Do French Women tend to be less endowed than other Women?

On 11/01/04 10:00, in article , "Jeremy
Henderson" wrote:


The article you posted would be improved if it distinguished scientific
discussion from political polemic. Specifically, it addresses the straw man
of whether African achievements in sport can be dismissed as "just good luck
with genes". I don't remember anyone denigrating African athletes on that
basis.

On the other hand read other peoples statemente here.

Indeed, the idea that Blacks are naturally superior athletes does permeate
White thinking these days. Hitler`s also since he did not like his
Aryan blond competing against "animals" as he termed Blacks.

As I've said elsewhere, it is self-evident that genetic differences between
races have implications for athletes. To take an obvious example Chinese and
Japanese are on average shorter than the Dutch, and hence are less adapted
to high jumping events.

Again, diet plays a big role in determining the average height of
a population group. The average height of the average Japanese has
increased by 3 to 5 inches since WWII. That is not genetics.

If you have look at something called the Flynn factor, you will find
out that the IQ (tested) of Americans has soared 20 points in the 20th
century. Better genes?? Better food (??) or IQ tests have not great
meaning (??) over a large time period.

Given small natural differences, these will be accentuated by social
factors. Imagine, for the sake of discussion, that black Americans are very
slightly taller than whites. Blacks may then perceive they have an advantage
in basketball and increased numbers take it up. If more blacks are trying to
play basketball, then you increase the chance of finding the ones that are
actually any good at it. You can make the same argument for tennis players.
(Are British players worse than, say Swedes, or are there just more Swedes
getting the opportunity to play, and hence more chance of finding the good
ones).

As I said, I am a proponent of social determinism but I am not always
prepared to rationalize a particular observation. But a lot of social
factors play a role in sports. At one time, US swimmers were mostly
developed out of those white suburbs which had swimming pools. Some
times accidents happen, the French become good internationally at judo
because some Asians showed up 30 years ago and starting forming
clubs etc.

Now let us discuss tiddlywinks as a sport! :-)

On 11/01/04 12:06, in article ,
"Mxsmanic" wrote:

Earl Evleth writes:

I am selective and avoid think tank stuff, go for academic sites.

Their reliability is not necessarily any better. They can't even agree
among themselves.

Sure they can, the global warming "hypothesis" is generally accepted by
those working in atmospheric and climate related areas. That was one of my
scientific interests since I was a modeler of chemical reactions,
some of them atmospheric. Global warming is a consensus view. The
cause of the ozone hole is another consensus view. Evolutionary
theory among biologists is a consensus view.

That does not mean there are no renegades, paid shills by special
interest groups. There are also a number of scientists who might
play the devil`s advocate, and say "wait a minute". One gets
recognition for being on the other side of an issue, even if
it is for the fun of it.

If it's art, it's not science, is it? But that does not surprise me.

I meant writing the stuff up. Not the basic science. One is a salesman,
"selling" an article. One has to get it by the referees (usually two).


Why are Jews so "over" represented in Academia?

Jews of Eastern European ancestry have a much higher average IQ than the
general population. Nobody knows why, but the fact is not disputed.

In another posting I mentioned the Flynn effect. Are you familiar
with that?

IQs are tricky things. Every underclass group in the world scores
10 or so IQ units below the classes above them. Like the Korean
minority in Japan. In the US, Koreans have the same tested IQ
as the Japanese.

Basically IQ test do not test intelligence, as one researcher said
"they test IQ".

What are the processes of exclusion which kept
them limited in the Corporate world and not the Academic?

There isn't much of any exclusion today.

In the Corporate World in the US? Well tell me, are there
private clubs in the US which still exclude Jews??
Are you saying the Anglo-Saxon anti-Semitism, which
dominated European and American cultures not that
many years ago, has largely "gone away"?.

Earl

On 11/01/04 12:07, in article ,
"Mxsmanic" wrote:

Explain why blacks have lower rates of melanoma, using the same
reasoning.


Have lower rates than whom? Other dark skinned people in the world
or the Swedes?

These are specific adaptations requiring probably a specific gene.

Other human factors, like "intelligence" are not single gene specific.
So one gets a spectrum of distribution within a single population.
Human survival depends both on specificity, in some cases, and
diversity in another. The "diversity" allows the population group
to avoid putting all its eggs into one basket, genetically.

