Marine Le Pen: “The Time for Denial and Hypocrisy Has Passed”

After the massacre in Paris yesterday, Marine Le Pen, the leader of the Front National, appeared on French television to address her fellow countrymen about what had just happened.

Many thanks to Oz-Rita for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:


00:00   My dear compatriots: France is in mourning,
00:04   hit by a terrible attack in the very heart of Paris on the premises of
00:08   Charlie Hebdo. Our country has not known such barbarity in decades.
00:12   The nation is united in condemning this foul attack, and
00:16   joins in the grief of the families. The nation is united in
00:20   declaring its visceral attachment to freedom of information and the media,
00:24   which, of course, was the target. But the nation is also united
00:28   in declaring that we, the French people, of whatever origin, will never accept
00:32   attempts on our lives and our freedom. Because this IS their aim,
00:36   to endanger our lives and our freedom. But
00:40   we are lucid enough to know that these attacks on our country
00:44   are not the consequence of destiny. They come from men
00:48   often hardened and trained; they come via a murderous ideology
00:52   which at this very moment causes thousands of deaths in the world.
00:56   The aim of these barbaric acts is to terrorise,
01:00   to paralyse by fear, to defeat or to censure
01:04   And, undeniably, after this act has traumatised the entire nation,
01:09   the fear is here. It is my responsibility
01:13   to tell you that the fear must be overcome and to say that this attack
01:17   must free our speech, our response to the Islamic fundamentalism.
01:21   Not to be silent, and to start daring to name what has happened
01:25   Not fearing to say the words: this was a terrorist attack
01:29   committed in the name of “Radical Islamism”.
01:33   The time for denial and hypocrisy has passed.
01:37   The absolute rejection of fundamental Islamism must be declared loud and strong
01:41   by those who hold life and freedom as their most precious values.
01:45   Facing things is the efficient and protective action
01:49   to take. Why have we arrived at this point?
01:54   What was the path of these assassins?
01:58   What is the extent of radical Islamic networks on our soil, their financing? What countries
02:02   support them? The questions are many, and they are legitimate.
02:06   The debate must occur; nothing must hinder it. Asking the right questions
02:10   and coming up with frank and clear answers. Taking measures
02:14   to protect our country and compatriots is the right of all our citizens,
02:18   but it is above all a duty of all politicians.
02:22   I intend to assume this daunting responsibility in order
02:26   to allow France to defend herself in this war which has been declared against her.
02:30   I wish to underline that nobody wants to confuse
02:34   our Muslim compatriots who are attached to our nation
02:38   and to her values with those who kill in the name of Islam.
02:43   But this obvious refusal to amalgamate must not be an excuse for inertia
02:47   or denial; this would be the worst service we could render
02:51   to French people of whatever origin.

36 thoughts on “Marine Le Pen: “The Time for Denial and Hypocrisy Has Passed”

  1. The problem is Fundamental Islam, but what separates the Muslim who clings to French nationality or any other nationality and considered to be moderate, from the fundamentalist kind of Muslim? His lack of praying five times a day? His partaking of haram alcoholic beverages instead of halal drugs? His making of friends with the infidel? His non-hatred of the Jew? His suspicion of those whom he considers to be fundamentalist Muslim?

    What test do we apply to detect any recognizable differences between the fundamentalist Muslim and the so called moderate? What happens when we believe those who have been labelled as moderate still choose to do the Jihad and become martyrs for Islam? Is there any real difference between the fundamentalist and the moderate that we as Westerners who generally take things at face value until proven otherwise, can safely differentiate between those Muslims who will choose to do us harm and those who will not?

    If there is, what is that test?

    • A moderate muslim is simply like a civilian in the Third Reich: he hasn’t received his orders yet.

      • That’s funny. However, I beg to differentiate between people who (a) have been drafted into the service of regimes that were wildly atypical of anything in their history and the full extent of whose crimes were not obvious even until after the war and (b) who serve “regimes” whose record in the previous 1,400 years is well known to them.

        I’ve read several individual accounts of Germans who served in the Wehrmacht who seemed as familiar to me as many a decent GI I encountered in our military.

