What would Camus say? France to ban smoking in public spaces

French essayist and novelist Albert Camus, who also named his cat “cigarette”. Photo: flickr.com

There are few photographs of Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus where those French heroes do not brandish a cigarette. For Jeanne Moreau and Brigitte Bardot, lighting up Gitanes and Gauloises was part of their smouldering glamour.

However, from July 1, there will now be no more smoking outside in French parks, public gardens, beaches, bus shelters, sports facilities, and near schools, announced French health minister Catherine Vautrin.

“A tobacco-free generation starts now!” said Vautrin, about the ban.

“Every year, one in ten deaths is linked to smoking. Smoking kills 75,000 people in France. That’s more than 200 deaths a day. It is the leading cause of avoidable death. Lung cancer causes terrible suffering,” she said.

Smoking “causes death” every day, said the minister.

Beyond the human toll, Vautrin pointed to the economic burden cigarettes posed for the French state.

“You can’t put a price on life, but cancer costs €150 billion a year, which is no mean feat when you consider the financial situation of our social model. Tobacco is not just an individual problem, it’s a collective scourge,” she added.

Failure to comply could result in a fine of €135, said Vautrin, who argued the freedom to smoke “ends where children’s right to breathe clean air begins”.

This announcement did not prohibit electronic cigarettes, or smoking in café terraces.

But moves against these may follow, eventually. “I’m not prohibiting myself from anything in the future,” said the minister.

Anti-smoking advocates welcomed the decision.

“A major breakthrough for our children’s health: starting July 1st, spaces frequented by the youngest will be tobacco-free. Thank you, Catherine Vautrin! Protecting children from secondhand smoke is protecting their future,” praised Sarah El-Hairiy, the government’s youth minister.

But for others, the move felt more intrusive.

“It looks like harassment, it’s deprivation of liberty”, argued Rémi Ferrec, president of the tobacconists’ federation in the Pyrénées-Orientales, in France’s southwest.

Passing smoking was not a danger in wide-open spaces like beaches, he said.

In Marseille, 24-year-old former smoker Alizée Landais expressed mixed feelings.

“It’s good, because even when I used to smoke, it bothered me to see people throw their cigarette butts in the sand. But it does take away individual freedoms,” she told Brussels Signal. 

Smoking has long been part of French identity.

The image of a cigarette-wielding intellectual or effortlessly beautiful actress has long defined a certain flavour of the French cool.

Cultural figures such as singer Serge Gainsbourg and his daughter Charlotte and actresses such as Catherine Deneuve and Béatrice Dalle embodied this imagery.

Smoking has been both rebellion and ritual, an act woven into the country’s artistic and philosophical identity.

Smoking rates remain high, with over 30 per cent of adults between 18 and 75 identifying as smokers in 2022. Still, the tide has naturally begun to turn.

Between 2012 and 2020, tobacco sales in France fell by 26 per cent, while the price of cigarettes surged by 65 per cent.

France is not the only country pursuing tighter rules on smoking.

In Belgium, a coming smoking ban applying to all restaurant and cafés has split opinion.

While the European Union is not enforcing an outright ban on smoking, it has been encouraging stricter smoke-free environments across member states.

For its part, in 2024, the European Parliament voted against outdoor smoking bans.

It remained though to be seen how a new smoking ban would be received in France– where philosopher and novelist Albert Camus only a few decades back advised fledgling writers to “smoke a bit, stare blankly at some ceilings, beat your head against some walls, refuse to see some people, paint and write”.

brusselssignal

In the Runup to Sunday’s Polish Presidential Election, Trump Administration Goes Out in Support of Conservative Karol Nawrocki

Karol Nawrocki with Donald J. Trump and Kristi Noem.

The European geopolitical chessboard keeps pitting the establishment Liberal-Globalists against the populist-rightwing patriots who refuse to surrender their national sovereignty.

Now, as we head into Sunday’s Polish Presidential Election runoff, voters face these exact options: the pro-European mayor allied with Prime Minister Donald Tusk against a conservative ally of current President Andrzej Duda.

