August 10, 2004

Never again?

Another Jewish cemetery has been desecrated.

About sixty graves in a Jewish cemetery in Lyon have been covered with swastikas and celtic crosses on Monday evening . . . . The keeper of the cemetery found the graves covered with black paint soon after 9 pm . . . . The person(s) responsible for the desecration painted one to two crosses on each grave. . .

Clearly things are doing better since Villepin took over. Clearly Sharon was wrong.

And indeed, just a few days before:

French police say an incident in which three Jewish youths were attacked near Lyon earlier this week was not motivated by anti-Semitism. According to reports citing police sources Wednesday, the Jewish youths mentioned nothing about anti-Semitic insults during police questioning, despite referring to such remarks in earlier interviews with journalists. Following the incident Sunday, in which the youths were kicked and punched during an altercation with a group of 15 young men in the Lyon suburb of Villeurbanne, the Lyon region prefecture the state representative in each French region issued a statement alluding to the anti-Semitic nature of the attack. The statement provoked immediate reaction from Jewish groups, with local Jewish official Marcel Amsalem saying the incident was one of many anti-Jewish attacks in the area. Three of the attackers are to be charged with assault.

Five of the 15 young men had been arrested then released the same day "because of their young age" - 14 to 19 year old.

The Rhône prefecture had announced on Monday [August 2] morning an anti-Semitic attack. After an investigation, the police, then the Public Prosecutor's office had relativized the anti-Semitic nature of the attack: according to the police, the investigation was rather moving towards "the encounter of two groups of young people that degenerated" and that "there weren't specifically anti-Semitic insults."

And France is back to her notorious "relativisons-les-choses-mon-ami" mode. Let's "relativize." No anti-Semitism here. No history of anti-Semitism here. Never again what exactly? And please, let's not engage in polemic either.

Posted by Carine at August 10, 2004 12:33 AM
Comments

It's a statement when grave desecrations can almost make up their own post category. How much longer before cemetaries need to start keeping 24/7 security on the premises?

Posted by: Doug at August 10, 2004 06:41 PM

U.S. tanks pushed into Najaf’s vast cemetery-turned-battlefield Tuesday as helicopter gunships fired on Shiite militiamen hiding there.

Perhaps, after the US wraps up in this cemetery, they could head to France and protect the US military men buried there, as well as the Jewish cemeteries. Security e-nough Doug?

Posted by: andy at August 10, 2004 09:00 PM

I'm thinking tanks might do a little more desecrating than spray paint.

Posted by: Doug at August 11, 2004 03:02 AM

The image from Schindler's List keeps going through my mind. Of the road to the death camp paved with the Jewish tombstnes.

American taxes are sent overseas to maintain U.S. military cemeteries. It would make me quite happy to bring the WWI & WWII honored dead home. They have stayed long enough in a hostile land.

Posted by: Valerie, Texas at August 11, 2004 04:56 AM

For Valerie:

And another keeps the eternal flame of stereotyping alive. ALL french must hate and spit on americans just like ALL Iraqis are guerilla fighters waiting to ambush american troops.

Posted by: Moonwhisper at August 11, 2004 03:15 PM

"Moonwhisper"

What's your point exactly?

Posted by: Carine at August 11, 2004 03:20 PM

Steady Carine,

MW is reminding us not to toss all Francaise into the "Hates America" bucket. And why should we? Especially with so many of them eagerly leaping into it.


Posted by: Valerie, TX at August 11, 2004 08:22 PM

Still, his (her?) remark is a cheap shot (and I'm being polite here) nevertheless.

You don't need ALL the French to hate the Americans for France to qualify as a "hostile land", as Val put it.
You just need a majority of them, or a voiceful enough (as well as strategically posted: press, administration, etc) minority.

Stereotypes, heh? Thanks for playing us the moral relativist one.

Posted by: the dissident frogman at August 11, 2004 09:38 PM

Of course, one can also say that not ALL Germans were anti-Semites 65 years ago, which is true. That doesn't mean Germany wasn't a hostile land for Jews.

And France is precisely turning into a hostile land for Jews and Americans.

Maybe MS could tell us where s/he's posting from to get that philosophical insight we visibly lack. France? Iraq? Or thousands of miles away from both?

Posted by: Carine at August 11, 2004 09:58 PM

You mean that Kristallnacht might have happened without the support of every single German? Being an ignorant American with no history, I wouldn't understand that. If I weren't too lazy to try though, it might seem to me that rampant, epidemic bigotry really could be a problem without getting to 100%. Take pity on my simplistic self - if I only had some culture, I might have the nuance to understand this stereotype thing properly.

