São Tomás de Aquino, o "Doutor Angélico", certa vez diante de um crucifixo em Nápoles, ouviu estas palavras de Jesus:
“Bem tem você escrito sobre Mim, Tomás, o que devo te dar em recompensa?" São Tomás respondeu: “Ti mesmo, meu Senhor". Em latim, São Tomás disse: Nil Nisi, Te ("Nada senão a Ti mesmo, meu Senhor). Em inglês: Naught save Thyself, O Lord.
Why I fled Argentina
after breaking the story of Alberto Nisman’s death
In an exclusive column, Jewish journalist Damian
Pachter – who first reported on the death of the special prosecutor – recounts
the intimidation, the sleepless nights, the agent who stalked him and his
ultimate decision to head for Israel.
So here they
are, the craziest 48 hours of my life.
When my source
gave me the scoop on Alberto Nisman’s death, I was writing a piece on
the special prosecutor’s accusations against President Cristina
Fernández de Kirchner, her (Jewish) Foreign Minister Héctor Timerman, two pro-Iran
“social activists” and parliamentarian Andrés Larroque. I learned that Nisman
had been shot dead in his home.
process wasn’t too tough because of my source’s incredible attention to detail.
His name will never be revealed.
Two things stood
in my mind: my source’s safety and people’s right to know what happened that
day, though not necessarily in that order.
Of course, for
both speed and the contagion effect, Twitter was the way to go. The information
was so solid I never doubted my source, despite my one or two colleagues who
doubted me because I only had 420 Twitter followers — a number now eclipsing
As the night
went on, journalists contacted me in order to get the news from me even more
directly. The first to do so was Gabriel Bracesco.
Once I tweeted
that Nisman had died, hundreds of people quickly retweeted the news and started
following me. That was my first of many sleepless days.
“You just broke
the best story in decades,” lots of people said. “You’re crazy,” was another take.
Either way, nobody questioned that the situation was very grave.
days were marked by a government trying to create an official story. First, the
head of state suggested a “suicide hypothesis,” then a mysterious murder. They
of course were not to blame. In anything.
That week I
received several messages from one of my oldest and best sources. He urged me
to visit him, but in those crazy days I underestimated his proposal.
On Friday I was
working at the Buenos Aires Herald.com newsroom when a colleague from the BBC
urged me to look at the state news agency’s story on Nisman’s death. The piece
had some serious typos but the message was even stranger: The agency quoted a
supposed tweet of mine that I never wrote.
Bus to nowhere
I cursed in anger,
adding amid the profanity: “I’ll tweet this and then they’ll see.” But I waited
a few minutes to cool down and realized that this tweet was a kind of coded
So I bounced it
off my friend, who said: “Get out now and go to Retiro,” Buenos Aires’ central
bus station. “And come visit me. You have to leave the city.” It was around
I was very
lucky: When I arrived a bus would be leaving in two minutes. Where that bus was
going I’ll never reveal either.
hours on the road, I arrived at the bus station, where I remained for a couple
of hours. It turns out this was a big mistake: I think that was the place
someone started watching me. But I didn’t realize it back then.
I didn’t want
to stay too long in any one place, so I walked over to a gas-station joint
nearby.My friend contacted me
and said: “I’ll be there in 20 minutes.”
I was sitting
around there for two hours or so when a very strange person came in. He wore
jeans, a jeans jacket and Ray-Ban sunglasses. I noticed him immediately but
stayed where I was. He was sitting two tables from me.
Suddenly I felt
a finger on my neck and jumped like I never did my whole life.
“You’re a bit
jumpy son” — it was my friend making one of his jokes. “You’re under
surveillance; haven’t you noticed the intelligence guy behind you?”
“The one with
the jeans and Ray-Bans?”
“What does he
“Stay calm and
look into my camera,” my guy said as he took my picture. Well, actually he took
a picture of the intelligence officer, who left five minutes later. I have that
picture here with me.
I then had to
consider the best thing to do, because when an Argentine intelligence agent is
on your tail, it’s never good news. He didn’t just want to have a coffee with me,
that’s for sure.
