In Grenoble, several off-duty CRS members were recognised by some ‘young people’ of (yet again) the same origin and savagely attacked. One of them had to be given forty-five days of TIW.
A few days later, in Orléans this time, an off-duty policeman was followed by two ‘youths’ on a scooter and attacked. He narrowly escaped by threatening them with his service pistol.
The aggressors themselves, on the other hand, are very rarely troubled by our justice system; hence the perceived disintegration of authority suffered by a state that no longer inspires fear in them.
Such incidents are on the increase throughout France. The potential for barbaric hatred targeting white policemen is high and steadily increasing. Anyone who does not detect in this a prelude to racial civil war is blind.
The growing number of assaults against policemen — whether on public roads, in their private homes or while they are on duty — has led solicitor Thibault de Montbrial, the president of the Centre for Reflection on Homeland Security and a member of the scientific council of the School of War, to state that ‘it all points to an alarming evolution: ever since the Magnanville attack, we have been aware of the fact that terrorists [i.e. jihadists] do not hesitate to attack police officers in their private lives. Nowadays, however, this logic extends to common law thugs as well, who consider policemen to be enemies with whom they are in a state of personal dispute’ (Le Figaro, 7th July, 2018). And yet, owing either to his lack of knowledge or his conformism, Montbrial is mistaken in this regard: as I have already explained elsewhere, large-scale and individual terrorist jihad and common criminal delinquency are closely correlated and inseparable in the Muslim-Arab tradition, and have been so for centuries on end. They are thus committed by the same people. It is a kind of atavism and an ancestral male custom, not a novelty.
Montbrial suggests that we have entered the preparatory phase of an ethnic war, but never explicitly follows through on a statement which is considered politically incorrect. He never calls things by their proper name because he is, and remains, a member of our statal institutions.
He does point out the following, however: ‘Personal attacks on police officers are commonplace among offenders. This situation also affects prison guards. Even magistrates have been targeted with death threats.’ This is obviously only true of those that have not shown any leniency; the others are all silent, because they are afraid and do not wish to take any risks.
Let us mention the Aboubakar F. affair, which is emblematic of the civil war climate now setting in. In early July 2018, Aboubakar F., a repeat offender already wanted by the police, is stopped at a checkpoint while driving a car through the city of Nantes. Panicking, the little kingpin tries to flee, at the risk of ploughing into the people around, some of whom are children. A member of the CRS pulls out his gun and shoots him dead. The policeman is arrested and taken into custody pending a trial. He had forgotten that although an offender of immigrant origin can shoot at police officers and count on a lack of criminal investigation and the leniency of our justice system, it does not work the other way around. An almost identical case occurred in Paris in August 2018.
The event gave rise to riots of ethnic solidarity, especially in Nantes, where, as part of a highly symbolic development, public buildings became the targets of arson attempts. The rioters themselves had come from the Parisian region and the housing estate where Aboubakar F. had lived.
They unleashed three nights of furious rioting, with seven arson attempts against the annex of a town hall, a municipal library and a Pôle emploi[131] agency. The neighbouring halal shops were all left untouched, of course. Identical scenarios, in which the death of an Afro-Maghrebian thug is attributed to the actions of ‘racist police bastards’ in the chaos of a street-fighting skirmish and then followed by well-publicised manifestations of ethnic solidarity and rioting, are experienced several times a month. In the not too distant future, one of these scenarios will eventually spiral out of control and set our country ablaze. The event shall mark the onset of a racial civil war, I guarantee it.
Every week, our police forces face several ambushes accompanied by the now trivialised ritual burning of cars. Photos of our police officers are shared on social networks, along with incentives to attack and kill them and the occasional inclusion of their home address!
With regard to the grotesque Aboubakar F. affair, Montbrial makes the following observation:
The first thing one is struck by is that the entire neighbourhood proceeded to present this individual as being a saint, thus disregarding his criminal profile and adopting a purely clannish position. One is henceforth either a full member of the group or completely rejected, either one of “them” or one of “us”. Another issue is that during the riots, a policeman was struck in the helmet by a .22 LR bullet.[132] Never in a long time had live ammunition been fired at law enforcement officers. This is a very disturbing development indeed. The police are no longer perceived as authority figures representing the Republic, but as a rival gang against whom all means are acceptable.
This analysis given by Montbrial is entirely inadequate and minimalistic. What he is trying to do is to avoid envenoming the situation further by going all the way and unveiling the truth. He believes that we have entered ‘a tribal territorial logic, in accordance with which rioters attack state-funded infrastructures whose purpose is to put an end to the ghettoisation afflicting those neighbourhoods. What we are facing here is a clannish logic of state rejection. It also highlights the limits of our attempt to pacify the suburbs through money, as advocated by the Borloo plan’.[133] He then goes on to mention a ‘restoration of republican authority’. The word ‘republic’, whose semantic dimension is both frail and vague, does not refer to anything truly specific. It does not mean much to people. Neither does clannism, which no one experiences these days.
The grave analytical mistake made by Montbrial is that of referring to a ‘clannish’ rebellion — in which clans and gangs of thugs unite — against the police and the French state’s ‘institutions’, in harmony with a purely criminal and delinquent sort of logic. Not at all. It is actually a racist or rather ethno-tribal revolt not against the French state and its institutions, but against France itself, its identity, and its history. Not against policemen regarded as a mere rival gang! The setting which Montbrial proposes is that of a societal and security-based clash, when, in actual fact, it is a political and historical conflict characterised, above all else, by an ethnic and, of course, racial dimension.
There is yet another very disturbing matter: the growing presence in, or perhaps even premeditated and deliberate infiltration into the ranks of our police forces and army by Black African and Maghrebian Muslims, just like in the rest of our society! In a display of reckless unawareness and irresponsibility, and as dictated by the delusion of diversity and the stupid dream of our living-together, one recruits into our law enforcement forces and army young people that are likely to become our worst foes, if, of course, they are not already our secret enemies. The wolf is simply brought into the sheepfold, right? In the event of an outbreak of insurrectional and racial riots in the suburbs, there is an ever-increasing risk that those people will end up embracing insubordination, conniving with their co-religionists and fellow rioters and perhaps even openly fraternising with them, and provoking ethnic conflicts even within the ranks of our police and military forces. Such a scenario would be the worst possible one, as it would paralyse our national defence forces in the face of potentially severe guerrilla warfare. For centuries on end, the most basic ploy resorted to by those who long to spark off a civil war has been to infiltrate the enemy camp and cause its implosion.
131
TN:
132
TN: The .22 Long Rifle or simply .22 LR is a long-established variety of .22 calibre rimfire ammunition which, in terms of units sold, remains by far the most common type of ammunition today.
133
TN: The Borloo plan is the name of project proposed by Jean-Louis Borloo to the French government on 30th June, 2004 and focusing on improved employment, better housing and equal opportunities for all. It is a so-called ‘social cohesion plan’.