Hvis du i dag regner med å bli opp mot 100 år gammel, ville du da ha søkt deg til en lykkelig pensjonisttilværelse i Frankirke?
Hva hvis det var håpløst for franskmenn å protestere mot 2 års høyere pensjonsalder? Ville noen ha turt å si det?
Hvorfor protesterte man for å få anledning til å jobbe 2 år lengre før pensjon (som det kan formuleres)?
Tenk om problemet var et helt annet og forklaringen å hente i helt andre forhold? Så hvorfor ville man ikke snakke om de «egentlige» eller underliggende problemene, eller utforingene, som det så pent heter?
Å snakke om tidligpensjon uten å snakke om senere livskvalitet
og livsmening, er søkt. Noe er galt. Å snakke om materialisme når utfordringen
er av åndelig, ideologisk eller metafysisk karakter, det er det som er
problemet, hvis man våger å se det og si det, uten frykt for å bli kalt rasist,
imperialist og – islamofob.
Hva skjer så egentlig i Frankrike? Som vi ikke ”har noe med»?
En undersøkelse avdekker at 64 prosent av franskmennene vil stoppe ikke-vestlig innvandring til Frankrike, der hele 66 prosent av kvinnene mener det samme. Det er uhyre sjelden at kvinner er strengere enn menn på dette området. Rita Karlsen Publisert: 02.05.2023 - 12:18
https://www.rights.no/2023/05/franske-kvinner-er-vaknet/
Mer som vi “ikke har noe med» langt der ned i Frankrike:
Only one third of migrants to France have found a job.
Employment data shows that it is a myth that immigration to France has economic benefits, French author and academic Jean-Paul Gourévitch said in an interview with Radio Sud.
“I have studied this topic extensively and today everyone in France, from the left to the right agrees that immigration costs more than it brings in,” Gourévitch said. “There is a major difference between left and right (oriented) economists regarding the costs: the leftist economists say the deficit is six to ten billion [euros per year], while those on the right say it is 40 to 44 billion. My own scientific research shows that the deficit is 20 to 25 billion [euros].”
Gourévitch also spoke about the debate in Europe and France whether worsening demographic figures should be improved via immigration or domestic demographic incentives.
…
There is an argument that immigration could to some extent offset the birth rates, because there is a major difference between the birth rates of the domestic population and the migrant one,” he said. “The domestic population has a birth rate of 1.49 (children per couple), while the immigrant population has 2.5 to as many as four children. This (birth rate), however, is gradually declining, as the children of immigrants have fewer children than their parents who, in turn, had fewer children than their parents.”
Bringing in migrants to be able to increase our capacity to pay those retired is in fact a coup,” he said. “The migrants — those who work, of course — will contribute towards pensions, but for the rest it is a real burden for the state.”
Gourévitch also said his own studies showed that after five years of migrants arriving, only one third of migrants had jobs. These statistics mirror other countries which show, for example, in Sweden that most migrants will never become self-sufficient. Other countries like Germany have already spent tens of billions on migrants and plans to spend another €64.5 billion over the next four years.
“All the surveys show that 5 years later, only 33% of migrants [in France] have found work,” said Gourévitch …
Gourévitch
concludes that these economic migrants are costing the French state some 25
billion euros a year. It’s a colossal sum, but some French economists on the
right believe even that is too low; they believe the number is far higher – 44
billion euros annually. How did Gourévitch arrive at this figure? He adds up
the cost to the state of the following: free or subsidized housing for several
million Muslim migrants; free medical care, which is especially expensive
because of the greater incidence of congenital defects among Muslim babies, the
result of societal norms that encourage cousin-marriage; free education, which
includes extra language classes; family allowances (which increase with the
number of children) that were originally intended to encourage French women to
have more children, but it is predominantly Muslim families that now benefit,
for they have the greatest number of children), and unemployment benefits for
the two-thirds of Muslim migrants who remain without jobs. That adds up to the
colossal sums — estimated at from 25 to 44 billion euros — that the economists
calculate are the true costs of immigration.