US President Donald J. Trump, the reference for real Conservatives around the world, has endorsed the PiS candidate Karol Nawrocki, a support that included the prospect of closer military ties.

The polls predict a very close race between Nawrocki and liberal Warsaw Mayor Rafał Trzaskowski.

Associated Press reported:

“Trump met with Nawrocki earlier this month at the White House and sent his Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to a meeting of the conservative pressure group CPAC in Poland, where she offered a strong endorsement.

Noem even dangled the prospect of closer U.S.-Polish military ties in the event of a Nawrocki win — with the implied warning that a Trzaskowski victory could jeopardize Poland’s security.”

In fact, Nawrocki got the endorsements of many in the conservative world: Trump, Musk, Vance, Russia’s Medvedev, Romania’s Simion, France’s Le Pen, Germany’s Weidel, Hungary’s Orbán.

Needless to say, AP stands for Trzaskowski and the continuation of PM Tusk’s ‘rule of law’ government (i.e. acceptance Globalist policies).

“Nawrocki’s backers believe only conservative rule can safeguard national sovereignty and traditional Christian values, and they say Trump’s support would greatly enhance Poland’s security.”

Meanwhile, outgoing conservative Polish President Andrzej Duda is outraged that Ukraine denies and hides the WW2 Genocide of Poles During ‘Volyn Massacre’ by Ukrainian Nazis, and decries the cult of war criminal Stephan Bandera.

Slavyangrad reported:

“’It’s absurd when I come to Ukraine and people hug me and thank me, wearing armbands in the colors of the Bandera flag. I say that we cannot accept this, and they throw up their hands and ask: ´What do you mean?´’ – Duda said.

‘Poland will never agree with Ukrainian laws that glorify criminals responsible for the mass murder of Poles. We will never agree that you consider them heroes. We know that you consider them fighters for a free Ukraine.  For us, they are just ordinary war criminals, murderers, genocidaires, and that is how we will always call them and will never come to terms with it’, he added.”

thegatewaypundit

‘We will rape your women and colonize you!’ Migrant gang jailed in France for racist attack on White neighbors during community barbecue

AI

Three Black migrants in their twenties have been convicted and sentenced after launching a racially charged attack on White French residents celebrating Neighbours’ Day in Tarbes.

During their arrest, one of the attackers shouted, “Dirty Whites, we are going to come and colonize you and rape your women.”

The attack took place on Sunday, May 25, when a gang of five drunken migrants approached a small barbecue being held by local residents in the courtyard of their building. When the residents made it clear the unfamiliar group was not welcome, the men became aggressive and violent.

One young man from the neighborhood was struck repeatedly, and one of the attackers pulled a knife, threatening the gathering.

The three main perpetrators fled as police arrived. One was found hiding behind a car and was discovered to have earlier removed his electronic ankle tag, violating the terms of his house arrest. His disappearance had already triggered a police alert. Officers also found an Opinel knife on him.

Two other men were located and apprehended minutes later on nearby streets. During processing at the police station, one of them verbally assaulted a municipal officer. “Your words shocked me deeply,” the presiding judge stated during the trial, before reading aloud the man’s threats: “Dirty Whites, we are going to come and colonize you and rape your women.”

This defendant, originally from Mayotte, claimed to have no memory of the incident due to heavy alcohol consumption. The same defense was used by the man already known to authorities. A third attacker admitted to striking a resident, but insisted he had been provoked — a claim refuted by both the victim and his partner, who testified that the men were visibly drunk and possibly on drugs.

All three were brought before the Tarbes Criminal Court on May 28. The presiding judge read the racist statements aloud in court and condemned the behavior. The prosecutor called for significant custodial sentences, noting the men’s prior records of violence.

The man who had removed his ankle monitor was sentenced to 12 months in prison. The other two received lesser sentences: One was handed six months in prison, convertible to house arrest with electronic surveillance, and the other eight months, suspended.

rmx

Fake IDs, Lies, and Taliban Links: The Scandal Behind Germany’s Refugee Programme

An aircraft takes off from Kabul International Airport, Afghanistan
Eliezer Gabriel (via ISAF Headquarters Public Affairs Office from Kabul, Afghanistan), CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Germany’s Afghan refugee programme has come under fierce scrutiny following revelations that the government allowed thousands of migrants to enter the country with fake documents and fabricated stories—many with the active support of NGOs it continues to fund.