Montevideo and Madrid
In any case,
the decision came quick: I
had to leave the country immediately. So I contacted one of my best
friends, who got scared but understood the situation. We had to do it quickly,
and I’m sure his efficiency saved my life. I will forever be grateful to him.
So I did it: I
bought a ticket from Buenos Aires, to Montevideo, Uruguay, to Madrid to Tel
I had to keep a
low profile in order to get by the security forces. So I went back to the
Retiro bus station — the scariest part of that long day. I was sure that if
something happened, it would happen at the train station, a very dangerous
place at night.
I had the
feeling someone was after me and I’d get shot from some strange angle. But then
I suspected my taxi driver even more. I figured he’d stray and take me off
messages were sent to my two best colleagues, a friend and my mom. They were
told where we would meet: Buenos Aires Airport. I couldn’t spend any time on
the phone because I was being surveilled.
When my mother
arrived she of course cried but remained calm. We discussed a few things and I
told her to leave. Then my journalist friends came and we did an interview that
has already hit Argentina’s top newspapers. I was flying back home, to Tel
Aviv, as I always wanted to.
I have no idea
when I’ll be back in Argentina; I don’t even know if I want to. What I do know
is that the country where I was born is not the happy place my Jewish
grandparents used to tell me stories about.
After I left
Argentina I found out that the government was still publishing wrong
information about me on social media. The Twitter feed of Casa Rosada, the
Argentine presidential palace, posted the details of the airline ticket I had
bought, and claimed that I intended to return to Argentina by February 2 — in
other words, I hadn’t really fled the country. In fact, my return date is in
A tweet from the Presidential Palace showing Pachter's
become a dark place led by a corrupt political system. I still haven’t figured
out everything that has happened to me over the past 48 hours. I never imagined
my return to Israel would be like this. --- Bom, acho que o réporter fez um ótimo resumo no último parágrafo: Argentina se tornou um país pária.
Para que alguém se recupere de uma doença, o primeiro passo é reconhecer que tem a doença. Mas os palestinos não reconhecem o terrorismo islâmico como uma doença. Quando o flagra é muito ostensivo, há imagens e bom som identificando o terrorismo islâmico, sempre é possível uma teoria da conspiração para dizer que o "mal é o outro".
Como o mundo pode esperar uma autocrítica dos muçulmanos sobre terrorismo, se eles não reconhecem que este terrorismo exista?
O jornal oficial da Autoridade Palestina, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, diz que foi Israel que executou os ataques em Paris que mataram os cartunistas e quatro judeus (!). Isto mesmo, Israel teria matado seus próprios filhos para finalidade política.
O pior é que pesquisa entre palestinos mostra que a imensa maioria deles (84%) concorda com o jornal.
84% of “Palestinians” believe Israel was behind Paris jihad massacres
Following the terror attacks against the Charlie Hebdo magazine and a Jewish store in which Muslim terrorists killed 17 people in France earlier this month, columnists writing for the official Palestinian Authority daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida have claimed that Israel was behind the attacks.