The cost to France that can be reduced to euros is very great. The cost to the French quality of life is also very great, though it is impossible to assign a euro value to such things as peace of mind, a sense of security, harmony and discipline in the classrooms. …
The French also need, in their immigration policies, to make the fundamental distinction between Muslim migrants, and all others. The Polish plumber, the Rumanian soccer coach, the Hindu restaurateur, the Chinese dry cleaner, are all working and paying into the pension system. They are not exploiting the French welfare state for every last benefit. After arriving in France, they soon find gainful employment. … can discourage Muslim immigrants. Ban the electronically amplified Call to Prayer as a public nuisance. The faithful can be reminded of the Call to Prayer by their iPhone; a muezzin’s wail is not necessary. … Proscribe the sale of halal meat because the slitting of the throat of an animal that has not first been stunned, and the slow bleeding out of that animal, constitute cruelty to animals. Prohibit the wearing of the veil in all public buildings, including all government offices and universities, because the veil makes a “political statement” and violates the French principle of “laicité.” Refuse to restrict public pools to hours for “women only.” Do not allow Muslim prayer rooms in public schools — again, invoke the need to preserve “laicité” in the public sphere ,,,
These workers are already fleeing from the impoverished Marxist dictatorships of Venezuela and Cuba, the poverty and gangs of Honduras, Guatemala, and Mexico, toward the United States, but the United States is ever less willing to take them. Let them instead be taken in by France, Italy, and other Catholic countries in Europe, where because of that shared religious background they can more easily integrate into the host society, so as to provide the semi-skilled labor force needed for jobs in construction, and other kinds of infrastructure, including massive solar energy projects that will require hundreds of thousands of installers on roofs all over France. If these workers from Latin America are brought to France, there would be no need for any Muslim migrants …
Belgia,
(som vi heller ikke har noe med):
"The migration agreements signed with Morocco and Turkey and the extreme benevolence towards the most radical Muslim populations fuel the political clientelism of the left in Belgium", says Causeur. “This opens up a demographic bomb that could make Belgium the first Muslim state in Europe. In Belgium, the Islamists have important relays in the local political class, but also within the Commission and the European Parliament. In May 2021, Sarah Schlitz, Belgian State Secretary for Gender Equality and member of the Greens, appointed a veiled woman Commissioner for Gender Equality”. …
It's simple: democracy is demography. The population of Arab-Muslim origin is very numerous in Belgium, particularly in the Brussels region. All the more difficult as this population is surprisingly homogeneous in terms of origin. The vast majority of Belgium's Muslim population (80 to 90 percent) comes from bilateral agreements signed in 1964 with Morocco and Turkey. Moroccans are today the largest ethnocultural minority in the country. This Moroccan immigration, coming essentially from the Rif, is strongly under Islamist influence.
"However, since Belgium has adopted an integration policy which greatly facilitates obtaining nationality, this population is an electoral issue. Islamists play political cronyism cleverly. They capitalize on their entry into Belgian parties and institutions through their strategy of influence with the European Union”.
And again: “In 2020, according to Statbel, the Belgian statistical office, 67.7 percent of the Belgian population was made up of Belgians of Belgian origin. Ten years ago, the share of the population of Belgian origin was 74.3. The decline is therefore considerable in a few years and should accelerate. As for the share of Muslims in the population, it is expected to increase sharply. According to the Pew Forum of Religion and Public Life, Belgium will thus have 1.149 million Muslims in 2030, an increase of 80.96 percent compared to 2010 (population estimated at 638,000). Demographic dynamics work in favor of this population….
Another study, published in 2020 by the Jean-Jaurès Foundation, shows that while young people in Brussels as a whole are open and tolerant, Arab-Muslim students are the opposite of this trend. Although they vote mainly to the left, out of clientelism, 81 percent of them declare themselves religious and 38 believe that religion takes precedence over civil law. In these conditions it becomes difficult to say that the Great Replacement is a fantasy….
More than one million migrants entered Belgium legally between 2000 and 2010. In the period 2009-2011 alone, family reunification, which accounts for half of all residence permits, enabled 121,000 foreigners to settle in Belgium. Today 20 percent of Charleroi's population is Muslim. And Wallonia, the Charleroi region, between 2007 and 2017 went from 70 to 140 mosques. Doubled in just ten years.
Brussels theaters have been labeled "Ramadan friendly" this year. What is a “Ramadan friendly theatre”? Perhaps one where it puts itself at ban an adaptation of Aristophanes because it is "offensive to Islam" or Christopher Marlowe's Tamerlane because a copy of the Koran is burned?