        • Check out the history of Rommel – from Wikipedia (a pinko site – but even they find naught to besmirch this soldier)…

          “Rommel is regarded as having been a humane and professional officer.[4] His Afrika Korps was never accused of war crimes, and soldiers captured during his Africa campaign were reported to have been treated humanely.[5] Orders to kill Jewish soldiers, civilians and captured commandos were ignored.[6] Late in the war, Rommel was linked to the conspiracy to assassinate Adolf Hitler. Because Rommel was a national hero, Hitler desired to eliminate him quietly. He forced Rommel to commit suicide with a cyanide pill, in return for assurances that Rommel’s family would not be persecuted following his death. He was given a state funeral, and it was announced that Rommel had succumbed to his injuries from an earlier strafing of his staff car in Normandy.”

    • There is only Islam says Erdo from Turkey as he loads up and see off another transport full of “desperate refugees” and other highly contagious brothers from the Muslim funny farm bound for Europe to do the Alah Devils work – on beaucoup dimes from the hated kufar.

    • The test should be support of sharia law one of whose precepts the most recent murderers were enforcing – that nothing about Islam can be criticized, let alone ridiculed. That’s sharia law that Muslim terrorists are enforcing on non-Muslims in our own countries.

      A “moderate” by Western definition who is Muslim should be protesting against sharia law being imported to western countries even to apply to them, let alone non-Muslims. So the Muslims pushing for sharia law to be applied in their own ghettos in the West have already declared themselves unsuitable for western citizenship as sharia contradicts many Western principles including freedom of speech, association, religion and equal treatment of women.

      If it comes to denying permission to immigrate or deportations, how many Muslims would lie (takiya type of lying to gain strategic advantage for Allah being encouraged in Muslim teachings) about their desire for sharia law? We cannot separate the sheep from the goats except by their behavior, not words. Where are the mythical millions of “moderate” Muslims in the West abjuring first terrorism and secondly sharia? Are they enlisting in western militaries to fight against the encroachment of “extremist” Islam? Are they mobilizing thousands to protest terrorism in their name as they do when they claim to be offended by teddy bears named Mohammed or ice cream swirls that resemble the Arabic for Allah? Moderate Muslims are likely mere delusions in the leftist multicultist’s mind as they’ve given NO actual sign of existing in any numbers. If moderates exist and are the majority as the fairy tale goes, they would have safety in numbers. Western leaders must pressure Muslim citizens to declare their loyalty to WESTERN principles by denouncing sharia for themselves in the West. Muslims who insist on sharia law have 57 nations or almost 1/3 of existing nations to choose from. Muslims are colonists of the West and allies of terrorists until they publicly protest against sharia. You can take that to the bank (and not the sharia bank).

      • Laine, I truly believe that the only test the West can use against the Muslim citizen is to have them all swear allegiance to the country they live in and to individually renounce Islam if they wish to remain citizens of that country – that can be the only true test applied to an ideology that encourages lying to further its own cause.

  2. It’s a good baby step; but she’s still using the cacophemisms “Islamism” and “Radical Islamism” and “fundamental Islamism”; and she has to add that PC MC spasm:

    “02:30 I wish to underline that nobody wants to confuse
    02:34 our Muslim compatriots who are attached to our nation
    02:38 and to her values with those who kill in the name of Islam.”

    Until the West learns that there is no such thing as a “Muslim compatriot” of any Western polity, this problem will continue to fester and metastasize.

    • It’s France and she has to watch what she says. It’s going to take a lot more French being slaughtered before the speech restrictions are lifted and a honest public discussion can be had as opposed to those behind closed doors.

      Look the French government is still totally delusional. They stationed two unarmed police officers outside the magazine’s offices, that was their idea of security. And their laws in regards to terrorism are a joke.

      But fear not the MSM and political class of the U.S. isn’t far behind. Islam is rapidly becoming the word that must not be spoken in conjunction with terrorist acts. Like I said before, it’s the Lord Voldemort syndrome. People think if they simply not speak of it, it ceases to exist.

    • A devout Muslim is never “American”, or “French” or “English” or “Canadian” with prime loyalty to the non-Muslim country he inhabits. His prime loyalty is to Allah and therefore to the borderless worldwide Muslim community or ummah. He is enjoined by his faith to add territory to that community and is therefore a colonist in the West, not a western citizen and far from a patriot.

