As the French press and online media reported, the situation with governmental funding of the key French FECRIS member organizations, are at stake.
As the newspaper recounts, FECRIS member (and founding) organizations UNADFI and CCMM are stating themselves “worried” because of the “decrease of public subventions”, stepping down from a “120,000 Euro to 20,000 Euro” yearly allocation, and “next year, it will probably be zero!”
Did they wonder why?
Did they query themselves what their operation’s outcome was, after the tragic happenings that ran over France in 2015 and later?
Did any faintest thought walk into their minds to let them surmise that the French government after financing their hate campaigns and alarmism, might now be eventually realizing that such an investment will bring about no good and has not in fact brought any so far?
As Catherine Picard stated, “When I was sitting in the parliament my time, we were forty parliament members working on cult matters. Since 2017, there has been no more study group at the National Assembly, nothing.”
One would so wonder – did that lack of public fund expenditure yield any troubled fruit?
Else – were those parliament members totally unemployed after abandoning that ‘study group’ or did they pour their efforts into some other worthwhile endeavor?
Yet the FECRIS representatives whined and grumbled not only to the press, but even to their supporters in Facebook:
They attempt all ways to make anybody pity them and perhaps help them get more funding:
Such statement sounds astounding: what would France be a model for, in terms of social peacefulness and serenity especially as related to religious phenomena and ideological extremism?
If one would just consider the long, dramatic and tragic bloody stripe of attacks and massacres occurred in the last years (see: https://news.sky.com/story/france-a-timeline-of-terror-10787264 and https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/terror-attacks-france-toulouse-louvre/), directly connected to the same sort of intolerance FECRIS tends to create in a society, one wouldn’t really dare to call it a “worldwide model”: