Jump to content

Was Fillon being racist


idun
 Share

Recommended Posts

I know he has upset religous groups and party members have said that his comments were in appropriate. Why were they inappropriate? His comments were logical and I don't say that very often after the PM has said anything at all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the surface what he said about ways of killing animals that were needed in the past for food hygiene reasons, but no longer have a place in a more modern society seem reasonable.

However they come in the context of remarks made recently about" superior civilisations " and 'halal in school dinners' that were deliberately inflammatory.

Food is often used in France as a way of excluding:  for example a far-right organisation organised a food kitchen for the homeless  serving pork stew...

What surprised me about his comments was the inclusion of Kosher food in his remarks. He must have realised that while Claude Gueante can get away with veiled racism in his remarks about halal produce, there would be no forgiveness for that target.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely agree with Fillon; superior civilisations have moved forward to humane methods of slaughter; it is quite obvious that the barbaric methods associated with the words kosher & halal should be banned. A morally disgusting accoutrement of inferior civilisations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not believe that there is a conspiracy here. If there was I reckon it would have all be a bit more subtle.

 

One of my oldest friends has similar views to Fillon, she's jewish and she and her family eat what they like, including bacon sandwiches. When we discuss this, she will think it highly amusing, of that I'm sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was on Europe 1 monday morning.

Heureusement l'exercice ne marche pas à tous les coups. Même le très prudent Fillon vient de se tirer une balle dans le pied. 

En pleine polémique sur la viande halal, François Fillon a provoqué lundi 6 mars la colère du Conseil représentatif des institutions juives de France (Crif) en suggérant aux juifs et aux musulmans de revenir sur les "traditions ancestrales" d'abattage rituel des animaux, qui ne correspondent plus aujourd'hui "à grand-chose".


S'exprimant à titre personnel, le Premier ministre a estimé surEurope 1 que "les religions devaient réfléchir au maintien de traditions qui n'ont plus grand chose à voir avec l'état aujourd'hui de la science, l'état de la technologie, les problèmes de santé".


Ces déclarations ont suscité le mécontentement du président du Crif, Richard Prasquier, dont l'organisation entretient de bonnes relations avec Nicolas Sarkozy. "J'ai été choqué de l'entendre s'exprimer ainsi", "la déclaration de François Fillon est stupéfiante", a déclaré Richard Prasquier.


"Même s'il dit que c'est à titre personnel qu'il s'exprime, quand on est Premier ministre, on a une parole officielle. Nous sommes dans un pays de séparation de l'Eglise et de l'Etat", a rappelé Richard Prasquier.


"Il serait normal que le président de la République rappelle ce qu'il en est de la loi à ce sujet", a-t-il dit. Le dîner annuel du Crif, le 8 février à Paris, avait réuni le président Nicolas Sarkozy et le candidat PS à la présidentielle François Hollande.


De son côté, l'Union des étudiants juifs de France (UEJF) s'est déclarée "outrée" par les déclarations du Premier ministre.

Dans un communiqué, elle s'est dite "choquée par les considérations dénigrantes que le Premier ministre porte sur les traditions religieuses relatives à l'alimentation. En affirmant que celles-ci "ne correspondent plus à grand-chose", le Premier ministre porte une parole méprisante à l'égard des Français qui observent ces règles religieuses".


"Il y a là quelque chose de désagréable, d'humiliant, et de contraire à notre tradition républicaine", a renchéri Richard Prasquier à propos des propos de François Fillon.


Le responsable associatif, qui a rappelé que le Crif n'était pas religieux, a également commenté la proposition samedi du chef de l'Etat d'étiqueter la viande en fonction de la méthode d'abattage: "Il semble que le candidat Sarkozy n'ait pas tout à fait les mêmes positions que le président Sarkozy. Je le constate."


Interrogé sur son opinion sur la campagne, le président du Crif a répondu : "Je n'en pense pas du bien. Cette campagne devrait discuter de la façon de sortir la France de l'ornière économique dans laquelle elle est."


Le Crif est rejoint dans sa protestation par le CFCM ( Conseil Français du Culte Musulman ) n'a pas souhaité servir de caisse de résonance pour les déclarations des uns ou pour les polémiques des autres.

En même temps, le CFCM ne comprend pas et n'accepte pas que l'islam et les musulmans servent de boucs émissaires dans cette campagne électorale", a déclaré Mohammed Moussaoui, son Président.

