Trackbacks (0) | Envoyer cette note | Tags: droite nationale, fn, front national, le pen

le blog se steve BRIOIS  .

Trackbacks

Voici l'URL pour faire un trackback sur cette note :

Repost 0
Published by Le comte vert - dans HOME ACCUEIL
commenter cet article

Rechercher

Archives