Doc's Talk: DSK Scandal Shakes French Socialists

Friday, May 27, 2011

DSK Scandal Shakes French Socialists

Nidra Poller

It is too soon to measure the extent of damage caused to the Socialist party by the Dominique Strauss Kahn scandal, and it would be a mistake to underestimate the effect it will have on the collective French conscience, but the simple answer to both questions is: "beaucoup." Stolid party president Martine Aubry is doing her best to look like she is at the helm of an intact Socialist party that will keep its head high and hold its primaries on schedule. As she is fond of saying, France is waiting for the Socialists to restore its damaged international reputation, install social justice, heal the wounds inflicted by the unspeakable Nicolas Sarkozy. Party leaders will make a show of unity before breaking ranks and grabbing at the coattails left behind by Dominique Strauss-Kahn in flight. Opprobrium that might be directed at the erstwhile undeclared frontrunner is deflected onto the "brutal" American system of criminal justice.

But things are happening too fast. It is all out in the open. There isn't enough damage control in all of France to handle this story. The fate of the Socialist party is tied to the downfall of DSK for reasons that go beyond politics to reach the collective conscience. It is dawning on French society that you cannot have juicy posts on the big international team and expect to play by the outdated rules of the provincial French system. The prestige of a French president of the IMF entailed certain obligations. As it happens, monsieur Strauss-Kahn -- innocent until proven guilty -- was 10 minutes away from a miraculous rescue. If the Air France flight to Paris had taken off, he would have been out of the hands of the NYPD. Innocent or guilty, would he have come back to the United States to face a possible jail term of 15 to 74 years? France doesn't extradite and in a case like this would never prosecute.

The question is, will the collective conscience face reality? If a powerful international personality did impose his sexual will on a 32 year-old Guinean chambermaid in a luxurious suite at the Sofitel, the concrete facts will ultimately lead to severe punishment. The crime, if it were actually perpetrated, cannot be made to disappear with a flurry of rhetoric or a hypocritical respect for privacy...as it would be in France.

This culture of impunity is not limited to public figures and their sexual exploits. It has nothing to do with pleasure or virility. It is deep-seated, generalized, and unexamined. For all the outrage over the cruel American system that submits a suspect to indecent exposure, commentators are starting to realize that the almost future French president may be guilty of a crime. By bending over backward in the first 24 hours to respect Strauss-Kahn's presumed innocence, they were necessarily dragging the alleged victim -- the chambermaid -- through the mud. Suspicions of entrapment would draw other prominent figures or parties into the cesspool.

Transfixed by video of a haggard handcuffed DSK paraded in front of the Harlem police station, French society came close to epiphany. Protesting like blushing virgins at the sight of this once powerful man standing in a courtroom with lowlife drug dealers, brawlers, and thieves, the collective mind was shaken to its depths. Much was said about American "accusation- based" justice as compared to the much finer French system in which an investigating judge mulls over the case for years, looking at the evidence for and against the defendant, before deciding whether the case should be tried. In a rare mood of fair play the media did invite international lawyers to explain the broad powers granted to defense lawyers in the United States, which do not exist here.

The latest polls reveal that 62% of Socialist sympathizers think Dominique Strauss-Kahn is the victim of a conspiracy. As if the Internet hadn't even been invented, the CSA (broadcasting control agency) warned media that French law prohibits the display of degrading images of suspects, even when the images are of foreign origin. Horror stories about the Rikers Island prison are circulating, as if French prisons had no tales to tell. But something has to be done to cover the noise of the latest leaks -- the future-former-president of the IMF did spill his seed in that luxury suite.

Examples of the exquisite discretion and merciful leniency of the French judicial system abound. The Gang of Barbarians case is eloquent. It shows how this discretion leaves society deaf, dumb, blind, and impotent to deal with the ills that afflict it. The 27 defendants in the kidnap-torture murder of Ilan Halimi were tried in first instance, and again on appeal, behind closed doors because two of the defendants were under 18 at the time the heinous crime was committed. In the United States they would have been tried as adults. Yalda, the young woman who knowingly lured 24 year-old Halimi into the death trap was sentenced to 9 years in prison and will likely be released after serving only half the sentence. It was revealed this year that she has been sleeping with the prison director for years, and enjoying special privileges. The (married) director, who says it is true love and he will start a new life with her when she gets out of jail, was relieved of his functions, and the story dropped into oblivion. Youssouf Fofana, mastermind of the Gang of Barbarians, who battered Ilan for weeks, then slit his throat and set him on fire, was sentenced to "life" in prison -- meaning 22 years, with possibility of parole in 20 years...or less...because that's how it goes here.

The Socialists, now clamoring for decency and reserve in the face of a personal tragedy, have been indulging in systematic character assassination of ministers of the Sarkozy government. Fingers are pointed, lurid accusations are made by politicians and reverberate in the media, Le Canard Enchaîné publishes incriminating documents, Rue 89 and Marianne spill leaks from police investigations, complaints are filed, the highest jurisdictions are solicited. Finally the pressure is so intense that the minister -- innocent or guilty -- is forced to resign. Labor Minister Eric Woerth was stomped as he piloted the reform of the retirement age. Minister of Foreign Affairs Michèle Alliot-Marie was axed for treating Tunisian President Ben Ali as an ally and hanging out with a rich Tunisian businessman when protestors had already gathered for the jasmine revolution. The latest target of this righteous indignation was Finance Minister Christine Lagarde...whose name is now mentioned as a possible successor to DSK at the IMF!

The left portrays President Sarkozy as a hard-hearted bling blinger who enjoys the company of rich people and won't pass laws taking their money away and giving it to the poor. The Socialists promise to give jobs to the unemployed, money to the poor, and equal rights to immigrants. What would an African chambermaid who lives in the Bronx deserve under their system?

In fact, Dominique Strauss-Kahn was the dream candidate because he appeals to a broad sector of voters, beyond the narrow limits of the left. He inspires respect, admiration, and affection. It is normal to shudder at the thought that he might be unfairly accused. His wife, former journalist Anne Sinclair, says she does not believe a word of the accusation. She stood by him in 2008 when, shortly after taking his post at the IMF, he had an affair with a married subordinate. "Everyone" knew he was a womanizer. (A reliable source who was a comrade of DSK 30 years ago in the Young Socialists Movement tells me his idea of politics then was "cherchez la femme.") No one thought he was a brute. Who would have imagined he would end up in a sordid American jail?

At this writing, it is rumored that DSK's hotshot lawyers will go for a "mutual consent" defense. If so, what are the chances of convincing a jury of honest citizens that the head of the IMF tucked into his schedule a twenty-minute romp with a chambermaid before taking off for Europe to save Greece and, ultimately, the eurozone?

If confirmed, this strategy sounds like the last bad decision in a lifelong hype. Aided and abetted by friends, family, associates, media, and his devoted wife, the Great Economist was allowed to run wild, to hide his disgraceful behavior under the wraps of his prestige, and pursue his bad impulses all the way to perdition.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk