An AMIF that (doesn't) want (only) the best for you

Salma has been a secular activist for years. She warns about the government's project of an "Islam of France". The notes are hers. Comments collected on July 8, 2019 and published on July 12, 2019 on the Lieux Communs website.

Since this publication, the AMIF (Muslim Association for Islam in France) project in question has been integrated into the FORIF (Forum of Islam in France), an initiative led by the Central Office of Worship (BCC) of the Ministry of the Interior and launched on February 5, 2022 in the premises of the Economic, Social and Environmental Council where Gérald Darmanin declared that "If Muslims organize themselves, it is not only Heaven but also the State that will help them.".

---

The government's project to create an "Islam of France" is not new, it's a bit of a pipe dream... Could you tell us what it's about?

This is the new attempt by the French state to "regulate" Muslim practices on its territory. This need is becoming more and more pressing with the increase in the number of practitioners due to legal or illegal immigration, descendants of immigrants and "re-conversions" but also to fight or at least control the radicalization of the Muslim religion that we have been witnessing for about fifty years now, strongly linked to the interference of many Muslim countries, in particular through opaque financing.

The first attempt dates back, I believe, to 1990 with the Corif (Council for Orientation and Reflection on Islam in France), between the outbreak of the Algerian Civil War and the Second Gulf War. Then there was the Foundation for the Works of Islam in France (FOIF) almost at the same time as the famous French Council of the Muslim Faith (CFCM), between 2002 and 2003 and, most recently, the Foundation for Islam in France (FIF) in 2016. But these are only empty shells that have not "framed" anything at all...

Why these successive failures?

These are failures only from the Republican point of view, because from the Islamist point of view all these negotiations have encouraged the most radical Muslim currents and therefore the progressive Islamization of the country. From there to say that there is sabotage, I don't know, but in any case, there is clearly a balance of power between the Islamists and the State, even from this institutional point of view... The main explanation is often put forward the interests of the countries of origin of the imams (Algeria, Morocco, Turkey mainly) and their competition, but there is also the careerism of personalities - who does not know the famous rector of the Great Mosque of Paris, Dalil Boubakeur? - accustomed to a quasi-mafia operation. So nothing very representative or democratic...

Perhaps also resistance from secularists?

Yes: on the other side of the spectrum, all around the secular activists, there is the diffuse but very strong reluctance of the French population, attached to the spirit and the letter of secularism, that is to say to the fact that, according to the established formula, "the State does not recognize or subsidize any religion." For many, France to start organizing Islam means gradually returning to the Concordat, with priests, rabbis, imams who are civil servants... And between the two, there is the "Muslim base", which is also reluctant and probably for several contradictory reasons: some are attached to French-style secularism, others would see it as constraints on their religious beliefs and practices - the best as well as the worst - but all refuse the emergence of a clergy that has never existed in the traditional history of Sunni Islam (unlike the Shiites, as in Iran, imams and ulama are theoretically only consultative). We are therefore here at a point of contact between several contradictory cultural blocs: Catholic tradition vs. Sunni tradition, secularism vs. religion but also individual freedoms vs. community interests.

And so the current government wants to start again by creating an “Islam of France”?

It was in E. Macron's program and the project has been postponed successively - the last time because of the emergence of the "yellow vest" movement. It is therefore a question of designating interlocutors for the public authorities, of awarding them an official label in order to grant them ideological and financial control over all Muslims in France. And it is obvious that in the current context, this can only amount to giving a national status to the UOIF (Union of Islamic Organizations of France), renamed in 2017 "Muslims of France" - the new name alone gives the hegemonic ambition... It is therefore, obviously, the brotherhood of the Muslim Brotherhood, this international organization founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna and which aims at the expansion of Islam by all means, always starting "from the bottom" and pacifism (education, social action, infiltration, infiltration) and ending if necessary with armed jihad to impose sharia and an Islamic State.¹. It is Ennahdah in Tunisia, the AKP in Türkiye, Hamas in Palestine, etc. In France, it is the UOIF, founded in 1980-1983.

In short: there are three major projects in the running today, but in all three we find the Muslim Brotherhood – financed by Qatar and supported by Turkey – which appears as a bulwark against Salafism, financed by Saudi Arabia, radicalization and violent “acting out”.

So whatever project is chosen, it will be that of the Muslim Brotherhood?

