Was watching Bill O’ Reilly today at lunch time. I don’t know why, since all his broadcast’s normally do is make me want to reach through the TV and give him the beating he so richly deserves, after which kneeing him in the groin and then hitting his skull with a pistol butt would be in order. That would only be half the repayment he deserves for being the arrogant bastard that he is…..
But I digress. After wading through his fabrications e.g. that France is a Socialist country, and is evil because it believes that it has a responsibility to provide for its citizens; deriding the French system of taxation that actually provides a decent standard of living for most of them; and above all deriding them for having an ethnic make-up foisted upon them because the United States refused to support them in their effort to maintain what was an integral department of France ( Algeria), he comes to his real point, that the French riots are a warning to the United States that it too could be next. At the end of his pontification, he thanks his lucky stars that he lives in a country that allows the rich to get richer while the poor get poorer.
Now in one regard, O’ Reilly is right, emphasis on “diversity” vice encouraging assimilation into a French society is partially to blame for this. Poverty and unemployment and the apparent ability to move ahead are also at fault. For the latter though, the damn Arabs and Africans have only themselves to blame, proving yet again my prevailing theory about Arabs in general. Give them a good deal and with time they will just f**k it up.
Now the Muslims claim that they are discriminated against:
Many French Muslims demand more public recognition by the state, and resent the law which bans the wearing of Muslim headscarves.
I’ve always felt the French were right to ban the scarves. You want to wear a scarf, go back to Algeria or Tunisia or anywhere else you came from…….You want to live in the 5th Republic, learn to speak French, settle down and get a job. Could it be that former French Prime Minister Pierre Mend’¨s-France was right when he said:
“One does not compromise when it comes to defending the internal peace of the nation, the unity and integrity of the Republic. The Algerian departments are part of the French Republic. They have been French for a long time, and they are irrevocably French… Between them and metropolitan France there can be no conceivable secession.”
At least if France still owned Algeria, they would have a place to send these criminals……
Of course the response from the rioters is that they have tried to get jobs and are discriminated against. That they had to leave Algreia, Tunis, and other places because there was no hope for them there, the governments that succeeded the French were incompetent to the task of running a nation. France wanted them for the same reason the Turks are so evident in Germany, somebody had to do the hard, s***ty little jobs……..After time passed though, and thanks to the information revolution these folks and their children wanted more.
And as is typical, the French are arguing about the causes of the riots:
The explosion of violence has split both the public and the political classes
The comment of hardline Interior Minister Nicholas Sarkozy that the rioters were “scum” prompted to Socialist Party leader Francois Hollande to tell Liberation, a left-wing daily, that he had “zero tolerance” for Sarkozy and his “simplistic polemics.”
An online, and therefore unscientific, survey in Le Monde found 51 percent of 11,000 respondents thought Sarkozy’s language was unjustified. Forty five percent thought it justified.( Something tells me the same poll, taken in America might have different results).
Jean Francois Mattei, writing in the conservative daily Le Figaro said the violence is rooted in irresponsibility embodied by a kind of “linguistic
treason.”
“In France one no longer speak of ‘riots’ but of ‘actions of harassment’: not of ‘delinquents’ but ‘youth;’ not of ‘police,’ but ‘provocateurs;’ not of ‘drug trafficking,’ but ‘the parallel economy,'” he wrote.
But the editors of Le Monde argued the continuing burning of cars and sacking of public buildings is proof that the conservative government’s “zero-tolerance” policies have failed just as much as the liberal policies of the previous
left-wing government. The state, they wrote, is “impotent.”
Back in the Post’s pages, Molly Moore writes that the rioting “underscores the chasm between the fastest growing segment of France’s population and the staid political hierarchy that has been inept at responding to societal shifts. The youths rampaging through France’s poorest neighborhoods are the French-born children of African and Arab immigrants, the most neglected of the country’s citizens. A large percentage are members of the Muslim community that accounts for about 10 percent of France’s 60 million people.”
Yea, yea, yea. All of that may be true, but when a house is on fire, the first thing you do is put out the fire. That calls for a vigorous police presence, backed up by the Army if need be. Once the riots have been brutally crushed, then you can figure out why it happened. In that regard Mssr. Sarkozy is probably right.