  3. No one ever unpacks these words: fundamentalist, radical, extremist. Fundamental simply means ‘basic’, radical means ‘to the root’ and extremist means ‘taking things to the extreme’. None of those words describe Muslims who engage in jihad and revenge, as per Islamic doctrine. These words are simply used to describe the tenets of Islam that are contrary to Christianity or Western Culture.

  4. The French Parliament recently recognized “Palestine”. It didn’t help, did it? Some day in the not too distant future France itself will be Palestine.

  5. Stop nitpicking. Who are you to tell Marine Lepine what to say? I think her speech encapuslated what many French people are feeling. I also liked what Sarkosy had to say. Will France ever be the same after this horror? Will the old press ever get away with saying, only 970 cars burned by youths on New Years Eve, down from last year, as tho it’s a good thing? I think not. France must stop denying and act. As must all free countries.

  6. At the very core, I believe we all have the instinct for survival, as individuals, as members of a family, and deeper yet, as part of a nation or simply as human beings who value life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The stakes are being ratcheted up one incident like this at a time, forcing us to face small moments of clarity in regards to what kind of future we are currently facing, breaking through all the “weapons of mass distraction” that hold us in a mostly false reality until the brutal truth slaps us hard in the face. Unfortunately, the grim reality may well be that this kind of senseless brutality will have to multiply exponentially before all bets are off and the sleeping giant finally awakes to take care of the business at hand. The enemies roots have sunken in deep, planted by the architects of destruction(islam), and the compliant multi cult diversity mongers that spread the “fertilizer”. Can any sane person see a peaceful outcome on the horizon? If so, explain…

    • I don’t think they can see a peaceful outcome. I was talking with my 17yr old son this morning about the Islam-Europe situation: War is coming I said. His reply: How else can it be?

    • I think Ms Le Pen is a better politician than Mr Wilders. Or perhaps her audience is more receptive to her message.

  7. “The problem is Fundamental Islam, …”

    No. I’d argue from the other side of the coin. The problem is Frenchmen who are ashamed to lay claim to France, Englishmen who are ashamed to lay claim to England and Swedes who are ashamed to lay claim to Sweden.

    Each and every people, Muslims included, deserve a homeland, ruled by them, for the sole benefit of their kith and kin.

    Islam, fundamental or otherwise, is not the problem. The problem is people who have forgotten their blood and their history and have been convinced to view their country as a hotel for all the peoples of the world to take residence in.

    • Muslims have 57 countries or nearly 1/3 of existing countries ruled by them. Yet they demand the right to encroach into all western countries achieving equal rights WHILE DENYING such rights to any non-Muslim in the areas they control. 0/57 Muslim states give equal rights to non-Muslims. There is NO RECIPROCITY.

      The Mid-East has cleansed itself of Christians and Jews and is trying to push out Israel. It is no different from China being only for China, India being only for East Indians, the entire continent of Africa for blacks, the continent of South America plus Central America for hispanics. THE ONLY NATIONS DENIED A PLACE OF THEIR OWN are European white Christian founded nations. They are the only ones required to embrace suicidal multicult to “prove” that they’re not racists. Apparently everyone else can be as racist as they like up to and including vestiges of slavery in Africa, the Middle East, India etc.

      What is wrong with this picture and what can the future be with such a picture where everyone but whites gets to say: “What’s mine is mine. What’s yours is mine too”. Multiculturalism is a euphemism for anti-white and Arab/Muslim immigration is one tentacle.

      • “Muslims have 57 countries or nearly 1/3 of existing countries ruled by them. Yet they demand the right to encroach into all western countries…”

        Muslims, or anyone, can demand whatever they wish. But they get nothing unless it’s given to them or they take it by force.

        “They are the only ones required to embrace suicidal multicult to “prove” that they’re not racists.”

        Westerners aren’t required to embrace multiculturalism. They are pressured into it and rather than fight back they allow it to be imposed upon them.

        “THE ONLY NATIONS DENIED A PLACE OF THEIR OWN are European white Christian founded nations”

        European Christian nations are not denied a place of their own. They refuse to claim and fight for a place of their own.

