Marine Le Pen: “Control the borders! No more mosques!”

Marine Le Pen is the leader of the Front National in France. In the following two-part television interview, she expressed some forthright opinions about the accelerating Islamization of France, and what must be done to stop it.

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

Part 1

Part 2

Transcript Part 1:

0:00   One reason why we are in difficulty today is because they don’t do their job.
0:04   We must take back control of our borders, we must immediately suspend
0:08   Schengen to be able to monitor who enters, who leaves, what arms
0:12   transit via our borders. Immigration must be stopped.
0:16   We must attack sectarianism and the rise of fundamental
0:20   Islamism in our country. I tell you clearly
0:24   we must TODAY freeze the construction of new mosques
0:28   while we verify the origin of their financing,
0:32   because we know that finances enter our country.
0:36   How can we freeze them if we don’t know their origin? We freeze and then survey
0:40   and verify. Listen, if one is incapable of finding out
0:44   precisely which are the financial streams
0:48   that construct this or that mosque, then let’s pull up the drawbridge: the Government can resign
0:52   and make way for people who know what to do. With what will you replace
0:57   these foreign finances? For more than 100 years…
1:01   because you will not push Muslims into clandestinity?
1:05   Sir, for more than 100 years French law has obliged places of worship to be financed by the faithful.
1:09   Until now this never posed a problem.
1:13   So I think this freeze on the construction of any new mosque is necessary because
1:17   it is evident there is financing which we are not able to verify.
1:21   These finances must be verified.
1:25   If one would use a tiny fraction of the energy and means used to survey
1:29   the candidates of Front National on social media etc.,
1:33   if they were used to survey radical imams
1:37   or other fundamentalist recruiters, we would probably
1:42   be (unclear – better off?)

Transcript Part 2:

0:00   Do you agree with (Prime Minister) Manuel Vals, who plans a
0:04   formal training of imams in France? No, because this is
0:08   a violation of the Law of 1905.
0:12   Sermons must be held in French in the mosques. Mosques must be monitored
0:16   All mosques but but but… As is done in Muslim countries. Algeria monitors
0:20   mosques, they monitor what is said, they survey
0:24   who preaches, we know that. The Front National stopped
0:28   in 2012 during the Congress of UOIF (Union of Islamic Organisations in France)
0:32   two or three preachers who called for the assassination of Jews ,
0:36   and it’s because we spoke out that their visas were denied.

27 thoughts on “Marine Le Pen: “Control the borders! No more mosques!”

  1. Many of the ‘right noises’ are beginning to be heard from within Europe that is also alerting the Traitor Class who will no doubt double their efforts in countering those ‘noises’.

    And I must state my appreciation for having videos transcribed for my internet access is limited and videos tend to take more download space than the written word.

    A BIG thank you for that!

    • It’s also good for those of us who are too impatient to sit thru videos when we can skim the words. Her voice is a pleasant one, though. Hillary could take lessons…

      You’re right about the time it can take to load a video – or even those pages with lots of bells and whistles, designed as though everyone lived with high-speed connectivity.

  2. Yes, thanks for the transcript, although in this case I prefer to listen to see what French words I can pick out while reading the captioning and trying to find Marine’s upper lip. (The first few seconds of the captions were blurry, but maybe that’s a problem on my end.) And I like Vlad’s outro image of a shelled minaret about to topple over. (Is that a Shia minaret, or a Sunni minaret?)

  3. I agree with Le Pen that France should halt all new mosques and make efforts to constrict the practice of Islam in general in France. However, I do not really want to see her win power. What I want is for her success to cause an ideological shift among the other French political parties: UMP, Nouveau Centre, Parti Radical, Parti Socialiste etc, to shift their politics rightward to absorb and NFs voters. That’s where they’re going to have to do.

    • The UMP may embrace some and only some of the FN’s policies on Islam, but the others: forget it. The Socialist Party, like Britain’s Labor Party and no doubt many comparable left-of-centre parties throughout the West, are utterly dependent on the Muslim vote.

      The worst aspect of this phenomenon is that the right-of-centre parties try to court the Muslim vote away by aping the left-of-centre ones. The British Conservative Party seizes upon any half-sane Muslim member or potential member and launches them into the highest of offices for which they are invariably not competent to discharge. What a golden career path for the mediocre? Join the Conservative Party (or in the case of Lord Ahmed’s the Labour Party) and start agitating for better opportunities for Muslims. The squeaky wheel will get the grease.

      How else does one explain the Conservative’s relentless promotion of Baroness Warsi, the first female Muslim Secretary of State? The first Muslim female peer? Who, after several major gaffes, finally self-destructed when she couldn’t manage to even tone down the anti-Israeli rhetoric ubiquitous amongst Muslim Pakistanis.

    • The other parties may pretend to “shift” their policies… but will they be anything more than “wolves in sheeps’ clothing”? The experience of New Labour in Britain – even during the tenure of its tough-talking home secretary David Blunkett – suggests otherwise…

    • That is a way of saying that you really don’t want any thing to really happen. She, and only she, can and will do what is necessary to safe France and perhaps all of Europe. Don’t be blind.