This is the biological equivalent of not painting yourself into
a corner.

Earl

On 11/1/04 13:17, in article , "Earl Evleth"
wrote:

On 11/01/04 10:00, in article , "Jeremy
Henderson" wrote:


The article you posted would be improved if it distinguished scientific
discussion from political polemic. Specifically, it addresses the straw man
of whether African achievements in sport can be dismissed as "just good luck
with genes". I don't remember anyone denigrating African athletes on that
basis.

On the other hand read other peoples statemente here.

Indeed, the idea that Blacks are naturally superior athletes does permeate
White thinking these days. Hitler`s also since he did not like his
Aryan blond competing against "animals" as he termed Blacks.

As I've said elsewhere, it is self-evident that genetic differences between
races have implications for athletes. To take an obvious example Chinese and
Japanese are on average shorter than the Dutch, and hence are less adapted
to high jumping events.

Again, diet plays a big role in determining the average height of
a population group. The average height of the average Japanese has
increased by 3 to 5 inches since WWII. That is not genetics.

However, the average height of the Japanese is still much lower than that of
Europeans, and indeed I suspect of Africans who don't enjoy a better diet. I
find it somewhat absurd that you are suggesting that there are not
genetically determined differences between races.

If you have look at something called

"If you have a look at something called"? - maybe you can find a book with
pictures that I can refer to?

Please condescend to someone else - I don't appreciate it.

the Flynn factor, you will find
out that the IQ (tested) of Americans has soared 20 points in the 20th
century. Better genes?? Better food (??) or IQ tests have not great
meaning (??) over a large time period.

Given small natural differences, these will be accentuated by social
factors. Imagine, for the sake of discussion, that black Americans are very
slightly taller than whites. Blacks may then perceive they have an advantage
in basketball and increased numbers take it up. If more blacks are trying to
play basketball, then you increase the chance of finding the ones that are
actually any good at it. You can make the same argument for tennis players.
(Are British players worse than, say Swedes, or are there just more Swedes
getting the opportunity to play, and hence more chance of finding the good
ones).

As I said, I am a proponent of social determinism but I am not always
prepared to rationalize a particular observation. But a lot of social
factors play a role in sports. At one time, US swimmers were mostly
developed out of those white suburbs which had swimming pools.

I think that's what I just said, apropos tennis.

J;

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 12:06:09 +0100, Mxsmanic wrote:

Earl Evleth writes:

I am selective and avoid think tank stuff, go for academic sites.

Their reliability is not necessarily any better. They can't even agree
among themselves.


Sure they may disagree. But most of the time, it's because they truly and
honestly disagree. (Even occasionally gets ugly and personal; but I
digress.)

In contrast, most "think tanks" have an agenda in the first place. So
what they do is really advocacy.

Quite different standards.

Earl Evleth writes:

Sure they can, the global warming "hypothesis" is generally accepted by
those working in atmospheric and climate related areas.

At least for now.

I meant writing the stuff up. Not the basic science. One is a salesman,
"selling" an article. One has to get it by the referees (usually two).

Ah ... and salesmen don't depend on the truth.

In another posting I mentioned the Flynn effect. Are you familiar
with that?

Yes. But it is not relevant in this context.

IQs are tricky things. Every underclass group in the world scores
10 or so IQ units below the classes above them.

That's because low intelligence tends to put people into an underclass,
since they do not achieve as well as smarter people.

Basically IQ test do not test intelligence, as one researcher said
"they test IQ".

That's the folk mythology, not the reality.

In the Corporate World in the US?

Yes.

Well tell me, are there private clubs in the US which
still exclude Jews??

I don't know; they are private, after all.

Are you saying the Anglo-Saxon anti-Semitism, which
dominated European and American cultures not that
many years ago, has largely "gone away"?

Yes. The Second World War got rid of most of it.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Earl Evleth writes:

Have lower rates than whom?

Than Europeans.

These are specific adaptations requiring probably a specific gene.

Why are they "specific adaptations" requiring a "specific gene" when
they concern melanoma, but misconceptions when they concern specific
athletic or cognitive abilities?

We don't know if skin color is monogenetic or not.

Other human factors, like "intelligence" are not single gene specific.
So one gets a spectrum of distribution within a single population.