 

A l'UMP, la secrétaire nationale chargée du développement urbain, Salima Saa, a vivement réagi lundi aux critiques de François Fillon contre l'abattage rituel. L'étoile montante du parti majoritaire, s'est déclarée "attristée de voir s'étaler des jugements négatifs et dévalorisants sur les musulmans de France".


"Au nom de quoi parle-t-on de pratiques ancestrales ? Où est le respect de la foi, des pratiques et des individus ? Je suis attristée de voir s'étaler des jugements négatifs et dévalorisants sur les musulmans de France (...) De tels propos n'ont pas de place dans le débat", poursuit-elle.


"Rappelons que 6 millions de Français sont musulmans, et que ces pratiques sont partagées par les Français de confession juive. Ce genre de provocations doit s'arrêter. Il faut mettre fin aux discours de préjugés et de stigmatisation", écrit encore Salima Saa.


"Je souhaite que la campagne présidentielle se recentre sur les sujets qui importent aux Français : le logement, l'éducation, l'emploi", conclut-elle.


La polémique sur la viande halal a été initiée par la candidate du Front national, Marine Le Pen, puis reprise par Claude Guéant qui l'a même liée au droit de vote des étrangers non communautaires aux élections locales.


Nicolas Sarkozy a pour sa part plaidé samedi à Bordeaux en faveur de "l'étiquetage de la viande en fonction de la méthode d'abattage".


Lundi dans l'Aisne, il est revenu sur le sujet devant la presse : "Un sondage disait il y a dix jours que le premier sujet de préoccupation des français, c'est cette question de la viande halal", a-t-il lancé, alors qu'il avait jugé le 21 février qu'il s'agissait d'une "polémique qui n'a pas lieu d'être".


Il n'est "pas judicieux" et "ce n'est pas le moment de parler" de l'étiquetage de la viande halal ou casher, a de son côté réagi le Grand rabbin Bruno Fiszon, spécialiste des questions d'abattage au Consistoire central.

"Si on veut informer, qu'on informe le consommateur sur tous les événements qui ont amené son steak dans l'assiette. Un étiquetage qui se focaliserait uniquement sur le rituel conduirait à une stigmatisation", a-t-il insisté.


François Fillon a défendu la position du président-candidat et réfuté toute stigmatisation des musulmans et juifs de France: "On ne peut demander à la fois la traçabilité de tous les produits et ne pas souhaiter que les Français sachent ce qu'ils mangent".


Il n'a pas désavoué non plus Claude Guéant pour avoir établi un lien entre droit de vote des étrangers et viande halal. Le ministre de l'Intérieur a d'ailleurs répété lundi soir, quasiment dans les mêmes termes, ses propos sur un lien éventuel entre vote des étrangers et viande halal.


Le ministre des Affaires étrangères, Alain Juppé, a pour sa part pris ses distances avec le sujet. "J'ai déjà dit que le 'choc des civilisations' n'était pas ma tasse de thé. Je pense que le problème de la viande halal est un faux problème en réalité, qu'il y a d'autres vraies questions qu'il faut se poser", a déclaré le maire de Bordeaux.




Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks PPP.......... Balham, you did ask.

 

If too much happens about this, then the zealots are winning. Because if something reasonable is said about such a thing then it deserves a debate and not attacking the person starting the debate and that is so depressing and dangerous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fillon will receive today at Matignon representatives of two groups on the halal Casher polemic. There in all this I have learnt that the translation of ' it's not kosher" is in point of fact " ce n'est pas casher"....I'll try it on some local goats today. PPP presumes that the people who will meet with Fillon are the bearers of  the tenets of ancient customs dating from a barbaric age imbued in inferior civilisations that have failed to evolve and modernise themselves into the superior civilisations extolled by Claude Géant.

These groups also in all probability have a vested interest in perpetuating these barbaric practices for pecuniary benefit.

It will all be in BFM later..keep zapping..keep in touch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fillon was definitely not being racist but was pointing out that the limits of multi-culturalism. Religion is one thing but its historic appendages are another, and it is these latter which very often clash with the development of modern thought on such things as freedom of speech, humanity and, in this case, hygiene.

Cultures have to move on and change if they are to live in any multi-cultural society and cannot live in their own private world, just as society has to make some changes to meet their real needs. Halal killing is NOT part of race or religion but of the age old customs which surround Judaism and Islam and which are no longer necessary. As are stoning and limb amputation and forced marriages.  So they must go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="woolybanana"]

Fillon was definitely not being racist but was pointing out that the limits of multi-culturalism. Religion is one thing but its historic appendages are another, and it is these latter which very often clash with the development of modern thought on such things as freedom of speech, humanity and, in this case, hygiene.