  4. It’s sad that someone apparently has to be “nationalist” to be concerned about legitimate security issues. All it should require is that someone be practical, utilitarian, and realistic. But apparently anyone these days who’s realistic is treated like some sort of radical crazy person. Objective reality… what a crazy idea!

  5. I enjoy the videos of Marine Le Pen posted here. I like seeing the human being in action, their body language and tone of voice. I agree with Dymphna, she has a mellifluous speaking voice. And is mentally razor sharp.

    What a pretty pass we have come to in the West when the reasoned and very sound policies Mdm Le Pen articulates, which hurt nobody and which should have been implemented 20 years ago by any sane society, will be demonized as the rantings of an extremist.

    I wonder what proportion of bien pensant Westerners could manage to actually listen to Marine Le Pen without prejudice. Does footage such as from clips like this ever make it to Western MSM? I wouldn’t know I don’t watch TV (other than the tennis Grand Slam events).

    • Some Americans, such as myself, post them on Facebook. Personally I am a fan because I love those who truly love France, who truly love Britain, who truly love, understand and accept the best of Western civilization.

  6. At the risk of sounding paranoid..being a 60 year old American, I am learning to look beyond the message and the emotion, to look for a larger picture. I admit the problem of Islamist politics is a huge and pressing problem, but as I am witnessing in the U.S., there is a lot of rhetoric being thrown around, while something else is establishing a firmer foothold. Mis-direction is an old tactic.
    It is difficult to know what is behind a popular movement. Especially difficult from a long distance and with no knowledge in a familiar cultural context.Uncomfortable questions have to be asked, especially as the surface message is enjoying popular support.
    I have to wonder who supports Pegida and the la Pen movements. I agree with almost all of the questions they are asking of their governments, as I am asking the same questions of mine. We have many “professional” protesters here. People are bussed into events all around the country, the are night after night and day after day on location with signs and voices, whether in Ferguson, N.Y., Portland, or Madison, WI.
    I look forward to learning where all the funding comes from, as it will give me a clear idea whether or not there is a puppeteer.

    • Soros is a major funder of Left wing movements and protests, including Ferguson. Then there are the foundations like Ford and Carnegie that are run by socialists who have a finger in a lot of things. Then there are the think tanks/corporate fronts like Chatham House, CFR, CPAC, CATO institute promoting the same stuff as Soros.

      Then you have the open borders globalists like the Koch brothers, Adelson, Gates, Buffet, Zuckerberg along with the EU ruling elite.

      All in all, the Left is massively funded and their agendas also tend to coincide with many powerful globalists and transnational corporations.

      Conservative movements have no such monied backers and they often face terrible odds. The government and MSM are hostile to them(because both are controlled by the same groups that love open borders and the demographic destruction of the West). They have to fight for every gain they get.

      • Let’s not overlook the fact that a heck of a lot of Russian money is flowing into various anti-EU groups and parties. They are starved for funds, and gladly take the Russian money. It’s an “enemy of my enemy” phenomenon.

        Russia’s goal is to weaken and fragment the EU, so it supports nationalist movements. After the EU breaks up, it will work to undermine nationalist movements, especially in Germany and Britain.

        We should be under no illusions about Russia, which will always follow a foreign policy — whether clandestine or open — that serves its own interests.

        • Our president does the same, except his interests seem to align with/serve the Muslim Brotherhood. Certainly not with the American middle class, whom he makes no secret of despising.

      • Greece could be a key player in Russian expectations of undoing the EU. Putin smells blood on the water of yet another socialism failure and will exploit the now so obvious fractures within Europe. Will Russia invade Europe? Not while the US is still capable of defending itself while supplying Europe with arms. Russia’s other ‘ally’ in this game of chess is Iran – ask yourself why the Russians would dally with an Islamic country on the brink of obtaining nuclear weaponry – would it be to target the US now being led by an ideological idiot who can’t see past his own puppet master’s strings and is playing right into the hands of Putin?

        The other aspect in this so very lethal game of Chess not often thought about is this; just which side of the Chess board would prove to be the greatest tyranny to a people accustomed to their individual liberties? Russia under whoever gets to be the leader in future, a country that has never known individual liberty or the Dark Forces pushing us all into serfdom that now controls the West?

        But all is not yet lost because there is still hope that based on recorded human history, not all plans prove fruitful, while many previously put in place have come asunder, their undoing eventually changing the course of history as we know it.

        So keep your fingers crossed.

  7. I was quite surprised to hear an assertions that about three quarters of the mosques in the U.S. are not owned by their congregations, but by a real estate trust based in a bedroom suburb of Chicago. Apparently, Ms LePen thinks something similar to this state of affairs applies to France, and it violates a French law of 1905.

    This leads me to two questions:

    Does anyone know more about this U.S. real estate trust, and who bankrolls it?
    What is the law on religious property in France, and how does it differ from Western European in general?