A story about the Catholic elementary school of Beringen in Flanders has come out in recent days. "More than 80 percent of the students are Muslims." Meanwhile, DH informed us about the calls for Charleroi: "It was a commitment that Mayor Paul Magnette had made with his Socialist-Ecological majority at the beginning of his mandate: to guarantee that a park, a garden and a green public space would be accessible to all residents. The chosen option is the demolition of two churches”.
Today 20 percent of Charleroi's population is Muslim. In Wallonia, the region of Charleroi, between 2007 and 2017 the number of mosques doubled.
Razika Adnani in this week's Marianne magazine explains that this conquest project was outlined by the Egyptian preacher Mohamed al-Ghazali (1917-1996), one of the most influential members of the Muslim Brotherhood: "He describes the West as a depraved and bankrupt world that only Islam can save. On page 16 of a book by him, he quotes the words of a French convert to Islam: 'I imagine all of France converted to Islam! What will happen? You will no longer find drunkards on the street, nor sexuality commercials, nor variety programs. Churches will turn into mosques after they are painted white and shops selling pork will be closed." …
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/370829
Litt mer generelt:
… Haidt: «Oppdelingen av høyreorientert og venstreorientert finnes ikke lenger. Det som finnes er nasjoner og stammer i nasjonen, som begge blir stadig mer selvbevisste og oppsatte på å hevde sin identitet. Haidt forklarer Trumps suksess med at han har talent for å appellere til grupper som føler seg fremmedgjort av konkurrerende grupper. Identitetsvenstre opphøyer det «hellige offer» – etniske minoriteter, som er hevet over enhver kritikk; kvinner; homoseksuelle og innvandrere, kort sagt: alle de gruppene som Hillary Clinton i enhver tale utviste ærbødighet overfor.»
– Men å favorisere utvalgte grupper er å utelukke fravalgte grupper – i dette tilfellet de såkalte etterlatte (left-behinders), definert som «bleke, avlegs, mannlige og mislykkede». I Amerika og Europa er eldre, hvite menn den eneste gruppen venstreliberale straffritt kan falle over og utstøte. Dette er en gruppe som er klart dominerende i små byer og de såkalte rustbeltene, fra hvor de på avstand kan betrakte de fjerne storbyene, globaliserte, digitaliserte, universitetsutdannede og politisk korrekte, oppsummerer Jenkins.
https://www.rights.no/2023/03/det-er-deprimerende-a-vaere-venstreorientert-viser-forskning/
Og i England – som vi absolutt ikke har noe med?
…
The talks came as Mr Jenrick in his speech cited an “an extensive body of research that demonstrates the damaging effects on social trust and cohesion from uncontrolled migration” as he defended the Bill’s radical and contested approach, which will put a duty on the Government to detain and deport nearly all Channel asylum seekers.
“I saw
this myself in the early days in this position, when I met residents of
Aycliffe, an estate in Dover, whose lives have been made a misery by illegal
migrants who have made clandestine landings on the nearby beaches – knocking on
their doors, entering their homes being found in their kitchens,” Mr Jenrick
said.
“They felt abandoned by the authorities, and it’s strange for their neighbourhood.
“If we don’t have confidence that those who live in our communities do so lawfully, Individuals are less likely to trust their neighbours, or to make sacrifices which sustain communities.
“Put simply, excessive, uncontrolled migration threatens to cannibalise that compassion that marks out the British people.
“And those crossing tend to have completely different lifestyles and values to those in the UK and tend to settle in already hyper diverse areas, undermining the cultural cohesiveness that binds diverse groups together and makes our proud multi-ethnic democracy so successful.”
Asked what he meant about lifestyles, Mr Jenrick said it was important to ensure public services do not come under pressure.