So?

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Well if you believe the geologists that the earth was once entirely
molten then it has been slowly cooling since the mantle is now solid.
If the core is still molten iron as has been hypothesized then the earth
is probably still slowly cooling.
Now admittedly there may eventually be some warming as a result of red
giantism if I believe the astrophysicists of my acquaintance, but I
won't worry about it. Even then, it will be a temporary phenomena since
we are immersed in a background temperature of a couple tenths of a
degree Kelvin and will eventually cool to that point.

A problem is that a lot of my 'colleagues' seem to forget their
thermodynamics................
--
wf.




Earl Evleth wrote:

Sure they can, the global warming "hypothesis" is generally accepted by
those working in atmospheric and climate related areas. That was one of my
scientific interests since I was a modeler of chemical reactions,
some of them atmospheric. Global warming is a consensus view. The

randee writes:

Well if you believe the geologists that the earth was once entirely
molten then it has been slowly cooling since the mantle is now solid.
If the core is still molten iron as has been hypothesized then the earth
is probably still slowly cooling.

Most of the heat of the Earth's interior comes from radioactive decay of
long-lived radioisotopes, such as uranium.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

On 11/01/04 22:44, in article ,
"Mxsmanic" wrote:

Earl Evleth writes:

Sure they can, the global warming "hypothesis" is generally accepted by
those working in atmospheric and climate related areas.

At least for now.

Until something better comes along is the history of science.


I meant writing the stuff up. Not the basic science. One is a salesman,
"selling" an article. One has to get it by the referees (usually two).

Ah ... and salesmen don't depend on the truth.

Salesmen don`t get peer reviewed by other salesmen. Our hurdles is
the referees.

Basically IQ test do not test intelligence, as one researcher said
"they test IQ".

That's the folk mythology, not the reality.

By definition they test IQ!



Well tell me, are there private clubs in the US which
still exclude Jews??

I don't know; they are private, after all.

Do you have Jewish friends in the US who have
had problems in this regard?


Are you saying the Anglo-Saxon anti-Semitism, which
dominated European and American cultures not that
many years ago, has largely "gone away"?

Yes. The Second World War got rid of most of it.

Anti-Semitism mostly disappeared, just like that!

As to the current status of anti-Semitism in the US I will refer you to
a web page

http://www.adl.org/adl.asp

This is the Anti-Defamation League' web page. Although a special
interest group, their stuff is reasonably well presented.

This article on France is germane to Americans, especially
American Jews visiting France. I consider it a well balanced
analysis by a French Jew.

Earl

****


Anti-Semitism in France, an Assessment

A report from Haim Musicant, Director-General of CRIF
(Conseil Représentatif des Institutions juives de France - the umbrella body
representing the organized Jewish community in France)

This report originally appeared in the CRIF English-language newsletter

Posted: December 30, 2003

France is not an anti-Semitic country. Why then have there been so many
anti-Semitic attacks in the past years? CRIF's Haim Musicant tries to
explain in this overview why it took the French authorities so long to grasp
the new reality of anti-Semitism.

A few years ago, in 2001 for instance, I do not think we would have
discussed an issue such as the one on our agenda. At the end of the 1990s,
the Jewish community of France was living in peace. Worrying events did
occur, however in the past three decades we never felt the Jewish community
being questioned regarding its role within French society. The future of the
Jewish community in France was simply not an issue. This situation has
changed in the past three years partly due to the large amount of serious
events that have occurred, pointing at a deep crisis within French society
and due, too, to the comments made by intellectual circles, by the powers
that be, by the media, by the public opinion and by the Jewish community
itself.

Before adding my own remarks, let me give you a brief overview of the Jewish
community of France and its background.

It is a community with a broad spectrum, the first in Europe and second only
to the United States. It is a strong, structured, centralized community. The
Consistoire Central takes care of the religious issues; the Fonds Social
Juif Unifié is in charge of welfare and of education and the CRIF is
representing French Jewry on a political level. CRIF commemorated this year
the 60th anniversary of its creation in 1943 under German occupation, an
offspring of the networks of Jewish Resistance. On this occasion, CRIF
organized a symposium, "Long Live The Republic!" and was invited to the
presidential palace by French President Jacques Chirac.