  8. I think it’s safe to assume there is a puppeteer but my question is — to what purpose? What do they want? I have always believed in live and let live but somebody wants much more than that and I wonder to what end?

    I have read of the “one-world order” for some time but again, do not understand why anyone sane would want that? Every country should do it’s own governing and the idea of ONE BIG BROTHER is pretty horrifying.

    I think Pegida comes from people who are fed up with having Muslim crap shoved down their throats. I am not familiar with le Pen, but I think she is like her father and believes that France should belong to the French — but I am not knowledgable, it is just my impression from whatever reading I have done around the internet and unfortunately, I don’t read French (one year in high school is not enough).

    And, to continue. . . if the Muslims would just agree to live their own lives and leave others to live there — maybe we wouldn’t have all this strife. However, I have always thought it was a big mistake to allow them out of their own countries.

    • Start with George Soros and his ‘foundations’ then you may arrive at an understanding of the adage that love of money and power is the root of all evil and what drives people like him. Understand also, that the West is now governed by many who think exactly like him.

    • “…the idea of ONE BIG BROTHER is pretty horrifying”

      Indeed it is, but for the people at the top it is very attractive. Hence the reason a nasty mix of Marxism/globalism is the defacto religion among the elite today.

      You’d think Marxism would be seen as toxic by today’s Social Darwinist at the top of the economic food chain. It isn’t, at it’s core it’s sugar coated totalitarianism the sees a handful of very powerful controlling everything. So it mixes well with the Davos set globalists who already view their locals as commodities to be used and discard as the elites see fit.

      This is why Britain that is far along in socialism has now become a authoritarian state replete with speech codes, rampant self-censorship, surveillance, etc. But for the people at the top, things are better than ever, even at the height of it’s empire.

      Sweden is much farther along and resembles a insect colony. It’s people are so socially engineered over the last century as to lack the basic qualities the define a person as a human being. Self-preservation, ability to think for oneself, knowing right from wrong.

      • “This is why Britain that is far along in socialism has now become a authoritarian state replete with speech codes, rampant self-censorship, surveillance”
        “Sweden is much farther along and resembles a insect colony. It’s people are so socially engineered over the last century as to lack the basic qualities the define a person as a human being.”

        I’m going to bring out an idea. The shift in populations and the loss of qualities like individuality, self-assertion, independence, individual conscience, the work ethic, intelligence: all stem from socialism and its effect on population genetics.

        Let me explain. Evolutionary biology shows that every gene mutates at a more-or-less constant rate. That is, “mistakes” are always creeping into the genetic code of a gene at random. So, traits, any traits, of a population will shift and deteriorate randomly unless there is an evolutionary selection process to winnow out the individuals with dysfunctional mutations.

        A perfect example of this is the fish without eyes in caves. The fish began with eyes, but since there is no survival advantage of eyes in a lightless environment, the random mutations were not selected against, and the existence of eyes just faded out on its own. It was a result of an genetic mutation process that is known, and is modeled mathematically.

        Let us speculate that some traits were selected for in recent human evolution: courage, integrity, perseverance, and intelligence. This is particularly true in the Northern climates where the weather and environment were often hostile to human life.

        As harsh as it sounds, people who did not have at least some of these traits did not survive, and people who accumulated wealth and power, say the nobility, had many children, legitimate and illegitimate, and were able to look after them.

        Under socialism, public monies are used to ensure the survival of offspring whose parents have no traits to contribute to anyone: drug-addicted, mentally ill mothers, criminal fathers…people who are unable or unwilling to put effort into bringing up their offspring: these offspring are supported by public funds taken from productive people.

        In socialist societies, there is no longer any survival benefit to traits we consider desirable and productive. It may be argued there is a negative pressure on the offspring of productive people, but that is not necessary for the argument. All that is necessary for the deterioration of the genetic stock of a people, any people, is that there is no selection on the basis of desirable traits.

        This is why Sweden has changed so drastically, and would have changed in a few generations, even without the disastrous immigration they are experiencing.

        The problem with the eugenics movement is that they wanted to empower the courts and government to decide on what traits to select. Giving a government this power is always dicey and the eugenics movement deservedly got a bad name. Government being government, will get it wrong. Having a government engineer a population is like having a government engineer a company.

  9. I just love that Marine le Pen. No more mosques ? Too damn right but the dhimmi councils here in the UK just rubber stamp all applications. However, sometimes, just sometimes the people fight back and I list one such case below :

    ALL the councillors voted for the mosque but had to climb down in the face of dtermined opposition. It CAN be done .

    As a footnote : in Tower Hamlet, east London, the council has been told to conduct business in English not Bengali ( because it has a majority Bangladesh population. )

  10. To Ronald B
    Thank you for that information. I am reading a book called Dark Albion. It’s a far cry from the books I used to read by English authors.

    And to another commenter — yes, you would think ONE BIG BROTHER would be horrifying but somehow people don’t seem to learn much from history, do they? Of course for all I know they don’t even teach history anymore — does anyone know this?

    And I realize I am 2 days late and 2 dollars short so this may be filed in the dead letter department.

Comments are closed.