A major investigation by Der Spiegel uncovered widespread fraud in German resettlement schemes for “at-risk” Afghans after the Taliban’s return to power in 2021. More than 36,000 Afghans have entered Germany through these programmes, most via Pakistan. While the initiative was intended for former local staff of the German army and other high-risk groups, internal government reports show that the system was exploited on a large scale.

“What am I now—trans or gay?”

German embassy officials in Islamabad warned of “highly concerning” practices. Visa applicants often presented forged identity documents and unverifiable claims of persecution. Some were openly coached to lie during interviews. One man, whose story had been written for him by NGO handlers, messaged an activist asking, “What am I now—trans or gay?”

The abuse appears systemic. In one instance, a group of ten individuals submitted 21 fake Afghan ID cards claiming family ties to a man who had taught literacy classes. In truth, many had been living in Pakistan for years and may not have been Afghan nationals at all.

Security officials also discovered that Islamist figures and individuals with Taliban links had appeared on visa lists. Internal emails reveal that under Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, the Foreign Office instructed embassy staff to use “maximum leniency” when verifying identities, often ignoring red flags flagged by police.

The NGOs involved in selecting candidates for these programmes remain mostly unnamed. German authorities have not even provided a full list of the organisations involved to their own security services. However, one NGO—Kabul Luftbrücke—has been identified after its former staff member Theresa Breuer criticised the process as being driven by favouritism and lacking proper oversight. She described the programme as “a scheme for friends of NGO staff.”

Meanwhile, the boats kept coming

The controversy over NGO involvement in migration is not new. Germany’s federal government has sent millions in taxpayer funds to NGOs operating migrant taxi services in the Mediterranean. In 2024 alone, Berlin spent nearly €2 million on such groups, including SOS Humanity and Sant’Egidio. These organisations routinely bring migrants rescued off the coast of North Africa directly to European ports, bypassing closer safe destinations.

Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has condemned the practice, accusing Germany of fuelling illegal migration and increasing pressure on frontline EU states.

Despite claiming a tougher stance on immigration, Germany’s current coalition—including the CDU under Friedrich Merz—has failed to halt funding to these groups. Critics have accused Merz of going silent on NGO financing after forming a government with the Social Democrats and seeking Green Party support for a €1 trillion debt package.

The revelations of fraudulent visa practices raise serious questions about Berlin’s commitment to border control and national security. FDP deputy leader Wolfgang Kubicki has now called for a parliamentary inquiry into the actions of Baerbock’s Foreign Ministry, warning that the lax policies represent “a security risk for the country.”

europeanconservative

The UK Has More Political Prisoners Than Cuba – 12,000 speech arrests a year, 1,000 a month and 30 a day

Screen grab youtube

The British economy continues to struggle under PM Keir Starmer, the military is depleted and a pension crisis is on the horizon, but there is one area where the UK is exceeding expectations.

Starmer’s UK has achieved levels of political prisoners not only resembling but occasionally even outdoing those of Communist dictatorships like Cuba, Venezuela and even China.

Freedom House estimated that Cuba has 2,768 political prisoners, Venezuela has 1,953 political prisoners, and thousands more in China. Starmer’s regime and an enthusiastic police force have easily outdone these backward Communist regimes by arresting over 1,000 people a month for social media posts. The full number of political prisoners in the UK remains unknown, but the high number of arrests suggests that Britain may be able to compete with Cuba.

The 12,000 arrests by 37 forces a year are a record high. Speech arrests more than doubled from 5,502 in 2017 to over 12,000 since 2022. increasing by 1,000 or more every year. The internet did not fundamentally change since 2017. The UK authorities however have.

