France and the Media During the Jihadist War

The ravages of Jihad Denial.

It is safe to say that there are now two main fronts in what we need to term the Islamist War Against the West. The first has been for many years now the Western liberal democracy of Israel surrounded by genocidal neighbors; the second is France, followed closely by other European countries, Australia, and America.

During the week of December 11th, 2018, two sad things happened and this essay shall attempt to enlighten by placing them together. The first is the recent terrorist attack in Strasbourg France, and the second is the signing by most of the world (with the exception of America, Australia, much of Eastern Europe, and Israel) of the United Nations Global Compact For Safe, Orderly And Regular Migration, which is a mind-boggling attempt to remove sovereignty from nations hesitant to admit Islamist young men and remove freedom of the press to object to the globalist –Islamist agenda.

The Associated Press covered the December 11th shootings at the Strasbourg France Christmas market that killed at least 3 and wounded at least 12 by writing that “The motive for the shooting is unclear. It wasn’t immediately clear if the market was the target of the attack of if there was any link to terrorism.”

 It was reported in the article that “France has been hit by several extremist attacks including the 2015 Paris shootings which killed 130 people and wounded hundreds, and a truck attack in Nice that killed dozens in 2016.

Note the following:

  • The media tend to mislead readers in nearly every terrorist attack by stating that the motive is “unclear.” 
  • The attacks, almost all of which are by loosely organized Islamist young men, are said to be the work of extremists, whatever that means. It is also common for the press to link the terrorist to mental illness or regular criminal behavior or to portray him as a “lone wolf,” all to obfuscate the reality of a war that is not directed by normal military generals or by national entities. Why can’t the press name the enemy?
  • The said “extremists” are said to be behind two examples of attacks in France, but omitted were many other attacks. The Canadian Press reported by December 12th that “The attacker is a 29-year-old with a police record in France and Germany who had been flagged for extremism, police said. Police detained five people in overnight searches around the city” and he was named as 29-year-old Cherif Chekatt.

Laurent Nunez, secretary of state for the Interior Ministry, spoke on France-Inter radio. He said that one possible reason for the attack was that police tried and failed to arrest him earlier on Tuesday for an attempted murder. He said also that the suspect had been identified as radicalized during past stays in prison. Other sources have disclosed that Chekatt was born in France to migrant parents, and after a life of crime and being unemployed since 2011, he latched on to Islamism in jail.

There are many articles from trustworthy news sources explaining the growing rate of radicalization of Muslim prisoners in jails in America, Australia and Europe and the growing rate of conversion to Islam in prisons mainly by black inmates, but with a growing Hispanic group.

Strasbourg’s public prosecutor Rémy Heitz has admitted that the suspected motive for the shootings is terrorism. “Terrorism has again struck our soil,” said Mr Heitz at a press conference on Wednesday, noting that witnesses heard the gunman shout “Allahu Akbar” during the attack.

The Washington Post reported within days that a judicial official said that the father and two brothers of the man suspected of attacking the Strasbourg Christmas market are among four people in custody in the investigation. So while the perpetrator is said to have been radicalized in prison, his father and brothers just happen to be Islamists. Note that from the earliest reports that a terrorist on the French terrorist watch list did not have a clear motive, to reports that his brothers and father are also radical Islamists. The media tends to downplay the connection to Islamism, even where, as here, the terrorist shouts “Allahu Akbar.”

Here are the Islamist terrorist attacks in France since the Charlie Hebdo attacks of  2015, courtesy of France24, which have now killed 245 people.

  • 2018: A knifeman shouting “Allahu akbar” (God is greatest) was shot dead by police in central Paris in May 2018 after he killed one person and injured four.
  • March 23, 2018: Gunman Radouane Lakdim killed four people in the southern towns of Trebes and Carcassonne, including policeman Lieutenant-Colonel Arnaud Beltrame who was hailed as a hero for taking the place of a hostage.
  • October 1, 2017: A 29-year-old Tunisian cries “Allah Akbar” and kills two young women with a knife at the main train station in the southern city of Marseille. Ahmed Hanachi is shot dead by soldiers on patrol. His attack is claimed by the Islamic State (IS) group.
  • April 20, 2017: A 39-year-old ex-convict shoots dead an on-duty policeman and wounds two others on Paris’ Champs-Elysees avenue.
  • Gunman Karim Cheurfi is killed by police and a note praising IS is found next to his body, with the group claiming responsibility.
  • July 26, 2016: Two teenagers slit the throat of an 85-year-old priest in front of five worshippers at his church in the western town of Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray. Abdel Malik Petitjean and Adel Kermiche, both aged 19, are killed by police. The murder is claimed by the IS. The teenagers had sworn allegiance to the group in a video.
  • July 14, 2016: A Tunisian ploughs a truck through a large crowd gathered for Bastille Day fireworks on the Promenade des Anglais in the Mediterranean city of Nice. The attack kills 86 people and injures more than 400.  The driver, Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, 31, is shot dead by security forces. IS claims responsibility.
  • June 13, 2016: Larossi Abballa, 25, uses a knife to kill a police officer and his partner at their home in Magnanville, west of Paris, in front of their young son. Abballa is killed by a police SWAT team, but has already claimed the murders on social media in the name of IS.
  • November 13, 2015: France is hit by the worst terror attacks in its history. IS jihadists armed with assault rifles and explosives strike outside a France-Germany football match at the national stadium, Paris cafes, and the Bataclan concert hall in a coordinated assault that leaves 130 people dead and more than 350 wounded.
  • August 21, 2015: Passengers prevent a bloodbath on a high-speed Thalys train from Amsterdam to Paris, tackling a man who opened fire on travellers. He was armed with a Kalashnikov assault rifle, an automatic pistol and a box-cutter. The gunman is identified as 25-year-old Moroccan national Ayoub El Khazzani, known to intelligence services for links to radical Islam.
  • June 26, 2015: Frenchman Yassin Salhi, 35, kills and beheads his boss and displays the severed head, surrounded by two Islamic flags, on the fence of a gas plant in Saint-Quentin-Fallavier in southeastern France. He tries to blow up the factory, but is arrested. He commits suicide in his jail cell.
  • April 19, 2015: Sid Ahmed Ghlam, an Algerian IT student, is arrested on suspicion of killing a woman who was found shot dead in her car, and of planning an attack on a church in the Paris suburb of Villejuif. Prosecutors say they found documents about Al-Qaeda and IS at his home, and that he had been in touch with a suspected jihadist in Syria about an attack on a church.
  • February 3, 2015: A knife-wielding man attacks three soldiers guarding a Jewish community centre in Nice. The 30-year-old assailant, Moussa Coulibaly, is arrested. In custody, he expresses his hatred for France, the police, the military and Jews.
  • January 7-9, 2015: Two men armed with Kalashnikov rifles storm the Paris offices of satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo killing 12 people. A policewoman is killed just outside Paris the following day, while a gunman takes hostages at a Jewish supermarket, four of whom are killed. The attackers are killed in separate shootouts with police, but not before claiming allegiance to Al-Qaeda and the IS.

