Former local elected, Céline Pina is an essayist and activist. She is the founder of "Viv (r) e la République", she has also published
Guilty Silence
(Kero, 2016).
FIGAROVOX.- The rector of the Great Mosque of Paris, Chems-Eddine Hafiz,
has announced that he is definitively withdrawing from the project of a National Council of Imams entrusted to the CFCM by the Elysee
.
Is he right to denounce the existence of an “Islamist component” at the CFCM?
Céline PINA.-
By denouncing the existence of an Islamist component within the CFCM, the rector of the Grand Mosque of Paris is only revealing an open secret that only the absence of an investigation by too many journalists, the will to blind themselves to the government and the financial interests of certain lobbies, individuals and think tanks close to power explain.
In this regard, reading one of the great connoisseurs of political Islam, Mohamed Louizi, would help many people to open their eyes.
To read also:
Mohamed Louizi: "If reform must be carried out, it is that of Islam and not of secularism"
Around the creation of an Islam in France, there are many interests at stake: political power to be conquered, influence to be monetized, a lot of money to be made thanks to the halal tax, on a population not very secularized for its less educated part ... If some appetites are eyeing the creation of an Islam of France and the establishment of a halal tax for the market that it can create and the wealth that it can bring, d others pursue a more political enterprise of destabilization.
The pressures of Hakim El Karoui to get his hands on the creation of a halal tax and the related market are probably more related to financial considerations than political ones, but through his alliances and the creation of the AMIF, he indirectly serves projects, them, much more worrying.
Whoever controls the creation of Islam in France can dream of having a state within a state.
Indeed, the creation of an Islam of France arouses all the more appetites that France is considered weak, that its representatives are often seen as little attached to their country and little attached to defending the letter as the spirit of our laws and our principles.
Suddenly, whoever gets their hands on the Islam of France will have a propaganda network throughout the territory thanks to the control of mosques and cult / cultural centers, institutions recognized by the State allowing the dissemination of their ideology. , executives and small soldiers, a training school for imams and a school intended to train political executives (see the Averroès high school).
Whoever will control the creation of Islam in France can dream of having a State within the State, of piloting a powerful counter-society, a system of casemates with which the French Republic can only oppose, at the risk civil war or more likely with which it will negotiate, at the risk of losing its identity and its soul.
This dream of a sharia-governed counter-society becomes an effective possibility for politico-religious radicals if our government follows through on its project of Islam in France.
This explains the violence of the struggles within the CFCM concerning the charter of imams.
There is behind these tensions the will to see if the Republic is recovering or if it pretends to show its teeth but remains in fact on its knees.
It must be said that there is a precedent, in 2000 a charter had already been signed which was to mark the adhesion of Islam to the Republic.
This one died barely born since a fundamental freedom had been refused: that to change religion or to leave it.
This
de facto
put
this charter outside the Republic since it did not recognize freedom of conscience.
At the time no one had denounced the dimension of social control and the religious violence inherent in this refusal.
Indeed such a refusal is equivalent to preventing any individual freedom, because by birth, the individual is supposed to adopt a way of thinking and a way of being in the world, imposed by his belonging to a clan.
He is not an “I” but a member of an “we” whose characteristics he must bear.
By retreating on this point, our leaders showed a form of incapacity and lack of courage which encouraged all demands.
This is why all this little world of politico-religious entrepreneurs does not care about the framework set by the state.
They know that it will have neither the courage nor the means to make it respect because it has already abandoned the idea of being respected and of having our ideals, laws and customs respected by simply enforcing the law.
It is therefore obvious that those who get their hands on the Islam of France will immediately have a great power of nuisance.
We must not forget either that the Muslim Brothers are at work both within the AMIF, and among “Muslims of France”, the ex-UOIF.
Muslims from France, although outside the CFCM also plays its score in this concert.
The failure of the CFCM puts it all the more in the game since those close to the violent and totalitarian sect that is the Brotherhood of the Muslim Brotherhood hold the majority of the network of mosques and the most important centers for the training of imams (St Denis and Château-Chinon).
Thus if Chems-Eddine Hafiz takes a strong act by denouncing the Islamist component within the CFCM, we hope that it is indeed by adherence to republican principles and not by proximity with Amar Lasfar and "Muslims of France", who would recover the project to further increase its power and influence.
The fact remains that his declaration has the merit of exposing what everyone knows and that our policies deny: today the influence of Islamism is such in Islam that nothing can be done. do without them.
However, Islamists refuse equality between men and women, hate our freedoms, justify the hatred and the murder of those who do not share their vision of religion… There is nothing to negotiate with them.
How to work calmly with people whose communication is often based on double talk, denial and even lies?
That being said, even though the rector had the courage to tell the truth, the machine for taking people for fools was immediately revived thanks to the President of the Council, Mohammed Moussaoui.
Quite simply asks him for proofs of Islamist entryism when he knows full well what are the forces present which justify these accusations, he even belongs to one of them.