““We as
a government believe that our resources are finite, and there have to be limits
to the number of people coming into this country,” he said ...
https://www.frontpagemag.com/why-liberal-caring-is-cruel/
Fra egen base og litt om hva som skjer andre steder, bl a i Tyskland:
https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2023/04/frykt-forvirrede-flelser-sensur-og.html
https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2023/04/mer-om-det-store-selvbedraget.html
https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2023/04/eliten-er-like-lite-empatisk-som-like.html
https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2023/04/den-uutholdelige-utholdenhet-hvordan-og.html
https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2023/03/bnnerop-og-eiendomsrett-til-landet.html
https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2023/03/islamofobien-som-splitter-kristne-na-i.html
Forsto venstresiden dette for mange år siden?
https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2011/06/vil-venstresiden-na-endelig-forsta-det.html
https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2023/03/den-store-fordrivelsen.html
https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2023/03/opplysningen-tilfangetatt-frihet.html
https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2021/12/om-keiser-trajan-oljefondet-vart-og.html
https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2020/11/salsal-na-en-muslimsk-islamkritiker-ser.html
https://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2017/05/om-den-franske-flukt-fra-friheten.html
http://neitilislam.blogspot.com/2023/04/hva-vi-ikke-fikk-fortalt-vare.html
Noen ytterligere tilnærminger i vår blindvinkel, (fra
linken over):
… It is not the first time former DGSE director and former ambassador Pierre Brochand has made public calls for a complete change to immigration policies while warning against France becoming poorer and possibly descending into civil war. However, hearing him doing so during a discussion with a top civil servant in the person of the director of the French Office for Immigration and Integration (OFII) on France Culture, a state-owned radio station that is part of the very left-wing and pro-immigration Radio France network, is something unusual in Emmanuel Macron’s France.
True, the presenter of the April 1 radio show titled “Face à l’immigration” (“Facing immigration”) was Alain Finkielkraut, a philosopher, writer, and radio presenter who is not particularly known for his political correctness, in particular on the subject of immigration.
Didier Leschi, OFII’s director, did not try to hide the true numbers about immigration like Interior Minister Générald Darmanin usually does. So, both men, Didier Leschi and former intelligence chief Pierre Brochand, were able to talk about an agreed-upon set of data regarding immigration levels: 320,000 new residence permits delivered in 2022 plus 156,000 asylum seekers and an additional number of 400,000 illegal immigrants benefiting from free medical care, plus a few hundred thousand who have not yet asked for the free migrants’ medical care scheme, which means their number is unknown. As Leschi commented during the radio show, such illegal immigrants are usually granted a residence permit after five years of illegal residence in France. This, of course, acts as a pull factor contributing to the rising wave of illegal immigrants that are now flooding Italy.
Those illegal immigrants enter Western Europe mainly through Italy, which is closest to the Tunisian and Libyan ports where the smugglers’ boats, overloaded with Muslim migrants, leave from to cross the Mediterranean. But they do not stay in Italy. Many of them head to France, where the benefits the government provides to immigrants are much more extensive than in Italy.
Reacting to those numbers, Brochand characterized the kind of immigration France has been experiencing for the last 50 years as “endured” and not chosen, “massive,” “on the rise,” “concentrated in isolated clusters,” “creating a snowball effect,” “with no historical precedence,” and “driven not by political decision-makers nor by economic players but by judges.” In addition, it is “culturally remote as it comes almost exclusively from what we used to call the Third World,” “conflictual,” “economically dysfunctional,” “costly for public finances,” “unpopular according to polls,” and “mostly irreversible.”
As a matter of fact, Brochand insisted, such massive immigration of low-qualified people from failed states has been pulling France down, making it poorer and causing a sharp degradation in the quality of its public services….
Immigration undoubtedly leads to lower salaries for the less qualified workers, and the only beneficiaries among workers are the immigrants themselves, as they see their income increase manyfold compared with what they could earn in their home countries. At the same time, the employers benefit by paying less for the work done, and the countries of origin are happy with the money transferred home by immigrant workers, which also means money is flowing out of their host country. Brochard estimates that this flow of money out of France amounts to an astounding $1 trillion since the 1970s.
Leschi himself had to acknowledge during that discussion on France Culture that there have never been so many immigrants in France, with 7 million people (out of 68 million inhabitants) who were born abroad, including 2.5 million who have since acquired citizenship….
Curiously, on April 9, the head of the French Catholic episcopate, archbishop Éric de Moulins-Beaufort, said about immigration on the KTO TV channel that “those who are delusional are the ones who try to make us believe that it can be stopped.”
His remark would appear to apply to former DGSE director Pierre Brochand, with the Catholic archbishop insisting that we must prepare to better welcome arrivals and be ready to live in a different society….