The London Times recently reported that “British police arrest more than 30 people a day for online posts”. London’s Met Police, who have been at the center of some of the worst speech abuses, maintain a secretive operation monitoring social media leading to almost immediate arrests.  The Met Police arrested a staggering 5,332 people in 9 years for speech and 1,700 speech arrests in 2023 alone making London into its own speech gulag.

Other forces have tried to duplicate it with their own social media monitoring teams.

After a Muslim terrorist murdered 3 British girls, a 55-year-old woman was dragged out of her home, arrested and held for 36 hours for “posting inaccurate information” that he was Muslim.

Allison Pearson, a journalist, had the police show up at her door after she tweeted a criticism of  them for posing with members of an Islamist  movement. Such incidents have become routine.

And some have led the victims of Starmer’s speech police becoming political prisoners.

One of the most infamous cases is Lucy Connolly, the mother of two children, who had lost her little boy after his hospitalization, and expressed her anger after the brutal Muslim terrorist murders of three little girls at a dance studio. Lucy was sentenced to 2.5 years in prison even while Islamists have been allowed to spout their support for terrorism and genocide.

While organizations like Freedom House and Amnesty International assemble lists of political prisoners in dictatorships, no such lists are being compiled for the UK since it’s ‘free’ (and since the British government has been one of the largest funders of Amnesty) however there were 7,734 ‘detentions’ in 2019 suggesting the possibility of a higher number of political prisoners in the UK than in many dictatorships.

Political prisoners in the UK are not limited to those arrested for online social media posts.

Recently a man who burned a Koran outside the Turkish consulate to protest the Islamist dictatorship was locked up, not in Istanbul but in London, for “harassment” against “the religious institution of Islam”. To add insult to injury, the Islamist who stabbed him was let out on bail while he was kept in prison. In the UK, speech is a major crime, stabbing the speaker is a minor one.

At political rallies, a Jewish protester who waved a sign mocking Hezbollah’s leader had his home raided by two police vans looking for “offensive materials” and was accused of stirring up “racial hatred” by offending “pro-Hezbollah” terrorist supporters. He was charged with “racially or religiously aggravated harassment” and put through an eight month court case before the case was finally dropped. Even an anti-Israel activist was arrested for carrying a sign reading “Stop Israel genocide! Stop Hamas executions!”. He wasn’t charged for the anti-Israel slogan, but for the anti-Hamas one, on the grounds that criticising Hamas was engaging in a “racially and religiously aggravated breach of the peace under the Public Order Act.”

Offending Hamas or Hezbollah is a crime in the UK, supporting terrorists however isn’t.

Such arrests make it even more difficult to begin assembling a full list of political prisoners, but the expansiveness of speech suppression operations in the UK is on par with dictatorships.

While it’s easy to blame the Starmer regime for the transformation of the United Kingdom into a speech gulag, much as in East Germany, where much of the public was revealed to have been informing on each other, the increase in speech investigations and arrests has been driven in part by a growing population of enthusiastic political informants. Cancel culture in America can get people fired or shunned, but in the United Kingdom it can actually send them to prison.

Over 14,000 “non-crime hate incidents” were reported to UK police forces including someone offended by a classic children’s illustration considered racially insensitive today and a family member “reported for being transphobic after saying that the ‘victim’ was “living out a sexual fantasy”. In a recent case a portrait of Enoch Powell, a British politician who warned about the dangers of unrestricted mass migration, in a store window was reported as a hate incident.

British leftists used to moan about Thatcher and warn of a tyranny that would take away free speech, but it’s their regime of radicalization and Islamization that is killing free speech. Englishmen had more free speech under even the most tyrannical kings, where men could at least whisper criticisms to each other in the corner of a pub, than they do under PM Starmer.

Crime rose 10% in 2024 and robberies rose 64% in a decade, but the only crime that the Starmer regime and police will prosecute is the crime of speech. The UK is falling behind in everything, but when it comes to political prisoners, it’s catching up to Communist tyrannies.

frontpagemag

Afghan teen sentenced to 8 years for ‘senseless’ fatal stabbing of French boy Matisse Marchais

Matisse (L). his murderer (R)

A French juvenile court sentenced a 16-year-old Afghan migrant to eight years in prison on Wednesday for the fatal stabbing of Matisse Marchais, a 15-year-old French boy, in a case that sparked national outrage and intensified public scrutiny of France’s immigration policies.