In any case, very strongly marked: in any case nine out of ten Muslim institutions in France are under “brotherhood” influence, whatever the country of attachment – ​​and the rest are of various obediences, including Salafist…

The first project put forward, the most radical, is that of Marwan Muhammad of the CCIF (Collective against Islamophobia in France), close to the indigenous movements of S. Bouamama or Nacira Guenif-Souilamas, with a communitarian, racialist and largely anti-republican discourse, whatever sense you give it… It brings together Salafists, like Rachid Eljay the infamous imam of Brest or Nader Abou Anas, the imam of Le Bourget. In short, he is really the worst…

Then there are the "traditional" members of the CFCM, the irremovable notables, the heavyweights, the elephants, completely corrupt, entangled in personal struggles and clearly in a strategy of sabotage or at least of a tough balance of power. You don't change a losing team.

And finally, the project that seems to have the government's preferences, a little further away from the UOIF: the AMIF, the Muslim Association for Islam in France, whose statutes were filed last April, by Hakim El Karoui, still little known.

Why this preference for AMIF?

Because it's the least disgusting option! At least in appearance… Take this Hakim El Karoui: he presents himself very well, speaks without an accent, Tunisian Muslim father and French Protestant mother, he is a natural child of the oligarchy, with university parents, uncles who are ministers in Tunisia… He was a technical advisor to JP Raffarin then to T. Breton, director at Rothschild & Cie, lecturer, collaborator of Rachida Dati with whom he founded the Club du XXIe siècle and the Young Mediterranean Leaders program… We also owe him in 2016 the survey of the Montaigne Institute among Muslims living in France which had caused a stir since it depicted, broadly speaking, Mohammedans divided into three large groups: a third secularized, a third “conservatives” and a third “radicals”… In this same report, he did not recommend the repeal of the 1905 law and barely questions its reform²In short, it is reassuring and putting it forward is a strong signal sent to the CFCM bigwigs.

In fact, it almost makes you want this ideal son-in-law in the middle of a basket of crabs!

Yes, and it almost seems like it was done on purpose… But the reality is a little more sordid since for him, the French model of assimilation – which means that today you can no longer distinguish a descendant of an Italian immigrant from a descendant of a Polish immigrant – is, I quote: “a model of oppression of the majority over the minority”, an expression of “an enormous, immense xenophobia that we see in the level of discrimination, which is extremely high”… He is probably a victim of it himself, just like his girlfriend Rachida Dati or Najat Vallaud-Belkacem or Myriam El Khomri, all ministers of the Republic… In short, for him, the AMIF will help fight against “anti-Muslim xenophobia”… which does not seem to dissuade Muslims from all over the world from coming to settle here, from bringing their families here and from affirming their faith in an increasingly visible way…

For him, this would be the problem with Islam in France: xenophobia and not radicalization?

Exactly. Besides, for him, the problems posed by Islamism come essentially from Salafism (of Saudi or Indo-Pakistani origin, the Tabligh), not from the Muslim Brotherhood, whose Islamization project would be, "if it exists", I quote; "more a pious wish than a plot."³… It is therefore not surprising that in his team which forms the AMIF we only find Brothers from or close to the UOIF like Tareq Oubrou, Mohamed Bajrafil,…

Tareq Oubrou? Juppé's buddy? He's rather known as a moderate, isn't he?

In a milieu of Islamo-psychopaths on the verge of decompensation, it is not difficult to pass for the "good cop", the one who will reconcile and avoid civil war in France! That's how you get fooled... But in reality, he is a realpolitiker of Moroccan origin who honed his first weapons in "radical Islam" which advocated the establishment of a Caliphate⁴. Very logically, the extreme right coming together, we saw him alongside Alain Soral in 2009. Since then, he has calmed down, he only associates with Robert Ménard and Nicolas Dupont-Aignant, and has adopted the "intelligent" discourse of patient Islamism.⁵ : he is now a supporter of a "minority sharia", that is to say Muslim discretion while waiting for better days, not upsetting French society, gently heating the water so that the frog stays quiet⁶… He didn’t come up with the idea: he’s just following the teachings of his master, Youssef Al-Qaradawi, the main theological reference of the Muslim Brotherhood, which advocates adaptation as a fundamental tactic while being fundamentally anti-Semitic, sexist, totalitarian, and banned from France and wanted by Interpol… We understand that T. Oubrou declares that “if it hadn’t been for the UOIF, I would be a Taliban”… We are reassured! Although: he left the UOIF after 30 years of activity⁷ to place oneself near El Karoui, everything is possible...

And Mohamed Bajrafil, whom you mentioned, is he also at AMIF?

