International Journal on Criminology Volume 6, Number 1, Spring 2018 | Page 61

International Journal on Criminology
organizers and participants by questioning their “morality” and “academic rigor,”
using a well-known method. However, if such failings are to be found somewhere,
it is rather with the Syrian “offshore revolutionaries” who haunt the national palaces
and monuments, as well as their accomplices on social networks with expertise
in the field. Our censors certainly have an almost phenomenal nerve and are
not known for their tolerance. They aspire to run Syria, but are already censoring
and issuing threats. No-one would want to be governed by such revolutionaries,
even if given the title of moderates, apart from their sponsors, who struggle to
distinguish effusion from explosion. A single symposium (which in any case did
not take place) out of the hundreds that have anesthetized and intoxicated French
opinion was enough for the “democrats” and their protectors to fly off the handle
and lose their heads.
“We cannot (it would appear) hand over the keys of the Memorial museum
to a symposium suspected of defending Bashar al-Assad, who has been waging a
vile war since 2011”—but the decision (of the Memorial museum) to cancel the
symposium equates to giving well-known lobbies the power, choice, and ability to
lock or open doors.
French politics, although it claims to be transparent, is not above suspicion
and it does not seem wrong to call it into question. The commitment to destroying
a sovereign state with whom no war has been declared, to undermine all chance
of a political settlement, to flout all rules of international and UN law, is contrary
to the tradition of our country. It is its position as a permanent member of the
Security Council that provides France with a great part of its status. Are we not
sawing off the branch upon which we sit?
Syria has already been partly destroyed and the Syrians feel forgotten, alone
with their tragedy, which is even greater because it is hidden in the West and in
those Muslim countries that took up the cause of the “revolution” declared by the
armed opposition. In Paris, there is a preference for pursuing obsessions that are
no longer on the agenda and cherishing nostalgia for contracts that will never be
honored. This is neither honorable, nor reasonable.
The truth is clear: we need only look to see, listen to testimony to understand,
and pay attention to the growing swell of voices contesting the false view
that is inflicted upon us under all circumstances. In the country of reason, no reason
remains. Here we can rightly speak of “the French exception,” and it is by no
means glorious. In the world of diplomacy we are well and truly out of the game
and on the bench, along with our “revolutionary” protégés.
Many French people dream of the day when a group of bold visionaries will
rise, capable of supporting the emergence of a new world equilibrium and of returning
their country, the country of the Enlightenment, to the place it has unfortunately
lost in the international community. France must rediscover its freedom
of choice as quickly as possible and no longer allow its “allies,” who do not wish us
well, its “friends” of convenience, or various pressure groups, to decide its destiny.
58