On April 11th, as soon as a law banning burqas was enacted by the French government, a dozen refractory women immediately went out shouting in central Paris, and were arrested in front of television cameras. Islamist groups tried unsuccessfully to organize a protest.
Comments were published in the international press saying that France had taken a bold decision and showed a strong will to set a limit to the Islamization of the country.
A more relevant interpretation would say, rather, that it was a symbolic and desperate gesture intended to satisfy public opinion temporarily at a time when President Sarkozy sinks in the polls. One might even go farther and say that it did not temporarily satisfy anyone, and actually was, under the guise of firmness, a subtle act of appeasement.
Like all symbolic and desperate gestures, it will have no practical effect. The law creates no barrier against the underlying problem: the continued Islamization of French society. Already the law is not enforced: many women still wear burqas, and the police do not arrest them. There are approximately 700 no-go zones in France: no officer would take the risk of provoking a riot.
The day the law was enacted, Prime Minister François Fillon, was quick to point out publicly that the burqa was "not a religious requirement" and that Muslim religious authorities had been consulted. In other words, Fillon acknowledged that before taking the decision, the government did its best to make sure it was "Islamically correct."
In the text of the law, the drafters were careful never to use a single word that could describe what the law was really supposed to ban: the words used speak only of "concealment of the face in public."
Two days after the law was enacted, to make clear what his government's position was, Fillon was photographed, with fully veiled little girl placed next to him, at the ceremony to inaugurate a new mosque in Paris suburbs.
In parallel, prayers in the street still take place in Paris and other major cities every Friday afternoon. The government says outdoor prayers are the result of "the absence of a sufficient number of places of worship." The fact that many of those who participate come from afar, and apparently do what they do for the sole purpose of making the occupation of public space more impressive, is totally ignored.
In addition, besides the burqas, the number of woman wearing veils that cover the whole body and transform them in disquieting black ghosts increases week after week. The message these women send is clear to anyone who wants to pay attention: Muslim women who do not veil are increasingly accused of "immodesty." In predominantly Muslim neighborhoods, they therefore may be harassed, and sometimes assaulted, until they fall into line. A Muslim friend recently went back to visit the town in Syria from which, years ago, she had fled; and was shocked to see that now all women were veiled. "Tell me," she said to the man who was showing her around, "are there any women here who are not veiled?" "Oh," he said: "Only the prostitutes."
Only one political party, the far-right National Front, dares to say explicitly that Islamization is a danger. Polls show that it draws fifteen to twenty percent of the electorate; it has no chance of taking power.
When the Presidential elections are held in one year, the candidate of the National Front, Marine Le Pen, is expected to rank second; Nicolas Sarkozy is expected to finish third and thereby be eliminated.
The candidate who has the greatest chance of winning will be the one designated by the Socialist Party. The favorite now is Dominique Strauss Kahn, the current President of the International Monetary Fund. Strauss Kahn is Jewish, and you might therefore get the impression that the Islamization of France is not accompanied by a rise in anti-Semitism. You would be wrong.
Strauss Kahn has every chance of being elected because he is a socialist: his Jewishness is a handicap that will cost him several percentage points of the votes. He belongs, moreover, to a party that has made the fight against "Islamophobia" one of its major campaign themes, anmd which also makes use of anti-Israel rhetoric. Strauss Kahn will undoubtedly have to comply if he wants to avoid being accused of "dual loyalty."
France today is a society where almost all the media are in the hands of supporters of Islamic correctness, which is now an integral part of political correctness. Few journalists dare to defy the unwritten rules: those who do, may at any moment be dragged into court and sentenced to heavy fines.
It is a society where the main supporters of Islamic correctness belong to a still Marxist left, and where the moderate right does its best to respect the codes set by the left, even if sometimes it uses harsher words to attract people voting for the far right.
Those who vote for the left are people who see Islamization as a fact that has to be accepted unconditionally, and who are much more concerned by the desire to see more "social justice," even if it means more poverty for everybody.
Those who vote for the moderate right resign themselves to Islamization, even if it makes them anxious and silently angry.
Only the far right allows voters to express clearly their anxiety and their anger, but it is the far right and therefore "politically incorrect," even if it turns out historically to be perfectly correct…...
The Muslim population, of course, votes overwhelmingly for the left.
The Jewish community has increasing problems to find anybody to support. Many Jews know that voting with those who accept Islamization unconditionally, or who resign themselves to it, implies danger in the near future. They see that Islamization is accompanied by a return of anti-Semitism accompanied by a growing hatred of Israel.
Some Jews are tempted to vote for the National Front, but they know too well that it is a party that counts among its ranks many anti-Semites.
The Jews cannot ignore the problem that even if those who vote for the moderate right have reservations about Islamization, their leaders are determined to find ways to attract the Muslim electorate and, for that purpose, to create ever closer ties with the Muslim world.
Shortly after the passage of the law meant to ban the burqa, on April 16th the French Department of Foreign Affairs organized a symposium on the "Arab Spring." The French Secretary of State, Alain Juppé told the forum that the aim of the symposium was to "show that France is open to dialogue with the Islamist movements, provided they accept democracy." The two guests of honor were Mohamed Ben Salem, a representative of the Tunisian Islamist En-Nahda party, and Mohamed Affan, a representative of a branch of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.
In one year, France will almost certainly have a socialist President who happen to be a Jew but prefers to not speak about it, and who will govern a country where Islam will continue to rise sharply. Socialist dreams of "social justice" will bump fast against economic decline. Then, the law meant to ban the burqas will fully appear as what it is: a symbolic, desperate and empty gesture.
The changes that affect France are those that affect all Europe, but they are much broader and much deeper. Political parties in France, as elsewhere in Europe, deal with symptoms because they do not see how they might treat the causes: they feel they can use only cosmetic medicine -- so that is what they do.
Sometimes trends take place that suggest that a point of no return has been passed, and that a new start, if it should come, will come only after a collapse.
The Dutch MP Geert Wilders recently said that the lights are going out all over Europe: he is a fighter, and he fights. He is currently being pursued in Dutch courts; the Jordanians have asked for his extradition so that he can be killed for "blasphemy."
Wilders added that freedom of speech is now sacrificed in Europe to please a totalitarian ideology. One can only agree.