    • Islam has been the problem for 1400 years anon61. The West has a long history of dealing with its traitors and we became better for it, but the West today is being very myopic in not recognizing the existential threat that Islam represents to what are still the most civilized cultures on this planet.

      We will be one day rid of our current Traitor Class, but Islam will still remain Islam.

      And if Islam remains, it will forever be a threat to the West while ever we refuse to accept its 1400 year history of aggression against us.

      • I would agree that Islam is a problem, but it’s not THE problem.

        “…it will forever be a threat to the West while ever we refuse to accept its 1400 year history of aggression against us.”

        Yes. But our refusal to accept Islam’s 1400 year history is OUR problem.

        Islam would be an irritation, like a small town bully, but never an existential threat, to unashamed, self-confident Western nations.

      • “They are a problem because they were allowed to be here.”

        We are the problem because we invited them here.

  8. Dear Muslim protester,
    Where do I begin? Having watched you shout and scream in front of the world’s television cameras, throw petrol bombs and smash windows, I reluctantly decided to write this open letter to you.
    Let me be blunt: you and I have little in common other than our shared Islamic faith, our common belief that there is no God but God and Muhammad is His Messenger. You live in a Muslim-majority country, where religion (or should that be religious extremism?) defines the boundaries of political debate and the limits of free speech; I was born and brought up in the liberal, secular west as a member of a minority Muslim community.
    If I’m honest, I have to say that, listening to your belligerent rhetoric and watching your violent behaviour, I struggle to recognise the Islam in which you profess to believe. My Islamic faith is based on the principles of peace, moderation and mercy; it revolves around the Quranic verses “There is no compulsion in religion” (2:256) and “Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion” (109:6). Yours is a faith disfigured by anger, hate and paranoia.
    Please do not misunderstand me: yes, you have every right to be angry. I have no time for those neoconservatives here in the west who airily dismiss “false grievances” in the Middle East and beyond. Muslims have much to be aggrieved over – from Bagram to Guantanamo Bay, from Abu Ghraib to Haditha, from US soldiers urinating on the Quran to the spate of racist films and cartoons depicting our beloved prophet as a terrorist/murderer/paedophile/rapist/ delete-as-applicable.
    Anger, however, is not an excuse for extremism. Have you not read this saying by the Prophet? “The strong is not the one who overcomes the people by his strength, but the strong is the one who controls himself while in anger.”
    Today, 14 centuries later, too many of us seem to have lost all self-control. Your fanatical counterparts on the Christian evangelical right have a phrase they often deploy: “WWJD”, or “What would Jesus do?”. Perhaps you and your fellow protesters should ask “WWMD”: what would Muhammad do? Would the Prophet endorse your violent attacks on foreign embassies and schools, on police stations and shops?
    We both know the answer. As a child, you will have been taught, like me, about how Muhammad was verbally and physically abused by the pagan worshippers of Mecca – but never responded in kind. The Quran calls him a “mercy for all of creation”.
    But your anger has blinded you. You tell foreign reporters you are protesting against injustice – but the fight for justice begins at home. Where were you and your fellow flag-burners when a poor, 14-year-old Christian girl in Pakistan was arrested on trumped-up charges of “blasphemy” in August and threatened with the death penalty? Where are you today when the Syrian regime continues to wage war against its own (Muslim) people? Why do you not protest outside the embassies of the Bahraini regime, which tortures and tear-gasses its (Muslim) citizens?
    You say you love the Prophet and cannot bear to see him abused, yet in Saudi Arabia the house of the Prophet’s first wife, Khadija, was flattened to make way for a public toilet, while the house where Muhammad was born is now overshadowed by a royal palace. Where is your rage against the Saudi regime? Or is your selfprofessed love for the Prophet just a cynical expression of crude anti-Americanism?
    You and I have long complained of the west’s double standards in the Middle East; it is time for us to recognise that Muslims are guilty of equally egregious double standards. Egyptian state television has broadcast a series based on the infamous anti-Semitic forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Pakistani television channels regularly air programmes demonizing the country’s Ahmadiyya community. Islamic scholars appear in online videos ridiculing the core beliefs of Judaism and Christianity. Yet you and your allies demand special protection for your religion and your prophet. Why? Is your faith so weak, so brittle? Muhammad, lest we forget, survived Dante’s Inferno. Trust me, he’ll survive a 14-minute clip on YouTube.
    Own goal
    Perhaps the greatest irony, and tragedy, is that by publicising the online insults directed at the Prophet, you have given the wretched “Sam Bacile”, the maker of the offensive movie, and his Islamophobic, evangelical Christian ally, Steve Klein, a victory they could never have achieved on their own. Need I remind you that when the full-length film, Innocence of Muslims, was released earlier this year, it was shown only once, to an audience of fewer than ten people, at a run-down cinema in California?
    Meanwhile, the reputational damage done to our faith – exacerbated, I hasten to add, by lazy journalists in the west who cannot seem to distinguish between Islam and its adherents – has been immense. Have you not seen the cover of Newsweek magazine? “Muslim rage”, screams the headline.
    But I have some (bad) news for you (and, for that matter, Newsweek). You represent no one but yourself. You do not speak for Islam or for the Prophet. Nor are you representative of the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims. In a recent Gallup survey conducted in ten Muslim-majority countries, representing more than 80 per cent of the global Muslim population, believers, when asked what they admired most about the west, cited political freedoms, fair trials and…wait for it…freedom of speech.
    Your actions undermine not just the great religion of Islam but a worldwide Muslim community, or umma, whose members want to live in peace and freedom despite the provocations from the bigots, phobes and haters.
    Like freedom, tolerance is not a western invention or innovation; it is an Islamic virtue. As the great Muslim caliph Ali ibn Abu Talib once wrote: “Remember that people are of two kinds: they are either your brothers in religion or your brothers in mankind.”
    Yours faithfully, Mehdi.