Rahman M., who was also 15 at the time of the attack in April 2024, was convicted by the Châteauroux juvenile criminal court following a three-day closed-door trial. The court also imposed an additional 15 years of socio-judicial monitoring after his release.

The teenager faced a maximum sentence of 15 years under French juvenile law, but the court ruled that he had a “significant impairment of discernment,” leading to a reduced prison term.

The attack occurred on April 27, 2024, in the Saint-Denis district of Châteauroux. According to police and media reports at the time, Rahman M. had previously been in an altercation with Matisse earlier in the day. He then returned to the area carrying a knife and stabbed Matisse multiple times, inflicting a fatal wound to the heart. A police source confirmed the boy was left lying unresponsive in the street and later died in hospital. Rahman’s mother, a 37-year-old Afghan woman, was also alleged to have struck Matisse as he lay bleeding.

Video evidence showed Rahman M. roaming the neighborhood with a knife before the killing. He had previously been under judicial supervision in connection with an aggravated theft case but had not been convicted.

Court president David Marcat described the sentence as “very balanced” and “well understood by Matisse’s family,” noting that it served the dual purpose of protecting society and allowing for the possibility of rehabilitation.

The prosecution had requested a 10-year sentence and 10 years of follow-up monitoring, but the court adjusted the terms in light of the defendant’s age and mental state. Rahman M. has 10 days to appeal the ruling.

Matisse’s family, who had largely avoided public commentary during the trial, previously expressed deep disillusionment with the process, saying they “did not expect anything at all from this trial” and “certainly not explanations that will not arrive.” However, they have since vowed to turn their grief into a broader fight against youth violence. On April 30, 2025, they held a public tribute titled “The Otter Against Violence,” pledging to transform their son’s death into a campaign for a more humane and safe society.

The case drew intense national attention from the outset, with many conservative politicians linking the killing to France’s immigration policies. Marine Le Pen described Matisse as “the latest victim of a crazy migration policy,” while Jordan Bardella of the National Rally called him a “new victim of a senseless migration policy that endangers the French people.” Reconquête President Éric Zemmour went further, calling the murder an act of “Francocide.”

Local mayor Gil Avérous, however, emphasized the family’s desire not to politicize the tragedy. “They do not want us to talk about the origin of the attacker, they do not want the subject of immigration to be exposed,” he said at the time, quoting the family’s own words.

Despite that appeal, Matisse’s murder became a symbol for many in France of what they see as the failures of the justice system and the dangers of unchecked immigration. A silent “White march” held in Matisse’s memory last year drew large crowds.

rmx

Elderly UK couple allowed to raise surrogate baby born in US despite judge’s misgivings

Shutterstock

A 72-year-old couple in the U.K. is now the legal parents of a baby that they procured through surrogacy using the husband’s sperm and a donor egg.  

Justice Gwynneth Knowles, who granted the elderly duo the right to raise the U.S.-born baby, nonetheless acknowledged that “Mr and Mrs K,” as the couple was referred to in court documents, will be 76 when their child “B” starts primary school and 82 when he starts secondary school.

“Put starkly, Mr and Mrs K will both be 89 years old when B reaches his majority,” the judge said.  

“They have begun parenting at a time in their lives when, despite their current good health, it is foreseeable that their health will decline and that one or both of them will become seriously incapacitated or die before B reaches his majority,” the judge said.

The judge also acknowledged the “reality of what is likely to befall” the child, “namely the experience of loss and grief.”

“That experience may strike B at a time in his childhood when he is ill-prepared to understand or come to terms with it, upending his daily life and placing him in the care of adults to whom he is not emotionally close,” she said.

“No matter how fit a person of Mr and Mrs K’s age may be now, health and life itself are undoubtedly at the mercy of an ageing process which becomes ever more cruel and capricious as the years go by,” she added. 