This view is shared by the vast majority of Palestinians, according to a poll conducted by Ma’an (an independent Palestinian news agency). The poll found that 84.4% support the claim that “the operation (i.e., terror attack) was suspicious, and that Israel may be behind it,” while “only 8.7% believed that the murder of the French [citizens] in Paris was a natural result of the spread of Islamic extremism in Europe.” [Ma’an, Jan. 19, 2015]
The writers of the official PA daily have argued that Mossad, the Israeli Secret Intelligence Service, planned the attacks because Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders want to encourage Jewish immigration and take “revenge on European governments… because of their… support for… an independent Palestinian state.” [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 15, 2015] (Longer excerpts of all quoted articles appear below)
One regular columnist, Muwaffaq Matar, argued that because Netanyahu “wishes to realize the myth of the ‘Jewishness of Israel'” and encourage immigration, the attacks against Jews in France and elsewhere in Europe were “no coincidence, but a carefully executed and fully controlled plan.” He further argued that these claims were true because “‘Netanyahu’s Jewish State’ was the only one to benefit” from these attacks. [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 15, 2015]
Netanyahu “trades with the blood of the 17 victims of the Charlie Hebdo newspaper and of the supermarket,” wrote another regular columnist, Omar Hilmi Al-Ghoul. He pointed out that Netanyahu wanted to “exploit the terrorism that struck some French Jews” to encourage them “to immigrate to Israel.” The writer claimed that “Turkish sources, including intelligence and the mayor of Ankara” determined that the attacks were “planned by the Israeli Mossad.” [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 14, 2015]
Similarly, a journalist, Akram Atallah, interviewed on official PA TV claimed that “in the past, the Israeli Mossad carried out operations (i.e., terror attacks): It bombed synagogues in order to force the Jews to emigrate,” and that “the operation (i.e., the terror attack onCharlie Hebdo) served Israel’s demographic [interests], for the Israeli media and government bodies predicted yesterday that 10,000 French Jews would immigrate to Israel.” [Official PA TV, Jan. 12, 2015]
Another writer, Yahya Rabah, claimed that Israel is behind “all the terrorist groups in the region,” trains them and provides them with weapons, and hinted that Israel, therefore, was behind the attacks in France:“We have seen how Israeli terrorism in all its forms… is what grants patronage to all the terrorist groups in the region. Eventually, we have seen that terror[ists] have begun to receive training, weapons and perhaps [even] intelligence from Israel. Therefore, many believe that there was more to the last wave of terrorism in France than [just] two young Muslims. This was an [attempt to] target the role of France… [which voted] in favor of the Palestinian-Arab proposal at the [UN] Security Council last month!” [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 11, 2015]…
Ontem foi o dia da tradicional Marcha pela Vida nos Estados Unidos, na luta contra o aborto. É a maior Marcha pela Vida do mundo. E relembra tristemente o dia que o aborto foi legalizado nos Estados Unidos por meio da disputa jurídica Roe vs Wade de 1973.
A pessoa que pedia a legalização do aborto no caso na época (Jane Roe, cujo nome real é Norma MCorvey) depois se converteu ao catolicismo e hoje está na luta contra o aborto.
Mas o estrago é de proporções gigantescas: mais de 53 milhões de abortos nos Estados Unidos desde 1973. 53 milhões de crianças mortas.
Obama celebrou o aborto ontem, como faz sempre. Ele é facilmente considerado o mais abortista de todos os presidentes da história, quando era senador por Illinois ele chegou a defender que a criança que sobrevive a um aborto não deve receber socorro médico, deve ser deixada para morrer de inanição. Ontem, ele divulgou carta de apoio à decisão do Roe vs Wade, e alegou que "aborto é um direito da mulher" e que o "aborto faz com que as meninas tenham os mesmos direitos e liberdades que os meninos".
Eu já tinha ouvido a desculpa de que o aborto era um direito da mulher. A mulher teria o direito de matar outro ser humano, que é bem diferente dela, tem DNA completamente diferente e pode ter até outro sexo, simplesmente porque está dentro dela.
Sobre isso, Ryan Mayer mostrou 10 razões científicas e lógicas por que a criança no útero não é parte da mãe. É outro ser humano.
Mas eu nunca tinha ouvido a desculpa de que esta matança de crianças no útero torna as meninas com os mesmos direitos e liberdade dos meninos. Isto é completamente estúpido. Nem sei como se pode justificar isso e Obama não justificou, vejam a carta da Casa Branca.