When these facts are put together with all the other Islamist Jihadist attacks on civilians across Europe, Africa, the Middle East, the United States and Canada, we should realize this is not a story, as the Associated Press in its early reports would have us believe, about “extremists” but about Jihad as interpreted by the radical Islamists. Note that not all Muslims are Jihadist, and we especially note exceptions like the Ismaili Muslims, the Ahmadi Muslims and reformist Muslims, small as their number may be.  

The largest number of Jihadist young men are Arabs. They are part of an Islamist war against the West. One government that participates in the War Against the West is Iran, but its hostility is mainly towards the Jews of Israel although it has financed and directed attacks in Buenos Aires against a Jewish Community Centre, killing over 80 and wounding over 300, and have also killed over 200 American troops peace-keeping in Lebanon, through its terrorist proxy Hezbollah.

We cannot defeat this war against the West until we are capable to name the enemy and understand that a war against our civilians is the worst kind of war, fought by powerful cowards who brainwash their followers into launching suicide attacks to terrorize host populations into submission. Does the submission of media and politicians like Macron and Merkel leave so many worried about their future that they are joining in protests like the French “yellow vest” protestors?

Unfortunately, the problematic news reporting explained in this essay is now being supported by the Government of Canada and most of the other governments of the world (except for the U.S., Israel, most Eastern European states and Australia) who this week signed on to the United Nations Global Compact For Safe, Orderly And Regular Migration.

This agreement states its purpose in OBJECTIVE 17: “Eliminate all forms of discrimination and promote evidence-based public discourse to shape perceptions of migration.” It explains further in paragraph 33:

“We commit to eliminate all forms of discrimination, condemn and counter expressions, acts and manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, violence, xenophobia and related intolerance against all migrants in conformity with international human rights law. We further commit to promote an open and evidence-based public discourse on migration and migrants in partnership with all parts of society, that generates a more realistic, humane and constructive perception in this regard. We also commit to protect freedom of expression in accordance with international law, recognizing that an open and free debate contributes to a comprehensive understanding of all aspects of migration.” 

It then comes to the scary part for those wishing to see the maintenance of a free media. It agrees to:

“Promote independent, objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet-based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media”

Some claim that this agreement is not binding as would be a “treaty.” I asked Canadian expert in international law Jacques Gauthier what we thought of that argument. He replied: 

“I have real misgivings regarding the animus and motives of the architects of this agreement.  International treaties are sources of obligations for nations. Even if this convention is structured as something which is not binding, it can be used as a stepping stone for new obligations based on the moral principles undergirding this instrument.”

Has the media in the West already adopted attitudes in favor of migrants and fear of being intolerant to migrants and their children? Have we already begun to worship diversity as the end game, instead of our traditional goals of liberty and justice? 

I wrote an entire book, Tolerism:  The Ideology Revealed, explaining that we should not be excessively tolerant to intolerant Islamist migrants that want to bring with them Sharia Law, abuse of women and children and gays and other ethnicities or religions, along with a mission to create a world-wide Caliphate in which Jews and Christians will be dhimmis. I fear that the Canadian government will soon have laws preventing me from expressing my opinion. I have already had lectures shouted down and books banned.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the one who thinks that Canada’s main goal is “inclusive diversity” didn’t even wait for the passing of the Compact; a month before he announced a $595 million dollar package of tax relief  to Canadian media, but only ones his government deems eligible as “trustworthy.” Most Canadian media of course wouldn’t criticize this gift not meant for the non-trustworthy. But Breitbart was willing to explain the new plan: 

“ The tax relief will include tax breaks for consumers who purchase subscriptions from news media outlets, refundable tax credits for news media outlets’ operational costs, and the extension of charitable status to non-profit news media organizations; registered charities with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) can issue charitable receipts to donors and benefactors for donations. “Eligibility will be determined by the government and government-established panels. Details regarding such determinations were not provided.”   This is a clear statement that only government approved media will be part of the mainstream and alternate media will have to stay poor and alternate.”

We see from the timid reporting of Associated Press that the desire not to offend the enemy has created a self-censorship akin to submission. We see how most of the countries of the world are willingly giving up their freedoms. Even before the United Nations directives, their media have accepted the idea that rights of citizens are secondary to the rights of migrants - no matter how many of those migrants might hide their evil inclinations under the welcome mat of the United Nations’ types who prioritize diversity over liberal culture.