arch/ive/ief (2000 - 2005)

The packed press centre waited for an hour before being told that Le Pen couldn't make it "pour raisons de securite" by his weasel faced spokesman and fellow NF MEP. As it happened, the only mild violence I saw were scuffles brought about by vying journalists and a cream cake thrown at Karel Dillen, a Belgian Vlaams Blok (Flemish right wing extremist) MEP.

Outside, more than a thousand very beautiful be-dreadlocked Belgian youth chanted good naturedly while the infamously heavy-handed Belgian police stood by, batons and shields at the ready, sullenly wiping chantilly cream from their riot-gear.

The Jeunesse Socialistes Belges, helped occasionally by an old man I seemed to recognise as Danny Cohn-Bendit of May '68 fame, waved banners and sang songs (NOUS SOMMES TOUS LES ENFANTS D'IMIGRES etc etc). In a rare moment of concord between Belgian anarchists and the bourgeois immigrants (mostly illegal as they can't be arsed to register with their council) who populate the European Institutions, the protesting youths appealed to the assorted assistants, fonctionnaires and MEPs who stood behind the line of riot police to "DANCEZ AVEC NOUS!", cheering every one who broke rank and came down the steps to join in the demonstration.

The threat to Le Pen's safety arose more from the shambolic Parliament Security services, farmed out some time ago to the private Group 4 company (can only presume that their reputation for incompetence is as yet specific only to Britain due to unfortunate and persistent "losses" of dangerous prisoners in early 1990s). Parliamentary architecture has historically concentrated on threats from without rather than threats from within, because in most democracies it's necessary to swear allegiance to some common symbol (the Queen, the Republic etc.) and the principles enshrined therein - on the floor of the Commons, for instance, you can't diss your honorable friend. In this experimental European Democracy we have no such common creed: Euro MPs can be fundamentally opposed to the house in which they sit - many are - whereas Sinn Fein, because they oppose some aspects (i.e. allegiance to the Queen) of British Parliamentary democracy, have until recently been refused access to House of Commons facilities.

Le Pen used his status as MEP to gain access to Parliamentary press facilities, knowing full well that within the Parliament, MEPs and assistants are not generally barred from that room. When the press centre, normally quite sufficient for the media demands of a fairly dull and overly technical legislative assembly, got overcrowded, Le Pen used this as an excuse for claiming that his personal safety was at risk. This is supposed to indicate that the Parliament is rife with intolerance and insufficient respect for democracy. I was with the other curious assistants in the press room - until I got thrown out - and with the protestors at the entrance. We didn't put up much of a fight, being nice middle class kids. The only problem was to even the most optimistic architects (in the physical sense) of the European Parliament, a "media frenzy" was not a major consideration.

That he is "forced" to cancel the press conference now becomes the story - adding a little more credence to Le Pen's claims that he's not being treated equally; Le Pen as victim becomes the story, without him even having to say anything....
.

I have been following LePen's heinous progress for about 15 years, altho from a distance and with much distraction including 3 years in El Salvador where I was focussed on Latin American issues.

Not only am I shocked at the returns of the 1st round of this years French elections, but I can't believe he's actually an MEP. I understand that one of his campaign tenets is to get France out of the EU. Isn't that in fundamental conflict with being an MEP?

France must be in the throws of Cranial/Rectal Inversion, Class 4+!