Vejamos 12 fatos terríveis sobre o aborto, divulgado pelo site Church Pop, destaco o fatos 6 (maioria das mulheres que abortam estavam usando anticoncepcionais), 7 (minorias abortam mais, especialmente os negros), 8 (45% dos abortos são feitos por solteiras) e 11 (66% dos abortos ocorrem depois de quase dois meses de gravidez. Na oitava semana, a criança já tem todos os órgãos formados, mesmo que nem todos estejam funcionando completamente)
1) Since 1973 (with Roe vs Wade), there have been over 53 million abortions in the United States alone
To put that in perspective, that’s an average of about 1.3 million a year, about 108,000 a month, and over 3,500 per day. [Source]
2) Since 1971, there have been 336 million abortions in China alone [Source]
3) According to one estimate, since 1973, there have been 1.72 billion (1,720,000,000) abortions worldwide [Source]
4) By age 45, about 30% of U.S. women will have had at least one abortion [Source]
5) 42% of U.S. women who have abortions have incomes below the federal poverty level ($10,830 for a single woman with no children)
Another 27% of U.S. women who have abortions have incomes between 100% and 199% of the federal poverty level. Together, that means that 69% of U.S. women who have abortions have incomes below twice the federal poverty level. [Source]
6) 51% of U.S. women who have abortions were using a contraceptive method in the month they got pregnant [Source]
7) Minority women in the U.S. are over-represented in getting abortions
Black women have 30% of the abortions in the U.S., even though blacks make up 12.6% of the population. Hispanic women have 25% of abortions, even though hispanics make up 16.4% of the population. [Source]
8) 45% of abortions in the U.S. are obtained by women who have never been married and are not cohabiting [Source]
9) 57% of abortions in the U.S. are obtained by women between the ages of 20 and 29 [Source]
10) 17.4% of abortions in the U.S. are obtained by teenagers
15-17 year olds obtain 6% of abortions, 18-19 year olds 11%, and teens younger than 15 obtain 0.4%. [Source]
11) 66% of all abortions occur after 7 weeks
At that point, an embryo has a heart beat, blood flow, brain activity, hair, is capable of motion, and the beginnings of all essential organs. [Source, Source]
12) 37% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. identify as Protestant, and 28% identify as Catholic [Source]
E no Brasil?
Nos Estados Unidos a luta é contra todo tipo de aborto, mesmo de crianças fruto de estupro, incesto ou quevtenham má formação genética. Pela simples e lógica razão que defendesse a vida e todos merecem o dom da vida. Sem falar que a criança não é a mãe, nem o pai. É outra pessoa.
Mas no Brasil mesmo renomados católicos defendem aborto para "certos casos" , uma desgraça e uma contradição.
Rezemos pelos seres humanos mais indefesos: aqueles que estão no útero das mães.
In the current tensions with the Islamic World, pundits bandy about received wisdom that in fact is often ignorance. Here are a few examples.
1) The solution of radical Islam must come from within Islam.
Perhaps it could. It would be nice to see the advice of General Sisi of Egypt take root among the Islamic street. It would have been nice had the Arab Spring resulted in constitutional republics from North Africa to Syria. It would be nice if an all-Muslim force took on and defeated the Islamic State. It would be nice if Iran suddenly stopped stonings and Saudi Arabia ceased public whippings. It would be nice if Muslims dropped the death penalty for apostates.
Unfortunately, there is no reason to believe that any of these scenarios is soon likely. Nor is there much historical support for autocracies and totalitarian belief systems collapsing entirely from within. Hitler was popular enough among Germans until the disaster of Stalingrad. The Soviet Union only imploded under the pressures of the Cold War. Mussolini was a popular dictator — until Italy’s losses in World War II eroded his support. The Japanese emperor only was willing to end the rule of his militarists when Tokyo went up in flames and the U.S. threatened more Hiroshimas. Only the collapse of the Soviet Union and its bloc pulled the plug on the global terrorism of the 1980s.
Until Muslims themselves begin to sense unpleasantness from the crimes of radical Islam, there is little likelihood of Islamism eroding. Were France to deny visas to any citizens of a country it deemed a terrorist sponsor, or to deport French residents that support terrorism, while weeding out terrorist cells, then gradually Muslims in France would wish to disassociate themselves from the terrorists in their midst. If the U.S. adopted a policy that it would have no formal relations with countries that behead or stone, Islamists might take note.
2) The vast majority of Muslims renounce terror.
