Cloudy and scattered rioting in France

by Don Hank

 

Yes, I know. Why even mention it? In France, it’s like talking about the weather.

The talking heads in the videos linked below are reporting that the riots in Amiens Nord were caused by “young people.” But those who recall the Paris riots a while back know that, when speaking of rioters, the media, not only in France, but everywhere, use the words “young people” when referring to Muslim immigrants, whose name they dare not utter. Naming them would be the first step to a solution, but that would also be lending credence to Marine Le Pen’s Front National (the only party with any common sense there). Obviously, the French powers that be are willing to accept unlimited rioting and destruction rather than admit that opening their doors to mass Muslim immigration has caused unlimited rioting and destruction:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVhdU0llMRc&feature=player_embedded

The video itself doesn’t mention Muslims, of course. But most of the posters think they are immigrants, or at least not indigenous French. BTW, when I did the Google search to bring up these sites, I discovered that the French words for “Amiens riots”(émeutes Amiens) brought up videos of rioting in Amiens in 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011 as well. Thus rioting seems to be an annual event tolerated by the authorities. Next year perhaps there will be concession stands.

In another vid presentation, talking heads discuss “les jeunes” (young people) who caused the Amiens riot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz0xOF2FVXA

But, again, in the forum beneath the video, the readers frankly speak of Muslims, immigrants, etc. These were not indigenous French young people as the media would have us believe.

Translation of one post:

Before, when the idiots spoke of popular revolt, it was civil war; today, when the idiots talk about civil war, it’s actually RACIAL war! ahahahha (This poster more or less gets it. But is it really racial? Or is it religious?—Don Hank)

Quand les bobos parlaient de révolte populaire c’était une guerre civile, aujourd’hui les bobos parlent de guerre civile alors qu’il s’agit d’une guerre RACIAL ! ahahah

America has had a lot of useful discussion of the killing of the knife-wielding Darrius Kennedy by the cops in Times Square. Here is a question to ponder: If we continue to pander to the “rights” of thugs who threaten public safety and property, will we be moving toward the French policy of denial and laissez-faire–allowing the thugs to have their way with the rest of us and thus inviting, for example, annual rioting of the kind seen in Amiens since 2008 — or even worse? Or is it better to show force once in a while to protect the innocent?

Note that the Times Square incident did NOT spark a race riot in New York. People there know their limits.

Now, if a cop had killed a “young person” in France, there’d have been war. The difference? In NY, minorities still expect the authorities to do whatever it takes to keep the peace. In France the “young people” know the cops are wusses and that they are protected by the media. In fact, it looks like the French have been largely brainwashed into accepting this kind event — perhaps as a kind of tourist attraction? Served with crêpes perhaps.

Where do you prefer to live? Your vote could help determine that.

All major political parties want poverty for the US

by Don Hank

The below-linked report shows that of all factors studied, the one most strongly correlated with GDP, or national wealth, is strength of the rule of law.

http://www.capitalismwithoutfailure.com/2012/07/the-main-driver-of-gdp-growth-strong.html

Quote: …he mentioned that he had done a study based on analysis by an institution that looks at all sorts of “fuzzy” data, like how easy it is to start a business in a country, corporate taxes and business structures, levels of free trade and free markets, and the legal system. It turned out that the trait that was most positively correlated with GDP growth was strength of the rule of law. It is also one of the major factors that Niall Ferguson cites in his book Civilization as a reason for the ascendency of the West in the last 500 years, and a factor that helps explain why China is rising again as it emerges from chaos.

Amazingly, despite this strong correlation, not ONE of the 2 main parties supports the rule of law. Bush and his GOP cronies famously supported rewarding lawbreakers with amnesty. Obama has gone further, refusing to allow ICE to deport many alien felons (only the most egregious) and even suing Arizona for trying to protect itself from the invasion — even though Article 4, Section 4 of the Constitution says the federal government is supposed to protect the states from invasion, literally.

Last but not least is the Libertarian party, which basically thinks borders are bad for liberty and is not much in favor of laws at all. Like the early communists, they think the state will melt away if we can just teach enough people how to behave in a lawless society (anarchy). I’m not making it up: If you go to the Von Mises Institute site you can see a proud invitation to sign up for a course in “Anarcho-Capitalism,” the favorite ideology of site founder Lew Rockwell, who is a mentor of Ron Paul.

America has given up on law, instead falling all over itself to protect the “rights” of minority criminals, like the black panthers who violated election law by intimidating voters and siding with petty thugs like Trayvon Martin while seeking to jail law and order activists like George Zimmerman. And suspending ICE agents for arresting illegal aliens (http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/senator-ice-agent-facing-punishment-for-arresting-illegal.html). This is a reflection of the back seat that science has taken in the public discussion, in the media and politics. We prefer catchy pandering slogans to facts. Slogans and pandering ensure poll success.

But as the law goes, so does GDP. It looks like our main political parties have all chosen poverty for us all.

Funny, none of them asked us either.