We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

France against radical Islamism

As Antoine is fond of pointing out here, the French are not totally supine in the face of radical Islamism:

Yahia Cherif, who preached in Brest, on the coast of Brittany, was deported to Algiers after being found guilty of “proselytism in favour of radical Islam” and “active relations with a national or international Islamic movement linked to organisations promoting terrorist acts”.

He was also found to have incited violence and hatred against people due to their origin. During the hearing, a lawyer representing the interior ministry cited evidence supplied by French intelligence to accuse Cherif of calling for a jihad during a sermon on March 19. The call represented a threat to national security, he said.

Cherif had also asked his followers for active support of Jamal Zougam, the prime suspect held in connection with the Madrid bombings, in which 191 people died.

Here is the case against deporting Cherif:

His lawyer argued that he did not promote terrorism but had been a victim of it, since he had witnessed his own father’s murder in Algeria. He said he feared for Cherif’s safety at the hands of Algeria’s military authorities.

I know that there is an argument that people like this just, you know, giving sermons, is just them exercising their right to free speech, but meanwhile, this man was clearly breaking French law as it actually is, and from the sound of it he certainly intended his words to give rise to actions. So my immediate reaction to this story is, in the words of the Sergeant Major with the moustache played by Windsor Davies in It Ain’t Half Hot Mum: “Oh dear. How tragic.”

As was this. Not.

3 comments to France against radical Islamism

  • Theodopoulos Pherecydes

    It always seems to me that any organisation advocating the imposition of its own law on a nation by force of arms, if necessary, is an illegal organisation.

    And, of course, this is precisely what ALL non-apostate Muslims must believe.

    Round ’em up; move ’em out. In the camps they can be given an opportunity to renounce their religion’s tenets on the subject, be deported, or…my personal favourite…shot.

    But no. We will continue to pussyfoot around on both sides of the Atlantic (and down under) pretending that Shari’a Law is not an actual threat to us. Islamic radicals are not “that much” of a threat as I read on here somewhere recently. Piss on Islamic “radicals”. The garden variety must ignore the injunctions of its own scripture or want us all either converted or dead.

    Bring back Joseph McCarthy! “Are you or have you ever been a member of [the Muslim religion].”

  • mike

    There was talk on here a while ago about people in Europe pretending that the big, racist boogeyman was a small but present group of neo-nazis instead of the real, large threat of radical Islam.

    On the local BBC news a few nights ago, they led into a phone poll about whether London should have a St. George’s Day celebration with the tagline “Far-right or all right?”, and in the ensuing debate (or lack of: the phone poll showed 99% in favour!), the reporter said that the reason there wasn’t a St. G’s parade was because of “fear of it being hijacked by right-wing extremists”… So it appears that the boogeyman has struck again. Do the other commentators think that this is the same thing? That they are actually worried about Islamic fundies turning such a parade into a riot so they claim it’s the nazis to worry about???

  • Verity

    Mike, thanks. Very interesting post. If supporting your national saint, who bravely slew a dragon, is “far right” in the BBC’s notoriously unbiased eyes – how do you categorise people who blow themselves up (the word “stupid” springs to mind) and people who shave themselves all over for Allah — or maybe for those 72 slutty retreads (they get made into “virgins” again – oh please! – for the next bomber) just before you fly planes into buildings?

    The BBC needs to be destroyed. Not modified. Not made “more accountable”. We’re talking razing buildings and calling in Rentokill to flush out remaining corridors and drains here. There is no sane reason for this vast parasite to exist.