Posted by: Doug at August 12, 2004 06:20 AM

Ma perspective vient de l'autre côté de l'Atlantique sur les bords du Saguenay. I'm male, btw. I didn't mean to insult Val, it's just that I found the idea of digging up dead, sending them by freight across the atlantic because the actions of few repulsive.

DF, I agree with you completely. I don't have the same insight on France as you do, that goes without saying. The closest I get to France is people coming to visit Quebec and it's from my experience from them that le tricouleur gathers any respect. I don't pretend to either. From what I gather... the problem is a vocal minority sullying the flag so to speak and a majority that dosen't want to get involved for what reasons I leave to you.

Cairne, Val saw my point immiedietly. I didn't mean to insult her. I only called the kettle black.

Posted by: Moonwhisper at August 12, 2004 02:34 PM

MW,

The problem is that Val never talked about "ALL French." Only a "hostile land." You assumed she referred to all the French. I, in turn, asked you to develop your point, although I did get what you meant.
We know her and we know that is certainly not what she thought.

Now as far as I'm concerned, as a French citizen, I'd completely understand an initiative to repatriate home all American deads buried on our soil because I don't think the hate-America crew is a minority here. As for those who do "not want to get involved" there is a saying in French: qui ne dit mot, consent.

Trust me, I wish things were different.

Posted by: Carine at August 12, 2004 02:52 PM

Bien dit.

However, the removal of the graves of the soldiers would be a punishment for all french for the actions of few. Basically by asking for the removal the graves of those valiant soldiers, she's saying to every frog: "You don't deserve their sacrifice". That's how I saw she was sterotyping every frog.

I'm sorry if I didn't develop it before as you asked. I'm posting at work between calls so I get sidetracked.

Qui ne dit mot consent I always thought that quote was sad. I prefer this one it's more provoking. All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing

But what is there to do Cairne? How can you stop someone for being an anti-semitic or anti-american when the information itself that people receive is wrong or tainted? The only thing I can see is that you do what you can but what happens if that's not enough?

Posted by: Moonwhisper at August 12, 2004 03:37 PM

Is that a reason to give up? Turn a blind eye? Do nothing?

Burke was right. And we cannot afford to do nothing today. That's my point. If that means waking up the French by showing them how disappointed Americans are by either their hateful acts or, on the opposite, their inaction, well, that's worth a try.

Elie Wiesel expressed the need to do something perfectly:

"I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere. When human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant. Wherever men and women are persecuted because of their race, religion, or political views, that place must — at that moment — become the center of the universe."

Posted by: Carine at August 12, 2004 04:25 PM

Moonwhisper,
My comment was based upon an incident from last year. "Loving attention" paid to a WWI British Commonwealth cemetery in France. Very nice.

I figure it is just a matter of time before the row upon row of croix blanc are pushed over up in Normandy. Think I am being extreme? Ten years ago would anyone have believed the level of anti-Semitism that is in France today?

As for my desire to bring my countrymen home being a slap at the "frogs" (your word, sir, NEVER mine), not my intent. I just want them kept safe.

To remove them would indicate the french are not worthy of their sacrifice? Interesting. Calls to mind the poll taken near the recent anniversary of D-Day among des jeunes de france who apparently think no great sacrifice was made by America in WW II. (Helas, Carine, I couldn't find it.)

Great minds think alike. I posted a variant on your quote earlier today in another thread at E-nough!.

How can one fight evil? I think the fiery Carine and the audacious dissident frogman are doing so.

They are not remaining silent.
They counter lies with facts.
They hold up incidents such as this and others for
all the world to see rather than keep them hidden.

And do so, I suspect, at no small cost to their personal lives.

You are right, not all francaise hate America. I am deeply honored to know these twoboggers who do not.

Posted by: Valerie, Texas at August 12, 2004 04:58 PM

Here is one poll.

Pensez-vous que depuis le débarquement, la France a une dette morale envers les Etats-Unis ?

Ensemble des Français Mai 2004 %
- Oui 48
- Non 50
- Ne se prononcent pas 2
TOTAL 100
Posted by: Carine at August 12, 2004 05:13 PM

qui ne dit mot, consent

It's "Wer schweigt, stimmt zu" in German - for some reason, I think this phrase's source is in latin.

Posted by: Doug at August 12, 2004 05:18 PM

Well, only 50%? Not like it's a common sentiment, then. Incidentally, how many French think the US owes a moral debt to France for Yorktown?

Posted by: Doug at August 12, 2004 05:21 PM

Val, I understand it wasn't you intent but if you want to remove the graves of those soldiers then you want by consequence that slap we spoke of.

Just wondering though, your reaction to my use of frog troubles me. As far as I know, it's just a colorful way of describing in english . Your reaction seems to indicate that it seems more extreme.