Our community is alive with many religious, political and cultural trends.
Over 31 000 pupils are attending Jewish schools. Jewish studies become more
and more important, including Hebrew and Yiddish classes. There is an active
Jewish press, four Jewish radio stations in Paris itself and many more in
the provinces, a Jewish television station and a second one in the pipes
plus several Jewish web sites on the Internet. French theatre and movie
industry often deal with Jewish topics. French Judaism is a visible element
of the French landscape.

The Nineties have strengthened the material and symbolic link between the
Jews and their homeland. French President Jacques Chirac in his July 16,
1995, speech commemorating the roundup of the Jews in 1942 known as the "Vel
d'Hiv roundup" officially condemned the responsibility of the Vichy regime
in this tragic event of our history. The Jewish community had been expecting
this official admission of the facts and of the French collaboration with
the Nazis for the past 50 years. It was greeted accordingly.

In 1997, the Catholic Church recognized that it kept silent during the Nazi
Occupation.

The Matteoli commission was appointed to assess the consequences of the then
anti-Semitic French legislation on Jewish property. Then came the Drai
commission - still active - to compensate those who were despoiled. The
compensations enabled the creation in December 2000 of a Fund for the
Remembrance of the Holocaust, chaired by Mrs Simone Veil.

This brief overview was just meant to show where we were coming from, as
compared to the present situation. May be the violence currently endured by
the Jewish community is a backlash in one way or another of the efforts of
compensation and of recognition of what happened during the Holocaust. The
support in favor of the Jewish people is totally focused on the compensation
for the Holocaust. Maybe those efforts have unwittingly unleashed a greater
tolerance to the reactions to the Middle East conflict.

The organized Jewish community strongly supports Israel. The debatable
aspects of Israel's policy do not weaken this support. The constant flow of
French tourists to Israel in general and especially last August proved if
needed the capacity of the Jews of France to demonstrate the strength of the
links binding them to Israel. Many of those tourists have relatives and
friends in Israel and even own flats there. The main Jewish institutions in
France often organize trips to Israel with hundreds of participants. In June
of 2003, CRIF, the Fonds Social Juif Unifié, the Consistoire Central and the
Consistoire of Paris organized a major event, "Twelve Hours in Support of
Friendship Between France and Israel". Over 50 000 people participated in
Paris itself only.

This link with Israel is vivid and deep. The French Jews experienced it in
their daily lives and in an unexpected way in September 2000.

The visit of Ariel Sharon on the Temple Mount and its alleged or real
consequences on the revival of the Intifada spread with an incredible speed
and triggered serious consequences on the daily lives of Jews in France,
still felt today.

In fact, this violence had been brewing for a long time, waiting just for a
right trigger to explode.

Forewarning events occurred in the past two decades: the terrorist attacks
on the Copernic synagogue in 1980 and on the Goldenberg restaurant in 1982,
both in Paris; the desecration of the Jewish cemetery of Carpentras (South
of France) in 1990; the rise of the extreme right-wing in Europe and in
France itself with the party of Jean-Marie Le Pen since the early Eighties;
changes occurring within the French society itself trying to absorb with
great pain a large Arab Muslim community; the discovery by the French of
their true history of World War II, of the war of Algeria and of the end of
colonization; the revival of anti-Semitism clad in new dresses and the
denial of the Holocaust.

Many reasons brought to the current situation in France and in Europe,
leading to anti-Semitic attacks. I want to highlight the fact that the
revival of the new Intifada and the attacks against the Jewish community on
the eve of Rosh Hashanah occurred almost simultaneously in September 2000.
Synagogues, community centers and Jewish schools were attacked and a great
number of buildings were destroyed or burned down.

These attacks occurred in the suburbs of large cities, mainly in the Paris
region and in other areas subjected to daily violence.

Generally speaking, the climate deteriorated. On the eve of Yom Kippur 2000,
a delegation of CRIF called on the French President and on the then French
Prime Minister. I must tell you that we were not heard; we were not at all
understood. We went to state our deep concern following the multiplication
of violent attacks against Jewish communities by suburban louts, most of
them of Arab Muslim origin. Our hosts replied that France was not an
anti-Semitic country, which was absolutely not what we were saying.