Absolutely. K. El Karoui is president of the AMIF cultural side (association law 1901) and T. Oubrou is president of the AMIF religious side (association 1905) of which Mr. Bajrafil is vice-president. A preacher of Comorian origin, very proselytizing on the internet with more than a thousand videos on his blog, he is the little protégé of Tariq Ramadan who sees in him "the next generation"⁸ and in return Mohamed would like "there to be 36.000"⁹ like him… Like his master, he is a great follower of double talk: one version for Muslims, another for the kouffar [infidels]! To the former he declares that the veil for women is a religious obligation¹⁰, but on TV sets he claims that it is not necessary¹¹…but that his 4-year-old granddaughter is dressed “as she will dress later”… And then he leaves you the choice to believe or not, but for the unbeliever or the apostate, “there is hell waiting for him”¹²… In short, nothing very classic, basically.

Still the speech of the Muslim Brotherhood…

Still, while the organization is classified as terrorist in quite a few countries. So Bajrafil keeps away from the UOIF but hey, he is at all the gatherings, he is secretary of the Theological Council of the UOIF and he is also an admiring follower of Youssef Al-Qaradawi¹³. He also appreciates Safwat Higazi¹⁴, an obscurantist who declares that "we will be masters of the world, one of these days"¹⁵This is the “new Islam”, “serene and peaceful” promoted by all these “progressives” that the State wants to endorse!

And in this fine team, there is also Hosni Maati, less known, who is an "anti-discrimination" lawyer - meaning pro-Islamist - who worked for the CRI (Coordination against Racism and Islamophobia) led by Abdelaziz Chaambi, listed S for radicalization, and for Rockaya Diallo's association Les Indivisibles, which awarded the "Y'a bon awards". He is also close to the sinister Houria Bouteldja, of the Party of the Natives of the Republic and the CCIF, which needs no introduction...

So there is a clear link with the racialists?

Very clearly. But to understand this link, we must consider what an "Islam of France" will produce in the hands of AMIF...

So let's go: in the least worst case scenario, AMIF would be recognized by the State to represent Muslims. What would happen?

This would be, once again, the victory of the Muslim Brotherhood, which will reign supreme over the religious practice of all Muslims in France, through the UOIF, which will indeed deserve its new name: Muslims of France.

These are their imam training centers (Château-Chinon and St Denis¹⁶) which will then become obligatory passages for all Muslim executives. Today, more than 2.000 people per year receive their political-religious teachings in Taqiya [dissimulation], double talk and ethno-religious separatism – tomorrow, many more… And with the assent of the French State since the diploma will be recognized and obligatory! At the same time, there would be the institution of a theological and legal authority imposing itself on French Muslims, a “National Council of Imams” or a “French Fatwa Council”, recognized by the State. These imams, theologians and muftis would issue “legal opinions”, fatwas which would be authoritative for Muslims in France. This already exists – we saw that Bajrafil was on the theological council of the UOIF – and it is overseen by a European organization, itself subordinate to the UISM (International Union of Muslim Scholars), based in Qatar and chaired until 2018 by Youssef Al-Qaradawi himself, the great inspiration of all these fine people. The change is that the French State will have to recognize, in one way or another, these fatwas, on the model of those already published which impose the authority of men over women or which condemn apostates to death.¹⁷...

But these fatwas would not be applied by the public authorities?

Of course not, not in the foreseeable future. But first, it will strengthen the informal "police" that governs families, neighborhoods, sectors of society that are already predominantly Muslim while ratifying de facto separatism ("us and them"). The authorities will turn a blind eye to the morals and "settling of scores" that take place there, tolerate them since they are the application of official fatwas and therefore binding, with the strong support of the most active believers. This is already the case with blasphemy: in France, since the Charlie-Hebdo massacres, it has been reestablished in practice. The same goes for Jews: it is up to them to move following the pressure they are subjected to in Muslim areas, that is no longer an issue. Later, as in Great Britain, there may be recognized Islamic Courts, which people can refer to to settle their disputes, depending on the current Muslim jurisdiction. It is the institution of differentiated legal treatment based on your community, already partially accepted and practiced by our own courts today: just look at the "double standards" in the freedom of expression of certain rappers, for example, which is out of all proportion to the political correctness required of people like you and me... Or the repression of the yellow vests on one side and the gray areas of the "neighborhoods" in secession on the other.

This is therefore a further step towards the Islamization of society...

