The Royal bon motÉcouter pour agir juste.
[Listen (to the people) to do right.]
of participatory democracy
December 6, 2006 (Haaretz) - It was a very embarrassing moment. The scene: the lobby of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. The players: Segolene Royal's spokesman Julian [sic] Dray and a representative of CRIF [Conseil Représentatif des Institutions juives de France], the umbrella organization of the Jewish community in France. "I have nothing to talk to you about!" said Dray heatedly to the astonished Jewish representative. "You have sold your soul to the other side; you have nothing to look for with us. Go back to your friend Nicolas Sarkozy; he's your landlord."The CRIF representative tried with all his might to convince Dray that his organization is taking an absolutely objective position with regard to the presidential race in France. But Dray stuck to his guns. "You are going to pay dearly for your one-sided mustering," he went on to shout. "Segolene will be president, and you will have to pray for her to receive you for a discussion."
M. Dray is not here stiffing some fringe Israeli group. He is stiffing French Jews who'd like a little listen to. So much for the vaunted Royal "écouter".
... In the past, French leaders who came to visit Israel would take along a representative of CRIF, to demonstrate their connection to the Jews. Royal came to Israel with her own people and left the people of the organization helpless.... It is an open secret that the Jews as an organized body have sworn allegiance to the candidate of the right, Sarkozy. ... This is the reason Royal did not accept an invitation to meet with the heads of the organization in recent months. This is also the reason she ignored their existence when she decided at the last minute to pop over to Israel and the reason the party spokesman related to the representative of the organization as though he were a leper.
The Royal camp is piqued because politics are partisan. If the CRIF is chummy with Sarko, perhaps it is because the Parti Socialiste is sniffy with Jews. If French Jews were not Sarko partisans before M. Dray's minacious performance, they surely have good reason to flock to the right now.
Someone might want to remind M. Dray that Mlle. Royal is not yet president. She is still campaigning for votes. Best reserve the grudges for after the vote.
The heads of CRIF took a step and learned it came with a price. "It has never yet happened to us that we have not had a connection with any key person in a candidate's headquarters," admitted a senior figure in the organization.This is why they are trying to make a pilgrimage to Julian Dray, so he can blaze a path for them to the candidate's heart. However Dray, a declared Jew and staunch supporter of Israel whose brother works here as a doctor, has turned his back on them.
Daniel Ben Simon, the Haaretz editorialist, seems to argue that good French Jews, or at least smart French Jews, are politically ambiguous. He unfavorably identifies CRIF with the politically partisan American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Why is this? Well, because smart French Jews, if not all French Jews, do not need much reminding of their precarity in French society.
This situation [partisanship] does not work to the benefit of French Jews, of Israel and of relations between the two countries. CRIF achieved its greatness because it appeared to be a bridge that stretched over the turbulent waters of French politics.
But -- as Mr. Simon's report ironically makes clear -- French Jewry and the CRIF do not float above French politics at some Olympian remove. They are tamped down below, where M. Dray would have them cringe and behave.
Unlike Jack who counsels endless talk then tells dissenters « Tais-toi ! », Mlle. Royal announces she will chat up everybody then sends a lieutenant round to tell dissenters « Dégage ! »
PFFT (What is this?): Écouter 0 | Dégage ! 5 | Rayonnement français 0
Check out one of my latest posts on this issue!
[Mr. Behemoth 101,
We will let your entry stand as you do indeed have a post on this story at your blog. We have corrected your blog link to that post's permalink.
In the future make your argument in the Pave topic thread instead of using the thread to boost traffic to your blog. Any future traffic-seeding posts will be summarily deleted.
BEFORE CLICKING OVER, Pave readers should know Mr. Behemoth 101 takes a contrary position, which is fine. However that position -- and much of the blog -- is an Islamite-lite by-the-numbers "those damn Jews" screed, for which Pave cannot recommend an expenditure of our readers' time.
The Management]
You didn't read my blog very thoroughly if you honestly believe what you say above.
You got me all wrong. My family is Jewish, and I have received nearly 20 years of Jewish institutional instruction. My position on the blog (anti-Zionist, not anti-Judaism/Semitism) is not SOLELY informed by any kind of home-made bias, unless you count logic and facts as "biases."
Further, you should not insult your readers by prefacing my posts with your disclaimers, they can make judgements for themselves, I reckon.
In other news, I think you might be interested in a recent post arguing against Holocaust-deniers. I should not have to point out that I am in the business of making well-balanced appraisals on my blog.
BTW, I have been a regular reader of Pave for almost 3 years. I dare say the unwaveringly anti-Muslim / pro-anything Israeli streak has reached an acroissement in recent months...
Ah, Mr. Behemoth 101,
Thank you, we have a good idea about how to run Pave.
We did not preface your comment, we annotated it. If our readers were insulted, you are the only one to know. Your invitation was left intact. The direct link to your referenced post was left for Pave readers to click if they so chose. Had you linked to the post in the first place instead of your running homepage, we might not have commented at all.
Our comments were based on the post as found and whatever else we read.
We support Israel in the general context of a world hostile to Israel and in the specific context of prevasive and perduring French anti-Semitism. We do not cut Israel excessive slack, but -- preferring evidence before verdict -- we are slow to criticize where the world press is not (e.g., Al Durah, "Jeningrad", Qana). Please point us to where you've found the excess.
Pave is not anti-Islam or "anti-" any religion where religion is understood as spiritual abidance with a loving God. But we do not look through our fingers at Islamism or Islamites or Islamofascism or more plainly wanton murder, torture, rape, or mayhem that appropriates a deity for legitimacy.
If you are a long-time reader as you say, then you know we give fair play to the fair-minded and do not applaud junk thinking and junk law that doesn't distinguish between Islamism and Islam. Where that distinction is weak, we suggest it is because peaceable Muslims could do more to make the distinction stronger.
Having said all that, we are not Jewish and we find the practical difference between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism -- for example, the distinction as made by the Arab League -- to be nugatory, if not nonexistant.
In short Pave is as you find us. With our admitted biases and limits. Not perfect, but not led by the nose. If the "acroissement [sic]" is too much -- and if disputing the point in Pave's threads doesn't suit you -- what can you do but click away.
The Management