This situation prevailed for several months. We firmly condemned it in
December 2001 on the occasion of the general meeting of CRIF by publishing
the list of all the anti-Semitic attacks that had occurred since September
2000. The same evening, we were hosting at a large dinner party the Prime
Minister, the major part of the French government, members of the National
Assembly, senators, and political and religious representatives. This event
garnered large media coverage. In a very tough speech CRIF's President Roger
Cukierman seriously warned about the situation and condemned the lack of
reaction of the government.

The French Socialist party today acknowledges that his friends who were then
ruling the country did not grasp the seriousness of the situation.

I must go back to the causes of the current crisis. I must point at the
obvious inability of the French Left to deal with immigration-related
issues, leading to a deterioration that paved the way for the extreme
right-wing. Arab Muslims are victims of a very difficult absorption process.
The difficulty is stemming from a lack of economic perspective in the long
run and from the lack of means to implement a decent absorption policy.
Could those victims be held responsible for the attacks they have launched
against the Jewish community? The Left had no answer to this question.

The French leaders feared that the Middle-east conflict would spread to the
French suburbs, already lawless areas. An Intifada of the suburbs, so to
speak.

In this listing of causes I must add the extreme left-wing political groups
who served as hothouses in the Sixties and Seventies for today's leading
writers in the French media.

I have to quote also the regrettable statements, exposed by a leading French
daily, of a French academic and an advisor to the Socialist Party, Pascal
Boniface, who made the Socialist leaders aware of Arithmetics 101: political
decisions should be made according to simple accountancy rules, Arab votes
outnumber Jewish votes by ten to one in France, explained Boniface.

I must also say a few words about the devil-like image of Israel's Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon in France, preventing any possible discussion on
Israel's policy and on the Middle-east conflict. One forgets that Sharon's
predecessor was Ehud Barak and that Barak was the man in power when the
Intifada broke out.

A few words must be said about the media's responsibility in the reporting
of the Intifada. The French media contributed largely to the deterioration
of the image of Israel in the eye of the French public opinion. I remember
the case of this young Arab immigrant living in a French suburb explaining
he decided to attack a synagogue after a TV newscast showing the Intifada.
From this point of view, the media coverage improved in the last months.
CRIF, with the support of some intellectuals, helped improving the
atmosphere through targeted actions on the media exposing the bias and
subjectivity of their reports and their serious consequences on the public
opinion and on the Jewish community.

CRIF has been active relentlessly on all fronts, politics, media, trade
unions, institutions, and public organizations. CRIF repeatedly requested
the public powers to increase the security around the Jewish buildings and
also to support the in-house security service of the Jewish community.

On April 7, 2002, a few weeks before the French Presidential election, CRIF
organized a major demonstration all through France with more than 200,000
participants. The impressive crowd of 150,000 people marched through the
streets of Paris chanting its condemnation of anti-Semitism and its support
for Israel, victim of terrorist attacks. It was a very large success.
However, it was a Jewish success, for 95% of the marchers were Jews and the
non-Jewish participation was almost non-existent.

April 2002 was the worst month in terms of anti-Semitic aggressions in
France.

This demonstration showed how isolated we were. We were very far from the
tidal wave that swept through France following the desecration of the
Carpentras cemetery in 1990, with French President François Mitterrand
leading the demonstrators. Clearly enough, all political parties and leaders
could then take part in the condemnation of the extreme-right wing, of
Jean-Marie Le Pen's National Front. On April 7, 2002, we were condemning a
sick and blurry drift of the French society but our voice will not be heard
as long as the image of Ariel Sharon will indirectly be referred to when we
support Israel.

Then came the results of the first round of the presidential election in
France. The National Front's Jean-Marie Le Pen ignominiously ousted outgoing
Prime Minister and Socialist candidate Lionel Jospin. This political
earthquake left the Jewish community between the hammer of the extreme
right-wing's anti-Semitism and the anvil of a new anti-Semitism coming from
the extreme left-wing and from an ideology close to the Arab-Muslim
population.

Jacques Chirac won the second round and was thus re-elected for a five-year
term. His victory put an end to the "cohabitation" (a right wing President
with a Socialist Prime Minister) and led to the appointment of a right wing
government who hurried to condemn the anti-Semitic attacks. These events
thoroughly changed the political landscape but it cannot be said that we are
back to the situation that prevailed before October 2000. In his first
speech in front of a Jewish institution, the new French Prime Minister
firmly condemned the attacks against Jews and stated, "Attacking a Jew is
tantamount to attacking the Republic".