The Archbishop Éric de Moulins-Beaufort may have a redolent name, but his is a counsel of despair. He defames as “delusional” those who, like Brochand, are alarmed but unwilling to give up, unlike Moulins-Beaufort, for if they were in total despair they would not even try to sound a tocsin, and to outlline, as Brochand does, a program to confront the peril of mass immigration of Muslims into France.
Pierre Brochand will not succumb, as the Archbishop is clearly prepared to do, to what Moulins-Beaufort considers to be inevitable. He knows he is not “delusional”; it is those who are minimizing, or ignoring, the threat to the French nation of the current wave of immigration, who are the truly “delusional.” He is not prepared to give up on France, not prepared to have his grandchildren leave France for other shores, autres rivages, most likely in North America, especially Québec. The truly “delusional” are those who, like the Archbishop, pretend to themselves that all manner of things shall be well in the end, as long as the French offer a “better welcome to arrivals” (they don’t feel sufficiently welcomed, apparently) and are “ready to live in a different society.”
Why should they do either? As to “better welcoming” these Muslim economic migrants, how much more should the French state lavish on these immigrants who came, uninvited, to France? They already receive free or heavily subsidized housing, free medical care, free education, unemployment benefits (without having a work history), family allowances, and more. This aid is costing the French state billions of euros every year. And in addition, Brochand calculates that since the 1970s, the total amount of money that immigrants send back to their countries of origin to a staggering one trillion dollars. What more must they do to make these immigrants feel “welcome”? Provide summer homes in Biarritz or St. Tropez? Apartments on the Avenue Foch? Sailboats on the Seine? A chateau along the Loire? And why should the French be asked to prepare “to live in a different society”? Why not, instead, mobilize the “plain people” of France to throw out the political and media elites who have not been up to the task of preventing any more mass immigration, and replace them with people such as Eric Zemmour, who in 2022 ran unsuccessfully for President, or Philippe De Villiers, or Alain Finkielkraut, or Marine Le Pen, people who have a keen sense of what must be done to ensure that the French will not have to live, unwillingly, in a very “different society”?
Pierre Brochand, perfectly lucid and keen-sighted, not at all “delusional” as the intolerably complacent Archbishop suggests, spells out the immigration problem in great and alarming detail, not to spread despair, but as a way to encourage his fellow Frenchmen to think rationally, and even with hope, about the problem. He sets out what he believes can, and must, be done, if not to put a complete halt to Muslim immigration, at least to greatly reduce it to manageable proportions. This is not a counsel of despair, but rather, an encouragement to act. The futures of his children and grandchildren in France clearly fill him with anxiety, but instead of letting such thoughts paralyze him, Brochand chooses to offer an outline of what must be done to put an end to the mass immigration of Muslims from both North and sub-Saharan Africa, and to engage in a relentless policy of lowering the benefits made available to immigrants already in France, making France less welcoming in the hope that some will choose to re-migrate back to their countries of origin. Unlike the Archbishop, whose Church is universal in its calling, Pierre Brochand thinks in terms of the nation-state; he remains a French patriot, a nationalist in a good sense, who doesn’t want to see his country –“douce France, cher pays de mon enfance,” to strike a musical note — transformed into something alien, impoverished, and violent.
In the same conversation with Leschi and Finkielkraut, the former intelligence agency head said that in France already 40 percent of children aged between 0 and 4 are of immigrant origin.
Brochand sets out what he believes must be done to avoid an implosion of the state, or to prevent a succession of violent explosions between Muslims and the indigenous French, leading to a state of open civil war.
“We have reached such a point,” Brochand said, “that the reaction can only be extreme.”
The reaction, in Brochand’s eyes, can only be to divide legal immigration by 10, divide the access to nationality by 10, divide by a multiple of 10 the visas for nationals of high-risk countries, cancel everything that makes France socially attractive, and abolish all the rewards granted to cheating — like regularizing the stay of illegal immigrants or giving them access to free medical care. In addition, France must reduce the size of the diasporas by not renewing residence permits and have a very targeted natalist policy to boost the ethnic French population.
To that purpose, the most important thing to do, according to Brochand, is “to take back control of the legal instruments that are indispensable for action, that have passed into the hands of the judges, and that must be given back to the legislators by various means.”
Brochand also advocates just ignoring “the intimidating discourse that is imposed on us and in particular the accusations of racism and fascism,” which he considers to be pure moral blackmail reflecting a specific ideology.
