Today, most of politic parties seem unanimous to highlight assimilation as a solution, the only solution, to solve the problem of extra-European immigration.
Very well. But what about the facts of this providential assimilation? Some recent “incidents” – according to the prudish term used by authorities and the medias – bring us some elements of the answer.
Criminal court of Lyon, 19 December 2006: Within a Muslim family, a young girl of 18 years old, Bouthaïna, was beaten and shorned by her brother Hani and her Father Amor. Here is the testimony of the young girl: “My mother assisted to the scene insulting me. They reproached me to date a French” (what a nice example of anti-Gaul racism… What does SOS Racisme think about it? SOS Racisme doesn’t think anything about it… Because anti-Gaul racism is not racism). Proud of himself and affirming he had no remorse, the brother declared “I recognize having shorned her. I confess everything: the beating, the insults and even the spits.” This humanist has been sentenced to 12 months of jail, of which 8 months are suspended sentence. His father got a suspended sentence of 8 months of jail. It is not an expensive price, and they will be able to rejoice themselves in their neighborhood. Concerning the young girl, she better goes to live very far away from there…
La Mulatière (Rhône-Alpes), 22 December 2006: A bus is burning. Passengers hardly had the time to exit before being caught by the fire. “Youths” put fire “to do like in Marseille“, “to be on TV”. If they ever go on trial, there will be lawyers, judges, journalists to estimate that after all it was only a game. Sure, may be a little excessive? But it is certainly explained by the fact that this “youths” are, in truth, victims of the society. A “LePenising society”, of course.
Court of Villefranche (Rhone-Alpes), 16 January 2007: An affair of large scale traffic of cannabis is judged. The people concerned are named Aïssa, Mohamed, Faysal, Khaled and Abdelmadjid.
Meaux (Ile-de-France): at the Albert-Camus school, 12 years old Carl dies after being beaten several times by a boy and an 11 years old girl named Seta. Carl was Gaul. The 2 aggressors have Malian origins (90% of the pupils are blacks or Maghrebians). Meaux’s prosecutor instantly assured that the cause of Carl’s death was a cardiac malformation, that it was just an “ordinary fight”, and that the aggressors were “very shocked”. “It was just a game (…) There was no will to hurt” assures Seta’s older sister, who describe her as “a laughing, pleasant, jovial child”. And, as a good Muslim, she ads: “This drama, it’s destiny. It was written”. As for the lawyer of the 2 aggressors, she declares that “in this school, fighting is a game, it’s normal”. In other words, it’s not a big deal, isn’t it?
Criminal court of Paris, 24 January 2007: already sentenced 4 times for violence, Fouad BEN MOUSSA was sentenced to 6 months of jail because he insulted and assaulted a gynecologist, who he accused of “impudic gestures” toward his wife. In fact the latter, who had just given birth, was receiving from the doctor the medical care she needed. Medical staff are constantly confronted to very aggressive individuals who refuse that male doctors take care of their wife, mother, sister, daughter, claiming prohibitions linked to the Islamic traditions. But of course, the director of legal affairs of the hospitals of Paris thought it was good to insist on the fact that this affair had no religious connotation, and that “any amalgam would be extremely dangerous”. Yeah right… Naivety brought at that level is becoming criminal.
The people who boast us the benefits of assimilation do not want to admit that assimilation can only work with people having the same civilization pedestal of the population of the country in which they have immigrated. An Italian, a Spanish, a German assimile themselves with no issues in France, as a French assimile himself with no issues in Italy, Spain, or Germany. But the people related to the above mentioned “incidents” do not feel concerned with our civilization’s values. Either they want to remain faithfull to the values of their civilization of origin, and this is a choice we respect – at the condition, of course, that they go back to live those values in the land which is their cradle, the original land of their family. Either, extirpated, they invent a neotribalization which serves them as a criterion and as a shelter, but therefore positioning themselves against our civilization’s values, which is for us unacceptable. They are moreover well aware that by positioning themselves as destructor of our physic and mental universe, they choose to affirm themselves as our enemies. We should get the conclusions that impose themselves.