Posted by: Moonwhisper at August 12, 2004 05:46 PM

Just wondering though, your reaction to my use of frog troubles me.

It's usually a derogatory slur (compare with "kraut" or "gook").

Posted by: Doug at August 12, 2004 06:52 PM

Moonwhisper,

"...then you want by consequence that slap we spoke of."

No, MW, you cannot ascribe a desire to insult les francaise that is not there.

I will speak plainly. I do not want to wait until charming bon mots such as "Get your trash out of France." are visited upon the U.S. military cemetery as was done at the Commonwealth cemetery. And if such a vile thing were to take place, that would not be a Slap at Americans?

Had the french (meida, government, public oucry) displayed a shade more concern over such incidents as happened last year and what continues to happen to Jewish graveyards, I would not feel compelled to remove my dead from possible desecration.

As for my ruffled feathers over the use of "frog".
It has become the practice by many people, not all, but many, to use the term frog in a very disdainful manner when expressing ire at French policies and politics. I do not indulge in it. Did not want any one to mistakenly assume that I do.

Except when I am discussing the audacious, talented and wickedly clever, Great Frog of War--the dissident frogman. (No, I am not trying to get a free t-shirt!)

Posted by: Valerie, Texas at August 12, 2004 08:05 PM

One of my favorite Sci-Fi authors (Lois McMaster Bujold) said this in one of her books. To accept an action, is to also accept the consequences of that action

All that I'm saying or wanted to say is that if you want to do A, then you have to accept B if it is a direct consequence of A.

The point is moot though.

Posted by: Moonwhisper at August 12, 2004 09:28 PM

Moonwhisper,
(What is it going to take to get you to reveal the story behind your nom de plume? Ply you with Le Bat?)

Yes, of course, one must always be prepared to deal with the consequences of one's actions. I learned that long before I ever read The Vor Saga.

The consequence, "B", of Americans believing their military dead in jeopardy of violation, and thus removed, would be the result of "A", the French displaying they are not especially concerned over such matters.

And yes, I accept the consequence of miffed feelings if, to protectthem, removing these men who gave up everything to liberate France became necessary.

Moonwhisper, I utterly and sincerely hope that it IS a moot point. But current events lead me to think otherwise. What of 10, 20, 40 years from now? Sixty years after D-Day and we have three french men verbally assaulting Jews at Auschwitz?! Attitudes change MW, and not always for the better.

Posted by: Valerie, Texas at August 12, 2004 10:49 PM

Well no it wouldn't take ole Louisville to get me to spill the ink on my nom de plume but it will have to be another day. =-P

I have a profound respect for the dead. Each time, I walk in a cemetary, I literally get dizzy from the awe at all these people, all these stories which I will never know. I keep looking for one particular grave though. I think it's true that the air stills there.

I'm just totally against the idea of disturbing the graves of those soliders. I completely understand though wanting to protect them. I just have this image of digging them up and sending them freight on some rusty ocean liner and that just screams no to me.

Posted by: Moonwhisper at August 13, 2004 01:42 PM

Moonwhisper,

Oh no, not another one with a sense of humor like Papertiger's! LOL! Le Bat is the only Candadian beer I know.

I too have a very deep respect for the dead, especially the military dead. For very intense personal reasons. Reasons I prefer not to share in a blog thread.

The thought of someone coming into those peaceful, green fields covered with white crosses and Stars of David and despoiling them just sickens me. And if it ever happened, MW, I would be offering to dig up the grave with my bare hands to relocate them back home. That is how keenly I feel about it.

And you must not be aware of how the U.S. military handles its own. With respect and reverene. Rest assured, never, ever as "freight".

Let us agree to disagree MW, and continue to pray that this will forever remain, a moot point.

Ok, so we ply you with...what kind of Canadian beer do you prefer?

Posted by: Valerie, Texas at August 13, 2004 02:41 PM

Actually as a disgrace to being a good Canadian and even worse a good Quebecois, I'm allergic to Alcohol. Although I have a morbid fascination into something that sends me into convulsions in high concentrations. I do drink Blue though, but it's pepsi and not Labatt.

I do know that the military takes care of it's own being a military child but with all the paper pushing and penny pinchers. I couldn't imagine anything less then some accountant going into a coma at the cost of excavation and transport by such an operation.

Posted by: Moonwhsiper at August 13, 2004 04:06 PM

MW,

LaBatt. Got it. Only heard it pronounced as I sat there sipping my iced tea. As in "A 'bat, eh?"

And what I endured to get that ice in that tea. Canadians would laugh every time I said "ice". Yeah, like ya'll don't have an accent?

Ya'll have a nice weekend now, hear?

Posted by: Valerie, Texas at August 13, 2004 04:52 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?