French question: why is Russia, instead of more logical choices, enemy No 1?

Why is the baneful role of Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait and Turkey ignored?

"Faced with terrorism, Europe shows its teeth: BAA BAAAA"
3 804
Not a day passes but there is some event providing a pretext to demonize Russia, while most media seek at all costs to justify immigration and to exonerate Islam from all guilt in the genesis of Islamist attacks. The convergence of these two axes of information can only provoke question, even suspicion. This becomes a near-certainty when there is added the real hunt for any resistance, national or religious identity, as soon as it develops in the West. In these three cases, the imbalance is so visible that it raises a requirement for understanding.

- Advertisement -

Why is Russia presented as the enemy of choice? Why, at the same time, is the baneful role of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, and Turkey minimized, or even ignored?
The annexation of Crimea is presented as a crime, while the history and the will of the inhabitants legitimize it completely. Russia’s support for the legal government of Syria, to allow it to re-establish sovereignty over the whole of its territory, has come under criticism, sometimes supported by military actions devoid of the slightest legitimacy on the part of Westerners. Turkey occupies more than a third of Cyprus, part of Syria, while the Americans forbid the Syrian army to cross the Euphrates or to approach the Jordanian border in defiance of the country’s sovereignty.

The Saudi ally, whose lack of respect for our “human rights,” and its total religious intolerance, has plunged its Yemeni neighbor into the humanitarian disaster, but Arabia is our “friend” … yet it is their thought, Wahhabism, and their infinite oil wealth that have become the real threat to Europe, with Islamism now “reloaded” into Salafism. The danger is fourfold: first, the demography of Muslim immigration; second, the growth of a virulent form of Islam that prevents assimilation and reinforces a secessionist communitarianism among immigrants; third, terrorism, which will find in the expansion of Islam an extension of vocations and fertile soil; and finally, the military risk, either through powerful states, such as Pakistan, or by the proliferation of jihadists.

Faced with these perils, obstinate blindness seems to answer with a slogan: “Daesh” would be the only enemy! No ! This is only one of the heads of the hydra. In Syria, only the Russians seem to have understood it. This head is also not cut, since Westerners seem more committed to attacking Syrians and Russians than to eradicate the Islamic State definitively.

In Afghanistan, Taliban cousins are gradually taking back control of the country, with the support of our Pakistani “ally,” the country where Christians are discriminated against. The attacks in Europe are one of the means of intimidation. The signature does not matter: Before the Islamic State, it was al-Qaeda, and after this, the name will change once again. Fear has impact: it is always easy to caricature a pope. Henceforth, to pick on Muhammad is suicidal. The rejection of melange allows apparently moderate networks to profit from a moralistic rejection of “Islamophobia.” And so the Muslim Brotherhood thrives in the shadow of power, in Turkey, in the midst of civil war, in Syria or Libya, and in the mosques and schools in France itself.

The threat is not at all the same intensity in the United States as it is in Europe. For Europe, it is deadly, because of demography and geographical proximity. That the Americans pursue an egoistic policy that aims to implode Europe, snfd cut it off from Russia, can be understood. That Europe lets itself be dragged into this suicidal policy is a criminal stupidity!

Subscribe to our newsletter
Sign up here to get the latest news, updates and special offers delivered directly to your inbox.

Get real time updates directly on you device, subscribe now.