True, current polls attest that grassroots support for Islamic terror is eroding among Muslim nations, largely because of the violence in Libya, Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere that is making life miserable for Muslims themselves.
But if even only 10% of the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims favor radical Islamists, the resulting 160-million core of supporters is quite large enough to offer needed support. Again, by 1945 most Germans would have polled their opposition to Hitler. But that fact was largely meaningless given the absence of action against the Nazi hierarchy.
In truth, the majority of Muslims may oppose Muslim-inspired violence in their homelands, but will do so abroad only if radical Islam diminishes the influence and prestige of Muslims. If terrorism does not, and instead another charismatic bin Laden wins the sort of fear abroad and popularity at home (cf. his popularity ratings in some Muslim countries circa 2002), then it matters little that most Muslims themselves are not actual terrorists — any more than the fact that most Russians were not members of the Communist Party or Germans members of the Nazi Party. Likewise, the idea that Muslims are the greatest victims of Muslim-inspired terrorism is not ipso facto necessarily significant. Stalin killed far more Russians than did Hitler. That Germans suffered firsthand from the evils of National Socialism was no guarantee that they might act to stop it. Mao was the greatest killer of Chinese in history; but that fact hardly meant that Chinese would rise up against him.
3) There is no military solution to radical Islam.
Yes and no. The truth is that military action is neutral: valuable when successful, and counter-productive when not. In 2003, there were few terrorists in Iraq. In 2006, there were lots. Then in 2011, there were few. Then, in 2014, there were lots again. The common denominator is not the presence or absence of U.S. troops, but the fact that in 2003 and 2011 the U.S. military enjoyed success and had either killed, routed, or awed Islamists; in 2006 and 2014 the U.S. military was considered either impotent or irrelevant. U.S. military force is counter-productive when used to little purpose and ineffectively. It is invaluable when it is focused and used successfully. If the U.S. bombing campaign against the Islamic State were overwhelming and devastating Islamic state territories, it would matter. Leaving a Western country to join the jihad in Syria would be considered synonymous with being vaporized, and the U.S. would find itself with far fewer enemies and far more allies. Otherwise, sort of bombing, sort of not will have little positive effects, and may do more harm than good.
4) Reaching out to Islam reduces terrorism.
It can. No one wants to gratuitously incite Muslims. But the fact that Mediterranean food and Korans were available in Guantanamo did not mean that released terrorists were appreciative of that fact or that the world no longer considered the facility objectionable. Obama’s name, paternal lineage, apologies and euphemisms have neither raised U.S. popularity in the Middle East nor undermined the Islamic State.
The 2009 Obama Cairo speech went nowhere. Blaming the filmmaker Nakoula Nakoula for Benghazi did not make the Tsarnaev brothers reconsider their attack at the Boston Marathon. The use of “workplace violence” and declarations that the Muslim Brotherhood is secular or that jihad is a legitimate religious tenet has not reduced Islamic anger at the U.S.
The Kouachi brothers did not care much that under Obama Muslim outreach has become a promised top agenda at NASA. Backing off from a red line in Syria did not reassure the Middle East that the United States was not trigger-happy. Had Obama defiantly told the UN that Nakoula Nakoula had a perfect right to be obnoxious while on U.S. soil, or had the Tsarnaev family long ago been denied entry into the United States, then Islamic terrorists might at least have had more respect for their intended victims. Current American euphemisms are considered by terrorists as proof of weakness and probably as provocative as would be unnecessary slanderous language.
The best policy is to speak softly and accurately, to carry a large stick, and to display little interest in what our enemies think of our own use of language. The lesson of Charlie Hebdo so far is that the French do not care that radical Islamists were offended and so plan to show the cartoons any way they please. If they stay the course, there will eventually be fewer attacks; if they back off, there will be more.
5) We need to listen to Muslim complaints.
No more than we do to any other group’s complaints. Greeks are not blowing people up over a divided Nicosia. Germans are not producing terrorists eager to reclaim East Prussia, after the mass ethnic cleansings of 1945. Muslims are not targeting Turks because Ottoman colonial rule in the Middle East was particularly brutal. Latin Americans are not slaughtering Spaniards for the excesses of Spanish imperial colonialism.