The Prime Minister's concern permeated to all other Cabinet Ministers who
have to deal with anti-Semitism, namely the Minister of Interior, the
Minister of Justice, the Minister of Education. Together with CRIF,
decisions were taken to fight anti-Semitism efficiently. The first results
are already visible. Members of the National Assembly have unanimously
passed a law toughening the sanctions for anti-Semitic attacks. This French
law is said to be the most stringent in the world. I must however highlight
that most of the lawsuits for anti-Semitic slurs or attacks while getting
large media coverage, were thrown out of court. French law can be
interpreted, allows for extenuating circumstances and French judges are
independent. In spite of this, the French Minister of Justice repeatedly
asked the Prosecutors to request "exemplary sanctions".

The police are collaborating efficiently with the Security of the Jewish
community. The police protection is highly visible around Jewish
institutions, schools and synagogues. The level of protection was upgraded
to prevent any terrorist attack. In the past months, the attacks reported
against Jewish property were by no means at the level of those of October
2000, September 2001 and April 2002. One may say that the peak of
anti-Semitic attacks was reached in mid-2002.

In the same time, the situation kept deteriorating regarding the Middle-east
conflict. There was an increasing number of demonstrations in favor of the
Palestinians with people carrying Stars of David daubed with Swastikas,
pictures of Ariel Sharon dressed as Adolph Hitler. Attempts were made to
boycott Israel-made products and Israel's universities. A campaign was led
to prevent the European Union from renewing its cooperation agreements with
Israel. We successfully reined in the activities against Israel's
universities. However the slogans against "apartheid" and "ethnic cleansing"
still appeal to militants of all sides and fool a public opinion unaware of
the true meaning of the words being used. The fact that an overwhelming
majority of the Jewish community is supporting Israel is used against it.

While there are no more major anti-Semitic events logged in the monthly
reports, there are daily incidents on a smaller scale involving Jews in
public transports, in the streets, at work, in residential areas and mainly
at school. In other words, anti-Semitism is thriving. For the time being and
luckily enough, there were no casualties, but the situation is tense.

This report is not something I wrote on my own. The remarks and comments
come from the French National Commission for Human Rights. This
institutional body is reporting once a year to the French Prime Minister on
racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia. It concluded that 2002 witnessed a
worsening of the situation of anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitic attacks
outnumbered racist attacks in 2002. 193 such attacks were recorded in 2002,
six times the amount in 2001. The Ministry of Interior registered 731
anti-Semitic threats. The Commission for Human Rights turned on a red light
following its worrying conclusions, requesting the Prime Minister to act to
improve the situation. In the same report, the Commission disclosed a poll
showing the public's ignorance and indifference to the increase of
anti-Semitic attacks.

It is impossible not to see what is happening at school. The situation has
been thoroughly analyzed in "The Republic's Lost Territories," a book
published under the authority of Emmanuel Brenner in 2000. It is a series of
accounts written by teachers, describing their daily experience. Their
conclusion is the sad evidence of a deep-rooted anti-Semitism in state-run
schools. This issue was picked up by CRIF's President Roger Cukierman in a
powerful speech addressing the Prime Minister, the largest part of the
French government and scores of political and religious representatives, on
the occasion of CRIF's annual dinner in January 2003. Hundreds of copies of
the book were handed out to the participants. Since the schools were named
in the book, no one could decently claim from then on that he didn't know
that Jewish children were prevented from attending some state-run schools
because they were mobbed by Arab Muslim children; or that teachers couldn't
teach anymore their classes about the history of the Ancient Hebrews, about
the Dreyfus Case or about the Holocaust without being ragged by some pupils;
while anti-Semitic slogans are taken for granted by the latter.

The Minister of Education was made aware of this point during a meeting with
a delegation of CRIF led by its chairman Roger Cukierman in February 2003.
The Minister of Education condemned the rise of demagogy in schools, the
partisan use of the Middle-east conflict, the freedom given to the pupils'
anti-Semitic speech and the lack of reaction of part of the teaching corps.
The Minister announced a series of measures to counter this unbearable
situation in total contradiction with the principles of the Republic's
secular school system.