The couple paid in excess of £150,000 – over $200,000 in U.S. currency – to their California surrogate and the surrogate agency they employed. 

The couple decided to pursue obtaining another child to parent in their declining golden years after their 26-year-old son, who reportedly was the product of in vitro fertilization (IVF), died of cancer a few years ago.

This is not an isolated case. 

Unlike adoption, which is highly regulated in order to ensure the best possible lives for children, in most countries there are no legal age limits for parents who obtain children via the burgeoning surrogacy industry. It’s an industry that caters to wealthy parents’ dreams while creating nightmares for the children they’ve purchased through medical engineering.  

“Last year, data obtained from the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service under freedom of information laws revealed that almost 300 men aged over 50 had applied to become the legal father of a surrogate child over the past five years – and 43 of them were over 60,” noted The Times (U.K.) social affairs correspondent, Sanchez Manning. 

Sir Elton John was 63 years old when his first child was born through surrogacy and 65 at the birth of his second. His partner, David Furnish, was 48 and 50. When their younger child graduates from high school, they will be 81 and 68. At his college graduation, they’ll be 85 and 72. 

In 2012, world-famous American-born fashion designer, homosexual Tom Ford, decided he wanted to have a child. He was 51 years old and his longtime partner, Richard Buckley, was 64. Buckley died less than 10 years later at age 73. 

Children deserve biological parents – a mom and a dad – and not to be raised by men and women who are old enough to be their grandparents or great-grandparents. 

“This is one of the most appallingly selfish things I’ve ever read,” Hadley Freeman, a columnist at The Times, wrote on X. 

“Abhorrent, how is this legal? Any of it,” female rights activist Venice Allan asked on X.

“Surrogacy is an abomination,” another X user responded

“Prostitution on steroids,” she added

“The message is clear: People are disgusted that this is going on,” Surrogacy Concern, an organization founded to expose the harms of surrogacy, wrote on X in response to the story. “International surrogacy must be banned.” 

lifesitenews

Pro-Antifa LGBT Activist Named as “Queer Commissioner” by Merz

Sophie Koch’s Facebook banner
Photo: Sophie Koch on Facebook, 16 June 2023

Germany’s new chancellor, Friedrich Merz, has once again disappointed conservative voters—this time by appointing a radical-left activist from the SPD as the government’s new “Queer Commissioner,” in a move critics are calling a gift to the woke wing of German politics.

Sophie Koch, 31, replaces Green politician Sven Lehmann in the post, but instead of downsizing the role or scrapping it altogether, Merz has expanded it—creating a new, additional post within his government. The CDU leader who once vowed to bring order to immigration policy and push back against progressive excess has instead handed more power to someone known for insulting his own party and promoting extremist slogans.

Koch, who until recently worked for a taxpayer-funded LGBT NGO in Saxony, has made headlines for openly mocking the CDU and celebrating their declining support in eastern Germany. “Never again CDU,” she beamed in a now-viral video, reacting to falling poll numbers for the party in Saxony. She has also accused the CDU of abandoning “the democratic centre” over migration policy.

Her social media goes further still: her Facebook profile displays the far-left slogan “Antifascism is manual work,” widely understood in Germany as a veiled call to violence against right-leaning opponents. The quote appears with an image of crochet work—an apparent attempt to soften its tone.

Koch has also declared she will not engage with AfD members in the Bundestag, telling a youth publication: “I don’t shake hands with the Nazis of the AfD.”

All this makes her appointment not only a baffling decision for a supposedly centre-right government—but yet another example of Merz bending to the cultural agenda of the Left. It follows a string of betrayals on migration, where Merz backtracked on a promised “de facto entry ban” and now aims merely to reduce asylum numbers below 100,000, far above levels many voters find acceptable.

Despite serious recent crimes committed by failed asylum seekers—including the murders of a toddler and a police officer—Merz has refused to cooperate with the anti-immigration AfD, even as his own policies were originally closer to theirs—in rhetoric, at least.

In appointing Koch, Merz has shown once again that he would rather win applause from Germany’s activist class than deliver the conservative course correction voters were promised.

europeanconservative