There is this piece of information from Turkey this morning. So much for the argument that the Turks wouldn't be a Trojan horse of Islamism in Europe...
To an overwhelming majority -and I mean overwhelming!- the whole European business is double Dutch. How does it work? who decides? in whose interest? and overall, who pays and how much? are questions 95% of Europeans couldn't give a shadow of an answer.
But there is one topic that is even farther off people's knowledge and decision and it is the question of membership.
The Baltic States have been admitted some years ago as well as Cyprus and Malta. No big deal. More recently Poland, Romania and Bulgaria have been granted membership. What these countries have brought to the 20 odd others I still can't figure.
But when it becomes tragic is when Turkey is demanding its admission! They so insist on being granted membership that you'd think they really love Italian music, German poetry, French architecture, Spanish theatre (especially the XVIIth century one) and British crockery so as to melt into a European ocean of cultural wealth and mutual admiration.
Or is it because of the hundreds billions Euros they would get from France, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy etc? And I don't even mention the cultural/religious values chasm that exists between mainland Europe and a country bordering Iraq, Syria and Iran.
But wait! Georgia is also asking for membership as well as Ukraine. You bet! And since we're at it, what about considering Afghanistan and also all the former Russian regions of the south as potential receivers of the European cash delivery system?
What 75 million Turks could bring to the other 350 million Europeans, I have no idea. What they can expect to get I can figure out.
Historically the EU was meant to be an enduring link between the former WWII enemies, particularly France and Germany. And it worked. But it has now grown completely out of control and is globally detrimental to the founding members.
It's high time to put a halt to this madness and say to the Turks a polite but definitive: NO!
13 commentaires:
Ce que veux faire les français ou la france, c'est leurs affaires. And it's none of my business.
Overall, I become more and more impressed with the French notion of secularism, myself not at all a theist.
I've been reading up on the French/Turkish relationship. The French are free thinkers and modern. Turkey is back in the middle ages as are most Muslim countries, albeit Turkey is more modern and secularist than many other majority Muslim countries, except for perhaps Indonesia and Egypt.
And Turkey itself has some restrictions re Burkas, or niqab, or hijab etc etc. So for them to criticize France when they, themselves, are concerned that extremists elements of the religious zealots might have too much power leads me to believe that their protests are hypocritical.
extremists elements
correction:
extremist elements
The French don't even allow yarmulkes or xtian crosses or headscarves or any other such blatant religious propanda in their schools. Therefore full religious political oppressive covering of a woman which is the burka (and other such oppressive costumes for Muslim women) would clearly go against the zeitgeist of French society and their cultural mores.
propanda
oops... propaganda
Recep Erdogan (Turkish PM) is deeply frustrated with Sarkozy and France because the French president made it clear during his presidential campaign that he was against Turkey's membership in the E.U.
Merkel also opposes Turkey's wishes of E.U admission but since there are some 3 or 4 million Turks in Germany Erdogan is less vehement with Germany.
There are less Turks in France as compared to Germany. Wiki indicates about 500.000 which is something like 6 or 8 times less than in Germany.
La communauté turque est récente en France, il n'y a pas beaucoup de Français d'origine turque (c'est à dire nés de parents turcs) et semble correctement intégrée.
" Turkey itself has some restrictions re Burkas, or niqab, or hijab"
En effet, la plupart des pays arabes (Tunisie tout récemment) interdisent les prières dans la rue ou le port des Burqua, Niqab etc. Sont-ils anti islamiques?
Here is a point of view on Fox. news (who would have thought?) where France is praised for her anti burqa, niqab etc legislation...
Since you're very sensitive re how women are subjugated in Afghanistan, I've often met this argument: The French, among others, are in Afghanistan officialy to get rid of the Talibans who impose the wearing of the burqas upon women where other women here in France (and also in The Netherlands) defiantly wear the symbol of their oppression.
There even was a demonstration last Sunday in front of Notre Dame to protest the anti burqa legislation. Talk of being provocative!
Like building a mosque and cultural center right on ground zero!
----------
As pertains religious signs in schools, it started in the mid 90s when muslim school girls started entering classes wearing veils.
These girls were about 15 and coming from religious Moroccan families. They sure did it out of their free will.
A law was voted and implemented and since then there are no longer problems with religious symbols at school in France.
C'est un peu comme certains collèges britanniques où les élèves portent un uniforme, garçon, et filles, de telle sorte que n'apparaissent pas les distinctions religieuses ou sociales afaik.
En ce qui concerne la laïcité française c'est une longue histoire bien sûr qui remonte à la Révolution.
Mais surtout à la loi de 1905 qui est fondamentale dans la construction de la France moderne.