Christians are not offended that Jesus is Jesus and not referenced as the Messiah Jesus in the manner of the Prophet Mohammed. The Muslim community has been constructed in the West as a special entity deserving of politically correct sensitivity, in the manner of privileged groups on campus that continuously suffer from psychodramatic “micro-aggressions.” That Muslims abroad and in the West practice gender separation at religious services or are intolerant of homosexuals wins greater exemption from the Left than a Tea Party rally. If the West were to treat satire, parody and caricature of Islam in the fashion of other religions, then eventually the terrorists would learn there is no advantage in killing those with whom they disagree. Once Westerners treat Islam as they do any other religion, then the Islamist provocateurs will be overwhelmed with perceived slights to the point that they are no longer slights. The Muslim world needs to learn reciprocity: that building a mosque at Ground Zero or in Florence, Italy, is no more or no less provocative than building a cathedral in Istanbul, Riyadh, or Teheran.
1] General Sisi of Egypt: http://pjmedia.com/michaelledeen/2015/01/06/blockbuster-story-spiked/
 until the disaster of Stalingrad: http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2005/06/17/the-white-rose/
 the pressures of the Cold War: http://vpostrel.com/blog/reagan-vs-communism-and-conventional-wisdom
 Then, in 2014, there were lots again: http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2014/05/01/no-white-house-guidance/
 were available in Guantanamo: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0910/steyn092710.php3#.VLwYhC6VmHs
 Nakoula Nakoula for Benghazi: http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2015/01/17/hillary-and-charlie-hebdo/
 It’s a War of the Gods: http://pjmedia.com/blog/its-a-war-of-the-gods/
Acho que o Papa Francisco usou palavras muito chulas para se referir ao frutos mais divinos de um casamento. Parece coisa de gente sem formação, ignorante, dizer que os católicos "não devem ter filhos como os coelhos". Na boca de um Papa ficou um lixo só. Se ele queria dizer a Igreja Católica também defende a paternidade responsável, junto como o Humanae Vitae, não precisava usar tal linguagem. Às vezes, eu acho que Francisco se empolga demais na frente de câmeras e repórteres.
Mas vejamos um belíssimo depoimento sobre filhos no casamento. Espero que saibam inglês, não vou estragar o depoimento com uma tradução feita às pressas. O texto saiu no jornal The National Catholic Register.
The Baby Promise
by Pat Archbold01/20/2015
I remember it clearly. I remember the day my future wife and I had the conversation about children.
She asked me, "How many children do you want to have?"
Me, being me, answered. "Who cares? Who cares how many children I want?"
My wife, already on her way to sainthood for choosing the cross that is me, said, "I mean, what do you think a good size family is?"
"A good size? Sixteen. That is a really good size."
"Why are you being a pain? You know what I mean."
"Yes, I know what you mean. I am just trying to make a point. I don't know what our optimal family size is, but I am very certain that God does. Let me put it to you this way. When it comes to children, I make you this simple promise. I will never say no to you and I will never say no to God."
My wife made me the same promise. We were not naive wild-eyed Catholics out to prove a point. My wife had all the same concerns most women do. How many can I handle? How many can my body handle? What about money? Will I have to quit my job? And so on. And we discussed all these things on days when I wasn't being jerky. We discussed it. We thought about it. And we prayed on it. In the end, we simply just put the number in God's hands.
We didn't get married until we were into our thirties and after our first, sometimes we were a little overwhelmed. But we kept our promise to each other and put our trust in God.
After our second, truth is, sometimes we were a little overwhelmed. But we kept our promise to each other and put our trust in God.
After our third, we were mostly overwhelmed. My wife quit her job. Having three all still little was tough on my wife. Money was tight. We just weren't sure how we could swing another. But we kept our promise to each other and put our trust in God.
