Wednesday, 3 February 2016

LE FIGARO. - You see the tensions between Muslims and Christians in western societies as a ferment of civil war. Why? 
Daniel PIPES. - The rejection of Islam is continually increasing in Europe and the United States. That started in 1989 with the Salman Rushdie affair in the United Kingdom, and with the debate on the veil in France. Today, political parties that thrive on the rejection of Islam represent 20% to 30% of opinion everywhere. There is a consensus claiming that it will stop there, but I don't believe it. These movements could grow even to the point of taking power. With every attack, citizens change their opinion about Islam. For their part, Muslims feel very strong, and they are going to extend their influence. Civil war, you already have it intermittently - for example, the 2005 riots in the French suburbs. 
Do you think Islam was the main wellspring of these riots? 
We were faced with a phenomenon that is cultural, religious, communitarian. A rage nourished by a feeling of both superiority and humiliation of the "Muslim nation". The fact is that, since then, the gulf has widened between Muslims and non-Muslims. 
You originated the concept of "no-go areas" (areas that are prohibited to authorities, to some categories of the population), exploitation of which by the channel Fox News caused shock in France... 
I have personally visited twenty-eight of these areas: in the USA, Australia, Sweden, Greece, Germany, Belgium and especially France - in Paris, Marseilles, Montpellier... Your governement calles them "zones urbaines sensibles" [Sensitive Urban Areas] and counts 751 of them. I call these "Partial no-go areas", areas where access is limited: if I go there alone and dress in an ordinary way, I won't have a problem; but when I went to La Castellane with an elected official in a identifiable car from the local council, we got a huge stone that destroyed the windscreen. We filmed the scene and gave the video to the authorities a year ago: nothing happened. 
What do you think of Donald Trump's suggestion of banning Muslims from entering the United States? 
It's absurd and impossible. On the other hand, we could ban entry to Islamists, via process of inquiry and questioning. I don't support Mr Trump. He has no principles. He insults everyone, he is a neo-fascist who only wants power. He doesn't understand and doesn't accept the American system. For that reason, he will never be president of the USA. 
... With the inflow of migrants, Europe is now in the front lines of the chaos... 
Angela Merkel committed an incredible folly by inviting every Syrian. Her country and Europe and going to pay a very high price for it. Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan are the natural countries of asylum for the refugees. In Europe, it's illegal immigration.
Source

3 comments:

  1. Don't forget that he is still a jew. See how he panics at the suggestion to stop muslim immigration, calling Trump a "fascist", etc. He still wants muslims to enter western countries, he just doesn't want them to be radical. Using his logic, it will be perfectly ok to islamize Europe with some form of moderate Islam, or to replace europeans with non-muslim blacks from Africa.

    "What do you think of Donald Trump's suggest of banning Muslims from entering the United States?

    It's absurd and impossible. On the other hand, we could ban entry to Islamists, via process of inquiry and questioning. I don't support Mr Trump. He has no principles. He insults everyone, he is a neo-fascist who only wants power. He doesn't understand and doesn't accept the American system. For that reason, he will never be president of the USA."

    It is easy to stop muslim immigration, he can ask simply Israel, Japan, etc. And it is part of American history too. There is a precedent for America banning immigration from various parts of the world, such as the Chinese exclusion act, or the Immigration Act of 1924, that barred or severely restricted immigration from various parts of the world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In part of the interview I didn't translate, he explained that Islamic State wasn't really a problem; the real problem was Iran.

      Delete
    2. Yep, and Israel's defence minister recently said exactly the same thing -

      "Israeli defense minister: If I had to choose between Iran and ISIS, I’d choose ISIS"
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/01/19/israeli-defense-minister-if-i-had-to-choose-between-iran-and-isis-id-choose-isis/

      It's as if they are reading from the same script, so predictable.

      Delete