Let us therefore cite as a movement having links with the Islamists whether they are Muslim Brotherhood or Salafist: the Turkish confederation Milli Görüs (pro Erdogan), the gathering of Muslims of France, close to the Moroccan Islamists to which Mr. Moussaoui belongs, Faith and practices ... How to work calmly with people whose communication is often based on double talk, denial and even lies?
It has been several times that the French Council of Muslim Worship has been the subject of controversy over its connections with political Islamism.
Already last January,
its delegate general Abdallah Zekri had declared on the radio that Mila "had sought" the troubles she suffered
.
According to you, does this structure only represent a radical fringe of French Islam?
This structure is diverse, but it seems to have elevated double talk to the rank of an Olympic discipline.
So while Mr. Zekri called for hatred against Mila, Mr. Moussaoui for his part began to explain that criticism of religions was right and then backpedal by asking that we respect the beliefs of Islam.
The CFCM does not appear to have a line.
In this he resembles President Macron: he tells his interlocutors what they want to hear, even if it means sowing inconsistency and discouraging all confidence.
The organization thus succeeds in the feat of telling the Islamists through Mr. Zekri what they want to hear, then through that of Moussaoui to tell the state and society what reassures her, for in a last act give pledges and send a message to fundamentalists in the mode
"I do the job for the gallery but I too vomit the blasphemy"
.
Complicated to base anything on so many ambiguities or manipulations.
The CFCM is above all the echo chamber for the national interests of the Maghreb countries and Turkey.
What is certain is that if the CFCM is diverse, it is with the principles and ideals of the French Republic that the council has the least links.
Today it is above all the echo chamber of the national interests of the Maghreb countries and of Turkey in particular and of the ideological interests of the Islamists, each having as its objective the control of the population whose integration they do not want.
Discussions for the creation of a national council of imams stumbled over the drafting of a "charter of republican values".
This was denounced by several Muslim religious representatives, denouncing an attack on the dignity of Muslims.
What do you think of these blockages?
From the start, this draft republican values charter was just aberrant and shows how our current leaders are neither statesmen nor politicians nor even men of power.
They do not seem to be aware of the challenges they would face.
They do not understand anything about sovereignty and their role, much less about their duties.
Certain things cannot be negotiated, they impose themselves and it is even the role of the politician to bring them to life and therefore to impose them.
Secularism is not a negotiation.
It was imposed on Christians as well as on Jews, it must be imposed on Muslims as it has been on others.
Indeed our secularism implies that we do not put religious dogmas before the law.
The believer can think what he wants of the laws but he cannot argue about his religious affiliation to avoid it.
It is therefore not for him to set up a charter of republican values but for the State.
This charter imposes respect for the laws and sets the framework for the exercise of worship.
It does not interfere with theology, it confines itself to saying what is acceptable in our country and to defining a system of sanction, closure and expulsion for those who contravene it.
This failure had the merit of revealing the reality behind the demands of an Islam in France.
Moreover, when we look at what has blocked, everything becomes clear.
Islamist federations have refused to blacklist political Islam and refused to exclude from the training of imams organizations whose founding texts and guidelines refuse democracy, secularism, gender equality and promote sexism, anti-Semitism, hatred of homosexuality… they refused secularism and the fact that religion was not intended to sow civil discord and community hatred.
This failure will have had the merit of revealing the reality behind the demands of an Islam in France and of reminding our leaders what the role of statesmen is.
But I fear that it will be for nothing: there is no worse deaf person than someone who does not want to hear anything and our government is lost in the face of crises, whether they are health, political or cultural.
He does not understand anything about the notion of authority and the regal.
While a new totalitarianism is rising, Islamic totalitarianism, it believes it is still at the time of the March of the Arabs.
He has in front of him a politico-religious ideology which hates democracy and everything France is and he believes that he is negotiating a problem of demand for integration.
Unfortunately, it is not the case.
The Islamists have a totalitarian and imperialist project, they are in the conquest and domination and it is this violent project which seduces and provokes adhesion, absolutely not a spiritual step.
Today they are the most influential in Islam and this can be seen in the return to a fundamentalist practice or discourse, especially among young people.
It is time to stop with the rhetoric of the various governments which, under cover of balance, only cultivate impotence.
Wanting to give pledges to Islamists by believing to send messages of "respect" to Muslims is a double error: first because no one is fooled, it is not tolerance that speaks here but helplessness and cowardice .
Indeed, we do not have to be tolerant of sexism, anti-Semitism, religious intolerance, domestic violence in the name of honor and social violence in the name of the denial of individual freedoms.
Yet this is what Islamism carries and what has become the reality of life in certain neighborhoods.
Secondly, because it particularly exposes the French of the Muslim faith.
They are indeed the first targets of Islamists who want to re-Islamize their co-religionists to make them the pawns of their logic of destabilization and seizure of power.
And woe to those who resist them and try to defend universal values.
It is time to stop with the rhetoric of the various governments which, under cover of balance, only cultivate impotence.
You can't both hit Islamists and apologize for doing so by giving Islam freebies.
We must therefore be clear and position ourselves in order to be able to act.
This means brushing aside the representations of Islamists: no, Muslims are not persecuted and the state does not have to subsidize the construction of mosques.
On the other hand, we must name precisely the political project which wants to destroy what makes our culture and our identity as our aspiration to the universal and give us the means to drive it from our borders.
We do not have to accept that a form of fascism or green Nazism is recreated on our soil, because that is what is at stake.
It is therefore time to assume the fact that Islamism is compatible neither with the Republic nor with democracy and that its sprawling grip forces us to be very careful on everything concerning the claims made in the name of Islam. .
There are therefore no pledges to give but a fight to wage.
It goes through the registration of the Muslim Brotherhood on the list of terrorist organizations, by the prohibition of any aid or public subsidies to associations linked to this movement.
That the CCIF was dissolved is good, but it had already more or less moved its assets to the LES Muslims platform, which must also be dissolved.
But we must above all remove the parent company: Muslims of France (ex-UOIF), close the Averroès high school (already condemned by the courts) and the schools that the association has been able to create, close the training institutes for imams which depend on it , monitor closely and not hesitate to place patronage or Islamist mayors under supervision, and above all demand accountability from all state agents who endorse organizations linked to the Islamist far-right.
For example, the LES Musulmans platform has a steering committee where many researchers at CNRS and INED are enthroned ... If they were members of the RN steering committee, they would see their careers slowed down and be ostracized by their colleagues. .
Supporting the Islamists is a further step up in abjection, but since it is considered unassailable, no one is shy.
There too there is some cleaning to do.
It is not for a government to determine the content of a religion.
In short, that this government do its job, if not by dint of thinking that posturing and announcement effects can replace action, it will leave radicalized and violent Islamist militants face to face with a France that risks taking refuge in the arm of the RN to escape the attempt to create on its soil an Islamic society that no one desires and which brings misfortune to all the peoples who live under its law.
The real question is: does he understand it, and can he afford it?
The CFCM was created by Nicolas Sarkozy in 2003. Is any public desire to create representative bodies of moderate Islam in France therefore doomed to failure?
It is not only in France that Islam sinks into violence.
Islamism is wreaking havoc all over the world and the only societies it has created are monstrous: Islamic State, Iran ... Emmanuel Macron really believes that he will give birth to a moderate and secularized Islam?
It is either pretension or stupidity but it is at least well shared by the right and the left who have been serving us for years this tale for children.
Of course all these attempts are doomed, it is not for a government to fix the content of a religion.
On the other hand, it is up to a government to assess whether a religious practice creates a disturbance to public order and to be ruthless in this case.
And there is no need to tie knots.
Are there not enough imams in France?
Never mind.
This is no reason to bring in fundamentalist imams from Turkey or Morocco.
We must stop this logic of exchange and wash our hands of the consequences.
A secular state is not there to ensure a religion the management of its followers and if the religious infrastructure is in the hands of a violent and radical ideology, it must first fight it even if the premises are closed. for quite a long time.
Islam today is sick of totalitarianism and its metastasizing logic, if this religion has to cut back the time that Islamists spend from dominant to marginalized, and we must accept that this is not the problem of the secular republic.
How to solve the thorny problem of the training of imams if Emmanuel Macron's project also fails?
How to solve the problem of hunger in the world?
How to ensure that there is no more war and that everyone loves each other?
There are plenty of crucial issues that we don't know how to solve.
Well, there are also problems that we don't have to solve.
Does Emmanuel Macron also want to be interested in the vocations crisis within the Catholic Church?
The problem of the State is not to ensure the training of imams but to take over the school and to assume the fact that it is there to also train citizens therefore people who share a common vision, it is to build hospitals, roads, universities, it is to ensure individual and collective security, to inscribe a safe, clear and lasting framework in which people can pursue their private goals.
If the only ones who can offer training for imams depend on foreign powers or are Islamists, then too bad, there will be no training of imams on our soil as long as a project carried by reliable people does not will not have seen the light of day.
Today the conditions are not met.
As for the AMIF it is not a solution, Mohamed Bajrafil like Tarek Oubrou are very ambiguous and it is a polite way of expressing themselves as for their links with the Muslim brothers.
At present, there is no reliable structure to support a project of Islam in France or the training of imams.
Better to realize it and stop chasing a chimera.
The worst would be, for image issues, to pretend not to know it and eventually entrust the baby either to the CFCM, or to the AMIF, or to the former UOIF renamed Muslims of France.
This would result in the Islam of France falling into the hands of the Muslim brothers.
But these are above all policies for which what France represents is a heresy to fight and to destroy.
Such a project is equivalent to sheltering a viper in its bosom.
As blood continues to flow in our streets, such a choice would amount to betrayal.