This issue reached the front pages of the French and International press.
Dailies and weeklies wrote about anti-Semitism in schools, anti-Semitism in
general, about the French Jews' "unease" and about the so-called "conflict
with the Arab-Muslim community". There, too, insidiously, semantics went
astray. Until now, the Jews in France were a model of integration into the
Republic and were regarded as French citizens for generations and centuries.
In the eye of the press, they suddenly became again "a community" with lots
of question marks and suspicion at a time when France is asking itself how
it will absorb its large Arab-Muslim community.

Simultaneously, the gap between France and the United States widened over
the Iraq issue. France piled up presidential decisions against the war and
demonstrators took to the streets at such a pace that one may have thought
that the Jewish community would not get away unharmed. And again, we saw
demonstrators with flags, slogans and scarves blaming Bush and Sharon,
Israel and the United States being the Great Satans of a Little
International sacrificing the Iraqi and Palestinian peoples.

In the course of one such pacifist demonstrations, a party of demonstrators
left the march to violently attack a tiny group of Jewish youths of Hashomer
Hatzair standing at the gate of their premises for a Saturday afternoon
activity. The young Jews were spotted because one of them was wearing a
skullcap. Here again, the French government and part of the political class
condemned this particularly violent aggression.

The Jews of France are living against this background. The evil is visible
to the naked eye and medicines cant help. The current French government has
demonstrated its good will and its decisions are providing a slight
improvement. For instance, on the issue of anti-Semitism at school, the
educational system braced itself to come up with tools of prevention and
monitoring of any event that could even look like anti-Semitism at school.
Contacts with CRIF are going on in a spirit of open cooperation.

The same good will and open spirit prevails in other Ministries where civil
servants are working on the issue of anti-Semitism. I personally meet with
representatives of these Ministries in the framework of the monthly
encounters initiated by France's current Prime Minister. The police are also
collaborating with the Jewish community's Security service, in a spirit of
efficiency and good communication.

CRIF is fighting on all fronts, and the battle is tough. On the political
side, we must maintain a fruitful dialogue with the media, with the
representatives of the major religions, with the local communities and with
the trade unions. In some areas, there are breakthroughs; in others, things
move at a slower pace. We do insist upon maintaining two channels, two
directions for the work we have been performing since our creation: the
protection of the Jewish community in France and the support of Israel. It
is not always easy to strike the right balance between both activities. From
this point of view, the large demonstration we organized on June 12, 2003,
"In Support of Friendship Between France and Israel" was a major success.
Over 50,000 people stood at a standstill to listen to an impressive parade
of France's main political leaders - from Left to Right, with the exception
of the extremes - who literally begged CRIF to be invited.

Protect the Jewish community, protect Israel are our two daily and difficult
missions. We are always looking for new ideas and new initiatives. One of
our most successful initiatives is the organization of tours in Israel for
French journalists. The aim is to show them something they have never seen
befo the reality of Israel. Slowly, we start to see a little change and
improvement in the representation of Israel in the media.

Our constant concern is to find out how to pursue a sustained dialogue with
our non-Jewish partners, in France and abroad. We do our best to keep up
with our principles and defend our rights in a country offering an unlimited
space to the Jews. We do not think we are living in France in a particularly
anti-Semitic environment. It is obvious to us that there is a revival of
anti-Semitism in several other countries. There are beyond the shadow of a
doubt sociological and historic distinctive features in France putting us
Jews in a rather sensitive position, but I hope we will have the means to
overcome this situation. Let's not delude ourselves: this goal will be
difficult to reach. We know that crises are cyclical and I hope the current
one will end soon. Allow me to insist upon the fact that the Jews in France
are facing a crisis that is part of a much broader national issue involving
sociology, demography, economy and politics. It would be unrealistic to try
and assess our own problems without replacing them within a larger reality
of which we are part and parcel.

I quoted in my presentation the statement made by France's Prime Minister in
July 2002: "Aggressing a Jew is tantamount to aggressing the Republic." This
statement has many consequences. Had I delivered this speech some years ago,
I would have said, "Jews feel at ease in France and are full of confidence".
Well, confidence is out and this is the time for questions.

Mr. Musicant is Director-General of the Conseil représentatif des
institutions juives de France (CRIF), the umbrella body representing the
organized Jewish community in France.