The Carpathian dwarf has been toying with the idea of loosening the provisions of the law only to recede when it appears that an overwhelming majority of the French opposed him, even his supporters.
La loi de 1905 est aussi essentielle que l'affaire Dreyfus pour comprendre ce qu'est la République Française.
De la droite comme de la gauche, à peu près tous les Français se réfèrent à la loi de 1905 pour contenir les excès de l'islamisme.
Be Muslim and practise as long as you want but keep it to yourself, period.
Here is a point of view on Fox. news (who would have thought?) where France is praised for her anti burqa, niqab etc legislation...
Yes, I read that article, but I was too embarrassed to link to an article from Fox. But then I agree more with those on the right re Libya. It's not as though the way that one views an issue has to be along party lines.
Here is an article about the Libanese woman Anijo mentioned some weeks ago.
Joumana Haddad, “the Oprah of Lebanon,” is flirting with a fatwa. In the Arab world, suddenly she’s everywhere, a dark-haired, golden-eyed looker sashaying onto talk shows in stiletto heels, provoking Hezbollah with her contempt for Shariah law, penning newspaper columns and books about Arab gender politics, publishing a racy magazine and flashing a winning smile as a judge on Lebanon’s “Celebrity Duets
Flocon, you are like an elephant. You never forget. Thank you for this update on Joumana Haddad.
There is something in it for Western women, too, to the extent that the fate of the honor-killed, acid-scarred, burqa-bound Arab female has implications for the status of women worldwide.
What most has implications for honor-killed, acid-scarred, burqa-bound Arab women is the willingness of those in the West to fight the honor killers, acid throwers, and burqa binders in the Muslim world. And by fight I do not mean writing critical articles about them in the Atlantic magazine. These men are willing to kill, and kill ruthlessly, to promote the subjugation of women everywhere to their law.
Who is willing to shoot them down when they fight? Who is willing to call in the artillery fire on them when they run? Who will direct the air strike on them when they go to ground? Who will direct the Hellfire missile from the drone on them when they think they are safe in their hideaway?
So long as we in the West are not willing to face up to the necessity to kill these killers, we will have to witness their crimes against their own daughters and sisters, and suffer their crimes against us.
SemperFidelis
Anijo,
"There is something in it for Western women, too, to the extent that the fate of the honor-killed, acid-scarred, burqa-bound Arab female has implications for the status of women worldwide."
I totally agree since nothing is forever definitive in our world particularly regarding moral values. That was the topic of the Nécessité fait loi (morale) post some days ago.
We have no insurance at all that our Western values that we consider the best in the world regarding social themes such as the status of women, ethnic minorities, children's right to education, death penalty, homosexuals, fair judiciary process etc. will still rule our collective mentality next century or even in 50 years time.
2 examples:
France : The last woman to be guillotined was Germaine Leloy-Godefroy in 1949.
USA: 50 years ago Black people were still deprived of their political rights.
Both examples now seem repugnant in our respective countries save for a tiny minority of murderous minds.
It wouldn't take long the minds of the majority would turn to the past if a nation wide campaign was to be aired everyday on radios and TVs, notwithstanding all the other medias (Internet et al).
The status of woman being strictly regulated by the Koran and the hadiths, it would take an herculean effort to unroot the belief held by hundreds of millions of Muslim re how women are considered in the Middle East.
SemperFidelis,
I understand it's the Marine writing here. Yet...
I think one must distinguish what's going on in one's country and what's happening in foreign countries.
In France there have been three (afaik) crimes committed by Islamic driven murderers in the last ten years.
One so called "honor crime" by Turks in Alsace, one acid attack on a girl who wanted to put a halt to a relationship she had with a Pakistanese born freak and a girl who died because she was set ablaze by another Muslim (the last two ones in the Parisian suburbs).
In three cases the police and the judiciary did their job.
Another horrendous crime took place in Vendée (the 18 something old girl was dismanbered and her rests were scattered in pools). Nothing to do with Islamism here.
No need for the army to intervene and that would be the same in the US where similar horrors happen every year.
Now, what people do in their far away countries is something different. It's despicable, vile, horrible and revolting we all agree on that but do you suggest the US, NATO and all western countries should invade Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Soudan and kill all these killers?
Also there's much work to be done in Africa re the status and fate of women.
Please note that both S. Hussein and M. Gaddafi both led countries were women weren't particularly subjugated, quite the opposite.
In this regard the bad guys are to be found in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, both very trustful allies of America...
And contrary to Gaddafi who did harm us neither Afghanistan or Irak were a threat to the West. Yet, this is where we are.
Enregistrer un commentaire