“Racist,” “fascist,” and “Islamophobe” — these are the trinity of words meretriciously employed to shut people up, to keep them from expressing their alarm over mass migration by Muslims. Brochand describes these words as a kind of “moral blackmail,” and counsels us, quite rightly, to ignore them.
In what may be troubling news for the French population, the former diplomat and former intelligence director does not think there is currently enough courage among the French political class to do all this, so for the time being, France seems set to continue on its very dangerous course, increasingly becoming the immigration-sick man of Europe.
But, Brochand shows by example, all is not yet lost, Cometh the hour, cometh the man. There is still hope of political change percolating upwards from the people to those who claim to lead them. Not at once, but there is steady progress shown in public opinion. New opinion polls confirm that the majority of the French now believe that Muslim immigration must be greatly reduced. Here is the latest evidence of how support for immigration has plummeted:
A recent national study revealed that almost 1 in 2 people who affiliate with French left-leaning parties think there are now too many immigrants in the country.
The number of those on the left of French politics who believe the level of immigration into the country is too high has almost doubled in the last four years, according to a new study.
An in-depth survey, conducted by French research and consulting group, BVA France, observed a hardening on the topic of immigration across the French public when compared with the same study conducted in 2018.
Nearly seven out of 10 French people (69 percent) believe “there are too many immigrants in France today,” a view that has seen an increase in support of six points compared to the 2018 study. However, when analyzing the attitude of those who affiliate with left-leaning political parties, this statement is supported by 48 percent, up 21 points in just five years.
The notion that France now welcomes too many immigrants is naturally one that receives majority support from voters for the National Rally (95 percent) and Reconquête! (93 percent). However, even within Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s left-wing populist party, La France Insoumise, a majority of supporters (51 percent) agree with the statement, and one in two (50 percent) supporters of Europe Écologie Les Verts (“The Greens”) agree with the statement. This is an increase of 20 percent and 22 percent, respectively, in support of the statement among those who affiliate themselves with the two left-wing parties when compared to the 2018 study.
Anti-immigration attitudes continue to steadily increase, and harden, among the people of France. This is the key finding of the latest opinion polls: seven out of ten French people believe “there are too many immigrants in France today.” Macron and his ilk are yesterday’s men; they do not represent, in their flailing about on the subject of immigration, the people of France, who now express strong popular opposition to further immigration. Nor do they seem capable of grappling with the problem of those economic migrants already in the country who are such a drain on France’s wealth. But that is not the only loss. Brochand says that since the 1970s, in addition to what has been spent on the migrants in benefits, more billions were sent home by these migrants to their countries of origin. He estimates the total cost of these Muslim migrants to France over the past 50 years, amounts to one trillion dollars.
The current leaders must be replaced by those who understand, and share, Pierre Brochand’s alarm. It is not “delusional,” as the Archbishop claims, to think that nothing can be done, first to halt immigration from Muslim lands, and second, to make France less welcoming to those Muslim immigrants who are already in the country. Every time Brochand appears on television and speaks as he has been speaking, every time Alain Finkielkraut manages to interview him and the other opponents of Muslim immigration like Renaud Camus (who first coined the phrase “The Great Replacement”), every time Eric Zemmour makes a speech or comes out with a best-selling book such as Le Suicide français, selling hundreds of thousands of copies, which warns the French, yet again, about the threat of this mass Muslim migration, and about a political class that refuses to see what is staring them in the face, progress is made.
Macron is clearly not up to the task of dealing with immigration. Nor is his Interior Minister, Gerard Darmanin, who once seemed to hold such promise. But there are mayors all over France who see the effect of Muslim migrants in their cities, and who are prepared to act at the local level. There are brilliant journalists like Zemmour, who in 2021 started his own political party, La Reconquête, which is devoted to one issue: Muslim immigration. In all the polls, Marine Le Pen is now predicted to win the next election. Not nearly as brilliant as Zemmour, but solid and reliable, she has promised to drastically curtail immigration from Muslim countries. Can France hold on until Macron’s second and final quinquennium is over, and he is replaced by someone who has absorbed the lesson Pierre Brochand has for the last several years been trying to make the French public hear?
Ingen kommentarer:
Legg inn en kommentar