Cultures have to move on and change if they are to live in any multi-cultural society and cannot live in their own private world, just as society has to make some changes to meet their real needs. Halal killing is NOT part of race or religion but of the age old customs which surround Judaism and Islam and which are no longer necessary. As are stoning and limb amputation and forced marriages.  So they must go.

[/quote]

As a non practicing Jew who loves his crispy bacon sandwiches part of me agrees wholeheartedly with your comments. The other part of me, rightly or wrongly does not. Simply put, I won't quote chapter and verse unless you want me to, it is part of the more orthodox and conservative Jewish belief and comes directly from the old testament which is at the core of the Jewish faith.

I am never too sure if PPP is repeating some of the things he writes, are his personal views or whatever but just in case I would like to point out that there have been 189 Jewish recipients of the Nobel Prize since 1901 and France has only produced 64 with a few of them being Jewish. To imply that the Jewish faith as a civilisation is inferior is in my opinion bigoted and insulting be it PPP's words or of somebody he is quoting.

As to barbaric practices both past and present I thing there is one, very large, christian church who has a lot more to answer for than probably most it we want to go down the religious route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Racist - no.

Silly - perhaps.

This how your meat is killed seems to be a major thing in this election. Perhaps homelessness, unemployment, the so called crise etc etc aren't such a big deal after all, but your meat, wow . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What description should I give to something that I find barbaric or immoral in any culture or race, no matter the good that can also be found in that race or culture?

There are things in this world that I find repulsive and offensive and they are usually associated with religions. And yet apparently it is the likes of me who puts society in moral decline and frankly I do not.

IF we got religion away from this planet, we'd have just as many good bad and ugly people. But maybe we wouldn't have abuses that are done in the name of some god or other, and at least we'd view others actions clearly, and not have  arguments about their  behaviour obfuscated by books written by men a long long time ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am never too sure if PPP is repeating some of the things he writes, are his personal views or whatever but just in case I would like to point out that there have been 189 Jewish recipients of the Nobel Prize since 1901 and France has only produced 64 with a few of them being Jewish. To imply that the Jewish faith as a civilisation is inferior is in my opinion bigoted and insulting be it PPP's words or of somebody he is quoting.

PPP has problems resolving the import of your prose with a humble patent clerk enrolling at IAS, Princeton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are farms round here were I often see the farmer's wife wringing a chickens neck, cut it's throat or cut it's head of with a axe who's sharpness I do not know. I see the hunters running around in the forest trying to find some poor wounded animal they have shot for fun, they can't find it and it takes days to die. There is an angler on the riverbank who leaves his caught fish on the bank to die slowly of suffocation, one could go on. There is much cruelty in the world. To single out a particular group however is wrong. If you ban one you ban them all.

I believe that Halal and kosher meats should be clearly marked in supermarkets and in meals so that people can make a choice. If people really do care they will not buy the stuff and it will rot on the shelf and the supermarkets won't buy it again.

By and large however I agree mostly with Balham's comments. When it comes to who will run the country there are far more wrongs to put right with regards to health, education and the economy than squabbling over something like this. This thread in a way is an excellent micro version of what is really happening in the country. If you are really concerned about the Presidential elections then there are far more important things to discuss but here we are already spending most of our energy debating about a minor issue such as food production methods. Like most politicians in the world they will say what they think the people want to hear to get their vote. Once they have, and have won the election, these promises are quickly forgot, the people don't get what they voted for and it all slips back to the corrupt world of politics that still does not really understand the hopes, needs and aspirations of the people they allegedly represent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="pachapapa"]

I am never too sure if PPP is repeating some of the things he writes, are his personal views or whatever but just in case I would like to point out that there have been 189 Jewish recipients of the Nobel Prize since 1901 and France has only produced 64 with a few of them being Jewish. To imply that the Jewish faith as a civilisation is inferior is in my opinion bigoted and insulting be it PPP's words or of somebody he is quoting.

PPP has problems resolving the import of your prose with a humble patent clerk enrolling at IAS, Princeton.

