France prepares the backdoor of legitimacy for Hamas by applying the sensuous lips of her foreign service to the nether wink of Mr. Putin's heinie.

FRANCE SIDES WITH RUSSIA ON HAMAS

PARIS February 10, 2006 (AFP) - France said Friday that it approved of Russia's invitation to Hamas leaders for talks in Moscow after winning the Palestinian election, saying it could help the Middle East peace process.

The offer "may contribute to advancing our positions," foreign ministry spokesman Denis Simonneau said, referring to the so-called quartet sponsoring the Israeli-Palestinian peace process — the European Union, United Nations, Russia and the United States.

And just what might French positions be? Well, the only perduring French position is to keep a multipolar world in flux to the advantage of France. Or put less politely, to subvert American influence and designs to the advantage of France. Although France is culturally disposed to anti-Semitism, anti-Semitism -- despite its manifest boorishness in the foreign service -- is not the determining factor in French hostility toward Israel. That America is Israel's steadfast guarantor is enough to turn France to the enemies of Israel. Enemies that directly or indirectly, by deed or laxity, with money or morale, support terrorism and the agents of terrorism.

France has a record of insisting -- without the standing to insist nor the means and influence to drive her insistence -- that terrorists be given seats at any table the United States sets. We do not believe France so debased that she actually credits the legitimacy of the terrorists' missions. No. We believe France to be so depraved in her anti-American project she will take up with just about anyone with a similar grudge.

Simonneau said the Russian initiative "had been taken without consulting the (quartet) partners, but it is within the framework of goals and principles we fixed for ourselves."

No fuss here about unilateral action. No fuss about consultative courtesy. No fuss about diplomatic over-stepping. France knows that these standard complaints about America don't play with Russia and will risk earning her a head slap.

"We share with Russia the goal of moving Hamas toward positions which will allow us to reach the objective of having two states living in peace and security," he said.

Hamas is considered a terrorist organisation by the United States and the European Union, but not by Moscow.

Nor France, notwithstanding its policy obligations as an abiding EU member.

At the time of the EU debate on Hamas, France fiercely fought the EU listing of Hamas as a terrorist organization.

August 8, 2003 (PNA/MOFA) - France expressed objections to placing Hamas and Islamic Jihad on the European Union(EU)'s list of "terror organizations", according to an Israeli report on Monday.

Diplomatic advisor to French President Jacques Chirac, Maurice Gourdault-Montagne, told the Israeli ambassador in France, Nissim Zvilli, during a weekend meeting, that there is no evidence that these two organizations are "terror groups."

"If we find that Hamas and Islamic Jihad are indeed terror groups opposed to peace, we may have to change the EU's stand," Gordo conveyed. "However, we mustn't limit ourselves to one, clear cut, position."

France, according to Gordo, is opposed to placing both Hamas and Islamic Jihad on the EU list, and believes Israel should deal with its "terror threats" through political, rather than military, channels.

In addition, with regards to Yasser Arafat's status, the French, refused to accept the United States and Israel's position. When Arafat was discussed in the meeting between Zvilli and the French official, the latter expressed the "legitimacy" of Arafat as opposed to the lack of it regarding the Palestinian Premier, Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen).

Terrorism? It is but a word. Let the world fret. France will do as she pleases.

The Ministère des Affaires étrangères later pronounced Mr. Putin's heinie quite delicious.

PFFT (What is this?): Rear-end diplomacy 4 | Rayonnement français 0

France is culturally disposed to anti-Semitism

You can feel Damian's sense of desperation in turning a fair debate (while ommiting that France has always called for Hamas disarmament and its recognization of Israel's right to exist) into another absurd statement in order to entertain his own bigoted tendencies.

And speaking of simple-minded idiots, one wonders how Damian would have reacted had a prominent French political figure suggested that Ariel Sharon got what he deserved...

On can sense M. Zmx's usual confusion when confronted with a French report asserting exactly what Pave has reported. It is, of course, Pave that is bigoted. If, like M. Zmx, you cannot manage to follow the link, here are relevant excerpts:

Mounting racism and anti-semitism in France represent "a radical threat to the survival of our democratic system", according to a government-commissioned report presented to the interior ministry yesterday.

The 50-page report by Jean-Christophe Rufin, a humanitarian aid specialist turned bestselling novelist, said "a specific armoury" was urgently needed to fight the growing risk of racist and anti-semitic sentiments giving birth to "organised political forces".

Mr Rufin, who based his conclusions on police data and a large number of interviews, said that contrary to popular belief the majority of anti-semitic acts in France were not carried out by supporters of the far right and disaffected youths of north African origin.

"Anti-semitic acts are the work of a far more diverse group of French people who use Jews as their scapegoats," said Mr Rufin, who is a former vice-president of Médecins sans Frontières and Goncourt prize-winning novelist.

One may find Mr. Robertson's remark bizarre, but in what sense can it be construed anti-Semitic?

Why M. Zmx finds himself wondering about our reaction to anti-Semitic remarks by prominent French politicos is a mystery. Pave is replete with instances of such a reaction. An illustrative link was provided in the post above. Our reaction there is plain enough, even to the dullest wit.

But then M. Zmx's métier is posturing, not political debate.

DGB

What I find interesting is how France always has to "back" someone.

They never seen to make their own policy, only just "backing" someones elses policy.

I'm sure ABAY will tell me where I'm wrong in this....

They never seen to make their own policy, only just "backing" someones elses policy.

That's a rather wide assumption, andy. France got the UN's unanimous "backing" in demanding an arm embargo against Damian's hero, president Gbagbo of Ivory Coast, even getting Israel to stop supplying I.C. with high-tech radars. Recent demands in investigating Syria's role in the murder of Haribi was a French-US led effort.

That's a rather wide assumption, andy.
Well, yes it is. I apologize for not being clearer, but was under some time constraints. Unfortunately for you, I shall now expand my thoughts. :)

It is not necessarily the insult that you perceive it to be, either. I was thinking about Europe for, say, the last 150-100 years, where it has for the most part been dependent on the EU3: UK, Germany and France (not necessarily in that order, and I am omitting USSR/Russia for this point). And, to paraphrase our old buddy Otto von Bismarck, one had to be one of the two to matter. (OK, Bismarck really said “When there are five, try to be à trios”, but you should get my point).

France was most successful (in recent history) when they were “one of the two” through alliances and “backing” one of the other two. For example, alliance with the UK (yes, that is right ABAY, with the UK) in the first part of the 20th century, and in the second part, aligned mostly with Germany in order to help build Europe.

But now what do we have? Since the failure of the “EU project” and the grand German/French alliance and Merkel being elected (half elected?) in Germany, we see a shift in alliances. One can see Germany move a bit away from France and toward the UK (shuddering yet, ABAY?). This is mostly due to economic reasons, but political as well. But what will France do if she is not “one of the two”?

Well, perhaps we can see a hint with what is mentioned in this thread: separately with the US and Russia? If you think that is far fetched, please read this article about French presidential adviser Maurice Gourdault-Montagne and his frequent trips here to DC. As you pointed out the “backing” :) with US on Syria/Lebanon/Iran is mentioned in article. We see here the backing of Russia (does it have anything to do with getting gaz, I wonder?)

But, as Damian points out here, the backing of Hamas/Russia is worrisome, to say the least….