Heck, we are outnumbered and broke anyway. So we kept our promise to each other and put our trust in God. People, society, everyone told us to be done. Sure, we heard all the jokes. But we promised and we trusted.
But we also faced tough choices. We faced health issues that caused us to evaluate everything. But we always kept our promise to each other and put our trust in God.
In all we had 5 children in 7 years. My wife jokes that if I had said 5 children in 7 years during that initial conversation, she would have had a heart attack. But what did we know about what we could handle? So we decided not to figure it out.
So now we are past the baby years and my wife's biggest lament? I wish we met earlier so we could have had more babies.
I have many regrets in life as we all do. But the single best thing I ever did was make and keep that promise to my wife.
Mas o Gatestone Institute, sempre atento, e com um arsenal de arquivos sobre assunto mostrou que a documentação é clara sobre a enorme existência de No-Go Zones islâmicas em toda a Europa. Nestas No-Go Zones pode-se comprar um rifle do mesmo tipo que matou os cartunistas do Charlie Hebdo.
Como o assunto do momento é França, começou-se pelas No-Go Zones francesas.
A 120-page research paper entitled "No-Go Zones in the French Republic: Myth or Reality?" documented dozens of French neighborhoods "where police and gendarmerie cannot enforce the Republican order or even enter without risking confrontation, projectiles, or even fatal shootings."
In October 2011, a 2,200-page report, "Banlieue de la République" (Suburbs of the Republic) found that Seine-Saint-Denis and other Parisian suburbs are becoming "separate Islamic societies" cut off from the French state and where Islamic Sharia law is rapidly displacing French civil law.
The report also showed how the problem is being exacerbated by radical Muslim preachers who are promoting the social marginalization of Muslim immigrants in order to create a parallel Muslim society in France that is ruled by Sharia law.
The television presenter asks: "What if we went to the suburbs?" Obertone replies: "I do not recommend this. Not even we French dare go there anymore. But nobody talks about this in public, of course. Nor do those who claim, 'long live multiculturalism,' and 'Paris is wonderful!' dare enter the suburbs."
The problem of no-go zones is well documented, but multiculturalists and their politically correct supporters vehemently deny that they exist. Some are now engaged in a concerted campaign to discredit and even silence those who draw attention to the issue.
What follows is the first in a multi-part series that will document the reality of Europe's no-go zones. The series begins by focusing on France and provides a brief compilation of just a few of the literally thousands of references to French no-go zones from academic, police, media and government sources that can easily be found on the Internet by doing a simple search on Google.
Fabrice Balanche, a well-known French Islam scholar who teaches at the University of Lyon, recently told Radio Télévision Suisse: "You have territories in France such as Roubaix, such as northern Marseille, where police will not step foot, where the authority of state is completely absent, where mini Islamic states have been formed."
French writer and political journalist Éric Zemmour recently told BFM TV: "There are places in France today, especially in the suburbs, where it is not really in France. Salafi Islamists are Islamizing some neighborhoods and some suburbs. In these neighborhoods, it's not France, it's an Islamic republic." In a separate interview, Zemmour — whose latest book is entitled, "The French Suicide"
— says multiculturalism and the reign of politically correct speech is destroying the country.
French politician Franck Guiot wrote that parts of Évry, a township in the southern suburbs of Paris, are no-go zones where police forces cannot go for fear of being attacked. He said that politicians seeking to maintain "social peace" were prohibiting the police from using their weapons to defend themselves.
The Socialist mayor of Amiens, Gilles Demailly, has referred to the Fafet-Brossolette district of the city as a "no-go zone" where "you can no longer order a pizza or get a doctor to come to the house."
Europe 1, one of the leading broadcasters in France, has referred to Marseille as a "no-go zone" after the government was forced to deploy riot police, known as CRS, to confront warring Muslim gangs in the city. The French Interior Ministry said it was trying to "reconquer" 184 square kilometers (71 square miles) of Marseille that have come under the control of Muslim gangs.
