One for the French
Vive la France !
Tuesday, July 12, 2005 09:57:20 AM
by Daniel Pipes
Thanks to the war in Iraq, much of the world sees the British government as resolute and tough and the French one as appeasing and weak. But in another war, the one against terrorism and radical Islam, the reverse is true: France is the most stalwart nation in the West, even more so than America, while Britain is the most hapless.
British-based terrorists have carried out operations in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kenya, Tanzania, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Israel, Morocco, Russia, Spain, and America. Many governments - Jordanian, Egyptian, Moroccan, Spanish, French, and American - have protested London's refusal to shut down its Islamist terrorist infrastructure or extradite wanted operatives. In frustration, Egypt's president Hosni Mubarak publicly denounced Britain for "protecting killers." One American security group has called for Britain to be listed as a terrorism-sponsoring state.
Counterterrorism specialists disdain the British. Roger Cressey calls London "easily the most important jihadist hub in Western Europe." Steven Simon dismisses the British capital as "the Star Wars bar scene" of Islamic radicals. More brutally, an intelligence official said of last week's attacks: "The terrorists have come home. It is payback time for ∑ an irresponsible policy."
While London hosts terrorists, Paris hosts a top-secret counterterrorism center , code-named Alliance Base, the existence of which was recently reported by the Washington Post. At Alliance Base, six major Western governments have since 2002 shared intelligence and run counterterrorism operations - the latter makes the operation unique.
More broadly, President Chirac instructed French intelligence agencies just days after September 11, 2001, to share terrorism data with their American counterparts "as if they were your own service." The cooperation is working: A former acting CIA director, John E. McLaughlin, called the bilateral intelligence tie "one of the best in the world." The British may have a "special relationship" with Washington on Iraq, but the French have one with it in the war on terror.
France accords terrorist suspects fewer rights than any other Western state, permitting interrogation without a lawyer, lengthy pre-trial incarcerations, and evidence acquired under dubious circumstances. Were he a terrorism suspect, the author of Al-Qaida's Jihad in Europe <http://www.palgrave-usa.com/Catalog/product.aspx?isbn=1859738079> , Evan Kohlmann <http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/regional/s_338945.html> , says he "would least like to be held under" the French system.
The myriad French-British differences in treatment of radical Islam can be summarized by the example of what Muslim girls may wear to state-funded schools.
Denbigh High School in Luton, 30 miles northwest of London, has a student population that is about 80% Muslim. Years ago, it accommodated the sartorial needs of their faith and heritage, including a female student uniform made up of the Pakistani shalwar kameez trousers, a jerkin top, and hijab head covering. But when a teenager of Bangladeshi origins, Shabina Begum, insisted in 2004 on wearing a jilbab , which covers the entire body except for the face and hands, Denbigh administrators said no.
The dispute ended up in litigation and the Court of Appeal ultimately decided in Ms. Begum's favor. As a result, by law British schools must now accept the jilbab. Not only that, but Prime Minister Blair's wife, Cherie Booth, was Ms. Begum's lawyer at the appellate level. Ms. Booth called the ruling "a victory for all Muslims who wish to preserve their identity and values despite prejudice and bigotry."
By contrast, also in 2004, the French government outlawed the hijab, the Muslim headscarf, from public educational institutions, disregarding ferocious opposition both within France and among Islamists worldwide . In Tehran, protesters shouted "Death to France!" and "Death to Chirac the Zionist!" The Palestinian Authority mufti, Ikrima Sa'id Sabri, declared, "French laws banning the hijab constitute a war against Islam as a religion." The Saudi grand mufti, Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh, called them a human rights infringement. When the "Islamic Army in Iraq" kidnapped two French journalists, it threatened their execution unless the hijab ban was revoked. Paris stood firm.
What lies behind these contrary responses? The British have seemingly lost interest in their heritage while the French hold on to theirs: As the British ban fox hunting, the French ban hijabs. The former embrace multiculturalism , the latter retain a pride in their historic culture This contrast in matters of identity makes Britain the Western country most vulnerable to the ravages of radical Islam whereas France, for all its political failings, has held onto a sense of self that may yet see it through.
Last edited by Hari_Om; 14 Jul 05, at 10:38.
this is not even worth responding too.
You think by isolating and marginalzing the freedom of the muslim society you will end terrorism.
Did attacking Afghanistan and bombing it to bits end terrorism?
Terrorism will be ended by engaging witht eh community and trying to work with us to help each other to end terrorism, and the blair government for all it's stupid schemes, i trust on my security and with my rights.
One one level maybe your're right, but when it comes to the committed extremists of the likes of UbL, al-Zawahiri and al-Zarqawi there is no engagement possible, except armed.Originally Posted by platinum786
When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow. - Anais Nin
The problem is that when they are given freedom they make a mockery of it. A case in point is he "Imrama rape case in India". The Sharia judgements are a laugh.
No they missed out bombing the country east of Afghanistan.Did attacking Afghanistan and bombing it to bits end terrorism?
Cheers!...on the rocks!!
If one cannot live by the laws of the land of adopted country, let them go back to their own countries.
Hala Madrid!!
What's important? To do things right, or to do the right things?
Appeasing Muslims wont work.
Whatever term one uses for it.
Hmph, where terrorists are concerned, I think doing things right is the way to go.
Just my 0.02 of course.
Would somebody tell me exactly why is it that Great Britain or any other country such conform to the demands of immigrants like that?
Shyt, the first I would want to do if I was to move to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or where ever would be to learn about and absorb the culture of my new home.
Not scream like a little bytch about things were "back home".
It's the same thing with the Northerners that come to Florida and whine and cry about "back in New York we did it this way...." Like I fcuking care what they did or how they did it in New York or anywhere else in the north.
Oh, and I want to get a keffiyah (sp?) too. Can anybody help me on that one? Red and white preferred.
Among the community of nations, Pakistan today stands out on one hand as a petty thug brandishing a dangerous weapon, and at other times as a concubine, sleeping with anyone willing to pay for her expensive tastes. ~ Tarek Fatah
Dubai, They've built Utopian cities just for the foreigners.
Well you're not doing anything to the terrorists, but to the Muslims. ALL Muslims. Now there's a problem. In the end you contribute just as much to the Mullah cause as his interpretations.
Asim, you've already mentioned Dubai on another thread and somebody already refuted it. So I'm not even going to bother.
Now, what about my keffiyah?
Among the community of nations, Pakistan today stands out on one hand as a petty thug brandishing a dangerous weapon, and at other times as a concubine, sleeping with anyone willing to pay for her expensive tastes. ~ Tarek Fatah
Check your PM's
You should start this road towards peace by rejecting Islam. Thanks.
don't. Well what I said a few days ago still stands.
I think proportionately (to the small country's population) it probably hosts the most American expats anywhere, they love this hot, Monarch, undemocratic, theocratic Islamic country for a reason.
Do you think maybe it's the money they are making?
Besides, according you, it's a Utopia for them. So what does a monarchy, no democracy, lots of theocracy and Islam have to do with them?
Among the community of nations, Pakistan today stands out on one hand as a petty thug brandishing a dangerous weapon, and at other times as a concubine, sleeping with anyone willing to pay for her expensive tastes. ~ Tarek Fatah
The American are everywhere.
So what so new if they are in Dubai?
The "monarch" has no options but to kowtow and he better do that before something sad happens to him like Saddam, right?
But then the Monarch or rather a tribal chieftain made a King by the goodwill of the whiteman is more obligated and loyal than you who too is enjoying the the Chieftain's hospitality!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Share this thread with friends: