fbpx
 
 

 

Islamo-leftism does exist… and what’s more, it kills!

Islamo-leftism does exist… and what’s more, it kills!

The term “Islamo-leftism” is controversial. Imprecise and too conflating, we prefer, at Global Watch Analysis, the more explicit terms “leftist collaborators of Islamism” or “useful idiots of Islam”! However, “Islamo-leftism”, in the sense of the compromise of certain components or movements of the extreme left with Islamism (political or jihadist) does exist. A long investigation carried out in 2004, for the needs of our book “Ben Laden, la destruction programmée de l’Occident” published that year by Jean Picollec, shows that this “Islamo-leftism” does not only kill the debate of ideas in French universities!

 

France: The collaborators of islamism, they dare everything!

France: The collaborators of islamism, they dare everything!

To paraphrase the Michel Audiard of Les Tontons flingueurs, we can say that collaborators dare to do anything. While the jihadist cutthroats are still shedding blood on France, a black flight of peremptory crows is descending on the plateaus and squatting in the newspaper columns. The poisonous honeyed platforms charged with rewriting reality follow one another as if nothing had happened. In any case not what had upset us to the core of our souls: this aftershock of previous earthquakes, five years after the massacre of Charlie Hebdo’s journalists, the attacks on the Bataclan and the Hypercacher.

 

Do battle with the worshipers of the Knife and Bomb Sect!

Do battle with the worshipers of the Knife and Bomb Sect!

A teacher. He was a History teacher who, when teaching the subject of freedom of expression, asked his pupils that this fundamental freedom could shock them out of the classroom. That already says a lot. This teacher was threatened with death on social networks. He knew it. He had filed a complaint. Some parents had even asked him to resign because you understand, freedom of expression is obscene.

 

No, Mr. Erdogan, Tunisia is not a Beylik!

No, Mr. Erdogan, Tunisia is not a Beylik!

Beylik: that’s the word we don’t want to hear anymore in Tunis. Beylik, domain of the bey, vassal of the sultan. Beylik, province or Ottoman “regency”. A word that comes from the well of the centuries, a return of the historical repressed. It was furiously written in the country’s media after the unexpected visit to Tunis of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who came to ask President Kais Saied to support a Turkish intervention in Libya in support of the ill-named “Government of National Accord” of Faiez Sarraj against General Khalifa Haftar. By opening Matmata airport to Turkish military aircraft. But yes, of course, it made sense: the tiny and strategic Tunisia could not but acquiesce to Ankara’s desires. In the spirit of the neo-Great Turk, it had to become again the vassal of the old days.

 

Which takers for the mosques from which Saudi Arabia seeks to separate in the West?

Which takers for the mosques from which Saudi Arabia seeks to separate in the West?

Under the leadership of the new head of the World Islamic League, Mohammed Bin Abdulkarim Al-Issa, a close to the crown prince, Mohammed Bin Salman, Saudi Arabia announced in January that it would separate from the mosques it control in the West and which have long served to spread the Wahhabi ideology. But five months later, Riyadh did not find takers. And this Saudi disengagement raises fears of a takeover of these mosques by even more radical actors. The mosques in question are coveted by some disreputable states, such as Erdogan’s Turkey, and by non-state groups, such as the Muslim Brotherhood or the Salafist movements.

 

France: Covid and the communitarian virus!

France: Covid and the communitarian virus!

It represents a very small card in the jungle of administrative recommendations issued in France on the occasion of deconfinement, but it is a huge step in the fight against communitarianism. This three-page document issued by the Ministry of National Education, under the title of “Coronavirus and the risk of communitarian withdrawal”, is at once unprecedentedly clear-sighted on the complexity of the “spectrum of radical ideas of communitarianism”, on the “techniques and ways of proceeding” of the various “radical groups” carrying out “anti-democratic and anti-republican” projects and on the “conduct to be adopted” to thwart the “separatist” aims of such groups, whether they are “communitarian, authoritarian or unequal”.