And more than you imagine since these Muslim authorities will multiply at all local levels, for example departmental. A Departmental Council of the Muslim Faith already exists in Vaucluse for example, but it is the Rhône department that is the forerunner: there is already a Theological Council of Imams of the Rhône and a Council of Muslims of the Rhône, therefore a religious aspect and a cultural aspect, led by Azzedine Gaci, member of the AMIF… There too, everything is ready, we just have to wait for the State's approval. So these bodies are in close relations with local Muslim associations of all types, sports, cultural, social, educational, etc., which the UOIF is multiplying to supervise all the Muslims in the territory, regulate their practices, their activities, their daily lives, etc.¹⁸. Obviously, this would be a very important lever of influence for exemptions, patronage, lobbying, the pressures that already exist on elected officials and the local population to obtain additional prerogatives. It is a step towards a return to the concordat and this is what has already been experienced for a few years in the Rhône with Prefect Delpuech, very discreetly.¹⁹ One of the many perverse effects of decentralization…

Return of the concordat means state funding of religion.

So here is the crux of the matter! The main goal of AMIF is the self-financing of "Islam in France", to avoid the foreign funds we were talking about. For Hakim El Karoui, the financing of worship would amount to 10 million euros, taken from halal certification, pilgrimages to Mecca, funeral services, donations and legacies. All of this would finance the "Islam in France" machine; the training and remuneration of imams, the construction and renovation of mosques, the dissemination of doctrine, actions "against discrimination", etc. Obviously, the State would supervise and control the collection of funds, but would have nothing to say about their spending, control, etc., since the goal is the financial independence of Islam... This is the Great Affair of AMIF - and of Islamists very attached to the mysteries of Islamic finance - but also very vague... I believe that it will happen as with the Arab World Institute in Paris (where Houria Bouteldja officially works): the countries of the Arab League were to finance half of it - thirty years later, it is the State which finances 90%. So we will very quickly find ourselves with shell games where it is the taxpayer who will ultimately pay for the Islamization of his country... In any case, we tend towards the jizya, the tax paid by the dhimmis, the minorities in Islamic lands, so as not to have problems... That is also what the billions lost in "urban policies" intended exclusively for the "lost territories of the Republic" are.

Is this the establishment of an Islam which becomes a perfectly foreign and independent body within French society?

Yes, but that is not why he would stop his political offensive, on the contrary: with AMIF, it is inevitable that infiltration and infiltration will be redoubled, since they are financed and legitimized by public authorities. Islamists have already largely infiltrated associations such as Act up or family planning, soon it will be unions or parties, such as UNEF, Sud Solidaires or France Insoumise. The promotion of the "fight against Islamophobia" will then take on another dimension, this is the perspective of Hosni Maati, the lawyer of AMIF who will be able to constitute himself as a civil party in order to officially silence all opponents and critics, who are already terrorized or even under police protection. This is the judicial jihad, which Islamists love. And the "padamalgam" will be completely ratified during the attacks, since the AMIF will have a "deradicalization" pole, prefigured by Mohammed Chirani, former delegate of the prefect of the 93 and consultant in the prevention of religious radicalization, and the CAPRI, the Center for Action and Prevention against the Radicalization of Individuals, an organization chaired by the Islamist Marwan El Bakhour, close to Tareq Oubrou. Faced with Islamism and terrorism, we need more Islam, always, since the slogan of the Muslim Brotherhood is: "Islam is the solution"... For them, training young people in Islam from a young age is "preventive theology" that avoids all the excesses; delinquency, mental disorders, failures, disbelief, etc. We must understand the principle: everything that is good comes from Islam, if there is evil, it is because there is not enough Islam.

Would all this at least guarantee civil peace, the end of this nameless war that the jihadists are waging on the territory?

First, we must not forget the endless dissidence between Islamists: whatever project the government chooses, the others will not accept it. For example, AMIF has little support from young people, unlike Marwan Mohammed, and the old guard of the CFCM does not even want to hear about it… More generally, the answer is quite simple: we only need to look at what is happening in Muslim countries since that is the final perspective. The violence does not stop, since there are always more radical radicals who consider that the others are not Muslim enough while they are committed to the path of Allah. Minorities are oppressed, power is authoritarian, freedoms are restricted, etc. We must look at Algeria, Morocco, Turkey… That is what is before us.

But France will never be a Muslim country, will it?

Perhaps, but it will be a country where Islam will be an important pole of power, directly governing the lives of millions of people and, little by little, changing the cultural, social and political life of everyone. This is already happening, here or in Belgium, for example, and from this point of view, the AMIF is a war machine.