[/quote]

You could try to stop using a thesaurus and write in plain English. That way there could be no misunderstanding as to your meaning or intent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Quillan"][quote user="pachapapa"]

I am never too sure if PPP is repeating some of the things he writes, are his personal views or whatever but just in case I would like to point out that there have been 189 Jewish recipients of the Nobel Prize since 1901 and France has only produced 64 with a few of them being Jewish. To imply that the Jewish faith as a civilisation is inferior is in my opinion bigoted and insulting be it PPP's words or of somebody he is quoting.

PPP has problems resolving the import of your prose with a humble patent clerk enrolling at IAS, Princeton.

[/quote]

You could try to stop using a thesaurus and write in plain English. That way there could be no misunderstanding as to your meaning or intent.

[/quote]

I have difficulty in relating what you have written to the work of Einstein whose first job was a patent clerk, later studying at the Institute of Advanced Studies at Princeton University in the State of New Jersey in the United States of America. Einstein remained at the Institute of Advanced Studies from 1933 until his death. It is my opinion that the contribution of Einstein to mankinds' knowledge was due to his own intellect and not to his religious persuasion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this has to be seen in the context of the battle for power inside the ruling right-wing coalition.

Morale is low, as they fear that Sarkozy may lose the election in 6 weeks time.

People like Fillon are positioning themselves for the next elections in 5 years time, while trying to keep in with Sarkozy just in case he wins.

So I very much doubt that he was simply talking about how animals are killed...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a very interesting report on humane killing:

http://www.daff.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/1370332/animal-welfare-livestock-slaughter.pdf

The report found that ritual (i.e. halal / kosher) killing methods can be as humane (in terms of the physiological affects of circulatory and neurological shock in eliminating pain etc) for some animals as the use of percussive stunning.  The animals where this is the case are the smaller livestock e.g. chickens, sheep and goats.  Ritual slaughter is less humane for large animals due to the relative brain size and the thicker hide. (I imagine that geography and habitat of the Middle East meant that relatively few cows were eaten when these rules were established.)

I think it's a general problem that, over the years, the raising of the live stock has become separated  from it's consumption.  Meat is seen as something that is bought ready wrapped from supermarkets, making it easier to distance yourself, psychologically, from the realities of the prerequisite slaughter.  I imagine that centuries ago (and I think still the case for more remote and rural communities) the animal being slaughtered would have been raised by those eating it.  This gives a far greater desire to ensure a humane kill.  As an aside, the article points out that the preparatory period is as

significant as the actual killing (or stun to stick period) in

terms of the distress to the animal.  I have certainly heard of modern

slaughter houses that are less than satisfactory in this regard (and

have also seen the inhumane multi attempt, blunt knife domestic / hunt

kills).

The article discusses supplementary measures that can be used alongside traditional slaughter methods to reduce the stress to the animal without rendering the carcass non kosher etc.  Thus there is no reason why ritual killing cannot also be humane. 

Maybe if we all took a more personal interest in where our food comes from then we would have more humane slaughtering whether the meat is halal, kosher or not?

Mrs R51

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="NormanH"]So I very much doubt that he was simply talking about how animals are killed...
[/quote][:)]

Or maybe he'd be telling everybody about the cruel and unusual punishment meeted out daily to battery hens by white Frenchmen (and no doubt women also).  There's no doubt in my mind either, Norman, that M Fillon was trying to elicit the right-wing vote, not the veggie one. 

 

Mrs Richard, I agree.  I'm as guilty as anybody in this, I admit.  Although I have killed a couple of chickens in my time (by the old-fashioned, neck wringing method, I hasten to add) and I have held on to several horses whilst they were shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="pachapapa"]Completely agree with Fillon; superior civilisations have moved forward to humane methods of slaughter; it is quite obvious that the barbaric methods associated with the words kosher & halal should be banned. A morally disgusting accoutrement of inferior civilisations.[/quote]

While I detest all religions and associated practices I do take issue with delusional inferior civilisations comments.

 

Lets list just a few things that prove our superiority.

 

The Daly Star and Jordan’s latest exploits.

 

Moronic soap operas that have lasted decades and will probably last for centuries.

 

Drug dependency level.

 

Sink estates full of welfare dependents.

 

And finally a political class that can whip up the ignorant with just a wave of a flag.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Braco"]

[quote user="pachapapa"]superior civilisations have moved forward to humane methods of slaughter;[/quote]

While I detest all religions and associated practices I do take issue with delusional inferior civilisations comments.

[/quote]

Totally agree Braco, that sort of racist comment is both unpleasant and unnecessary.

Mrs R51

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...