The French newspaper Le Figaro has referred to downtown Perpignan as a "veritable no-go zone" where "aggression, antisocial behavior, drug trafficking, Muslim communalism, racial tensions and tribal violence" are forcing non-Muslims to move out. Le Figaro also reported that the Les Izards district of Toulouse was a no-go zone, where Arab drug trafficking gangs rule the streets in a climate of fear.
Separately, Le Figaroreported that large quantities of assault rifles are circulating in French no-go zones. "For a few hundred dollars you can buy Kalashnikovs," political scientist Sebastian Roché said. "The price of an iPhone!"
The newspaper France Soirpublished poll results showing that nearly 60% of French citizens are in favor of sending the army into troubled suburbs to restore order.
The newspaper Le Parisien has called parts of Grigny, a township in the southern suburbs of Paris, a "lawless zone" plagued by well-organized Muslim gangs, whose members believe they are "masters of the world." The weekly newsmagazine Le Pointreported on the spiraling Muslim lawlessness in the French city of Grenoble.
The French magazine L'Obs (formerly known as Le Nouvel Observateur) has reported on the deteriorating security situation in Roubaix, a city in northern France that is located close to the Belgian border. The magazine reported that local citizens are "exiled within their own country" and want to create their own militia to restore order because police are afraid to confront Muslim gangs.
In August 2014, the French magazine Valeurs Actuelles (Contemporary Values) reported that "France has more than 750 areas of lawlessness" where the law of the French Republic no longer applies. Under the headline "Hell in France," the magazine said that many parts of France are experiencing a "dictatorship of riffraff" where police are "greeted by mortar fire" and are "forced to retreat by projectiles."
Separately, Valeurs Actuellesreported on the lawlessness in Trappes, a township located in the western suburbs of Paris, where radical Islam and endemic crime go hand in hand. "Criminals are pursued by Islamic fundamentalists to impose an alternative society, breaking links with the French Republic," according to local police commander Mohammed Duhan. It is not advisable to go there, he says, adding, "You will be spotted by so-called chauffeurs (lookouts for drug traffickers) and be stripped and smashed."
Valeurs Actuelles has also reported on no-go zones in Nantes, Tours and Orléans, which have turned into "battlefields" where the few remaining native French holdouts are confronted with "Muslim communalism, the disappearance of their cultural references and rampant crime."
A graphic 20-minute documentary (in French) about the no-go zone in Clichy Montfermeil, a suburb of Paris, can be viewed here. At around the 3-minute mark, the video shows what happens when French police enter the area.
A 1.5 hour documentary (in French) produced by France's TF1 about Muslim gangs in Parisian no-go zones can be viewed here. A 50-minute documentary (in French) produced by France's TV3 about the no-go zones of Clos Saint-Lazare in northern Paris can be viewed here. A 45-minute documentary (in English) about the no-go zones of Marseilles can be viewed here.
A four-minute video of the most dangerous neighborhoods of France in 2014 can be viewedhere. A three-and-a-half-minute video of the most dangerous neighborhoods in Greater Paris Metropolitan Area can be viewed here. A two-minute video of a no-go zone in Lille can be viewed here. A five-minute video about life in the suburbs of Lyon can be viewed here.
A Russian television (Russia-1) documentary about no-go zones in Paris can be viewed here. The presenter says: "We are in Paris, the Barbès quarter, a few minutes from the famous Montmartre. Finding a European here is almost a mission impossible. Certain Paris streets remind one of an oriental bazaar." He continues: "The Paris banlieues have become criminal ghettoes where even the police dare not enter." Hidden cameras record widespread lawlessness and drug dealing in the area.
Some of the most notorious no-go zone areas in France are situated in the department of Seine-Saint-Denis, a northeastern suburb (banlieue) of Paris that has one of the highest concentrations of Muslims in France. The department is home to an estimated 600,000 Muslims (primarily from North and West Africa) out of a total population of 1.4 million.
Seine-Saint-Denis is divided into 40 administrative districts called communes (townships), 36 of which are on the French government's official list of "sensitive urban zones" or ZUS.
Será que está insuficiente para mostrar a existência dessas No-Go Zones na França?