It is basically a great dynamic of secession, the break-up of French society, of the principle of nation, of community of destiny by the establishment of a de facto multiculturalism, where each community is governed by its own principles, its own values, its own standards, its own institutions, and their competition. Hence the alliance between the community "indigenists" on the basis of immigrant diasporas, whatever they may be, and the Islamists obsessed with the restoration of a universal empire, a supposedly multicultural caliphate whose "minorities", even the majority, they will manage like a herd.

It is hard to believe that the French state could support this...

This is something that is hard to admit, but we only need to look at the evolution of the French situation (or European, the dynamic is similar) over the past forty years: the regression is so mind-boggling that we have difficulty even believing what we see.

We must first understand the geopolitical pressures exerted by Muslim countries, either as suppliers of oil and gas – Algeria for example – or as a source of financing – Qatar and all its assets, PSG at random – or by regulating the sending of legal or illegal migrants by making them an infiltrated herd at its service – the case of Erdogan in Germany is edifying.

And then, basically, for the oligarchies, ruling over a deeply atomized, divided people, divided not only into social classes but also into ethno-religious communities, is to ensure their domination ad vitam æternam by setting themselves up as arbiters of conflicts between groups. We saw this with the yellow vest movement: the suburbs and a good part of the youth, immigrants and Muslims for the most part, remained totally separate, except to introduce their specific demands. And then a leopard-skin society goes hand in hand with the disappearance of solidarity institutions such as social security or pensions, and therefore their privatization... So for the dominant classes, this fragmentation of the social body, this fracturing of the territory, this archipelagoization of society and institutions are far from being to their disadvantage. Hence their incredible complacency for communitarianism and Islam, which is its spearhead. And then, letting in or prosper an "internal enemy" like the increasingly numerous jihadists (doubling of S files in a few years... 20.000 today), this allows to multiply the administrative and technological means of controls, of filing, of surveillance by blackmailing security

So there are political figures who are in favour of this perspective?

Of course, under the guise of resolving the monstrous problems that Islam poses in France, some are almost ready to restore the concordat. This is first of all the Islamo-leftists and other "fellow travelers" from Raphaël Liogier to Jean Baubérot, from Libé to C. Taubira, etc. But even dyed-in-the-wool oligarchs have declared themselves in favor of the French state recognizing and helping Islam to structure itself: obviously Jean-Pierre Chevènement, Jean-François Copé, Alain Juppé, but also Valérie Pécresse, Gérard Darmanin, François Grosdidier, Jean-Christophe Lagarde, Benoist Apparu or "advisors to the prince" like Didier Leschi or philosophers who are nevertheless respectable, like Pierre Manent, who see no other way out of the situation than a negotiation between the Republic and Islam - but the Republic would have to stop backing down... More concretely, we have people like Yassine Belattar who whisper in the president's ear, or Hakim El Karoui, an investment banker, let's remember...

This is nightmarish… What can we do?

We need an unprecedented mobilization of all those who are attached to certain principles of secularism, equality, freedom and who are still, for a few years, the majority in the country. There are an infinite number of things to do and first of all to inform ourselves and inform others on this subject, provoke discussions, challenge elected officials, mayors, deputies, ministers, prefects. But basically, we should above all organize ourselves, beyond ideological divisions, starting by forming autonomous and coordinated local groups, in cities and neighborhoods, that is to say on democratic bases. Because this fight that is to be waged will require significant, permanent and organized forces to reverse forty years of retreat, compromises and cowardice. And this will not be done in the comfort of the hushed armchairs of ministries: those who are opposite are not angels, have international resources, local roots, support at the very heart of the State. We need a new democratic impetus, which the yellow vest movement perhaps prefigured, to counter this fantastic regression that we are experiencing and which is only possible in a politically moribund society, without projects or reference points.

What could an “Islam of France” be for you?

I don't believe that there can be anything other than Islam in France, but that it could be devitalized as much as possible, as other religions have been. The fundamental principles of Islam are absolutely incompatible with any democracy – = like any religion, moreover, but as Islam is intrinsically a political project that places its sacred laws above human laws, it is a fight to the death and particularly for France and its centuries of anti-religious struggles in the face of the admiration of all Muslims for a warlord Mohammed… We can only reconnect with the old principle of assimilation, which requires the immigrant to assume his arrival by gradually becoming French, and that the settlers be expelled immediately – because that is what we are talking about. But, I repeat, all this would require a real popular awakening, the rebirth of a deeply democratic popular current that would reinvent forms of sovereignty and the yellow vest movement has shown that all hope is not lost. Because talking about Islamism also means talking about the interests of the oligarchies, the energy issue, demographic policy, our values, our identity, the collective interest, a common project to be respected, therefore the type of society we want. Islamism thrives on this void.