    Mehdi Hasan is an NS contributing writer and the political director of The Huffington Post UK.

      • I would also be interested in the answer to your question. He presents a false picture of Mohammed as a lover not a fighter as though we are so ignorant that we don’t know about abrogation, the later hostile violence-inciting verses of the Koran invalidating the earlier peaceful ones when Mohammed was in a weak position unable to make war. Mr. Hasan may be just a more subtle skilled takiya artist than most.

        • Mehdi Hasan is a rare being, a leftist muslim. He is given far more publicity than he deserves.

    • Long winded and at the end of the day more Muslim bs. Islam is a lie. Islam is the ideology of savages. If you all left our countries to-morrow you would not be missed. The Spanish had it exactly right all those years ago. Unfortunately our left sting scorpions injected you into our blod stream and we now find ourselves prepaing for a war that would never have been had you been confined to road sweeping in Germany. You think we all ignorant idiots?

  9. It is interesting that the BBC World Service has made no mention of this, neither have they deigned to interview Ms Le Pen, having interviewed almost everyone else on the subject – even a representative of CAIR

  10. Bert said

    ‘Marine Le Pen could take lessons from Geert Wilders in how to deal with islam’

    If you read GoV regularly you will know that M Le Pen is ‘learning’ from Wilders ‘how to deal with Islam’. The two are close allies in Nationalist Parties in Western Europe, opposed to Islam, EU-sceptic, anti the Eurocurrency. The two parties did well in the local and Euro Elections last year (matched by UKIP in the UK). The MEP’s from the two parties work together in the Euro Parliament (Farage will not let his UKIP MEP’s have any dealings with them and UKIP sit in a different group in the EU Parliament).

    Syed posts a long statement from Mehdi Hasan. For a professional journalist Hasan’s statement is poorly laid out with confusing grammar and vocabulary. Not only is he a political director for HuffPo UK he is also a regular contributor to Al Jazeera English (the AJ feed from Doha/London shown in Europe and mid East not the US transmission).

  11. Comparing a Moderate Muslim to the Wehrmacht is idiocy, it has been proven that the Wehrmacht murdered far more civilians than Islam has to date. The proper comparison is between the SS and Islam, though even the SS did not embrace suicide as a means of killing Jews.
    The link between Hitler and Islam is manifest, the Grand Mufti sent large numbers of men to be trained and used against the Allies.
    Persia changed it’s name to ‘Aryan’ and Mien Kamph is still a #1 selling book there

Comments are closed.