Robert and Emmanuelle Ménard on Mass Immigration

Robert Ménard is the outspoken mayor of Béziers in southern France, and his wife Emmanuelle is a member of the Chamber of Deputies. Both represent the Rassemblement National (formerly Front National), and both are vociferous opponents of mass immigration into France.

The following discussion featuring the Ménards took place recently on a talk show on French TV. Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

00:00   Robert Menard. —This immigration is a typical example, it’s precisely
00:04   THE central question: the identity of the people.
00:08   People have economic insecurity, but they have an…
00:12   I don’t know — existential insecurity when faced with mass immigration.
00:16   The discourse is such that there’s such a chasm between
00:20   what — in general — the media and the large part of the political class,
00:24   and what people are saying. —What people feel. —And I can see it in my town.
00:28   In our town, people say things like that on immigration, it’s obvious.
00:32   Yes, the society. —What do they say? —They say that it’s unbearable!
00:36   That it’s unbearable! That they don’t want it any more! That they want to stop mass immigration!
00:40   That enough is enough! That it causes insecurity for everybody!
00:44   That they want to keep our country the way it is! —However, today,
00:48   Robert Ménard, Emmanuelle Ménard, we can feel well that there’s a large political crisis which,
00:52   incidentally, is passing through Europe, but also [other] countries concerning
00:56   the migration question. But the numbers show that deep down we are rather in the “after”,
01:00   that the peak happened a couple of years ago, and that today there are fewer migrants who
01:04   turn up at our borders, so it is a question of perception. Are you telling yourselves
01:08   deep down there is a gap between the perception… or not at all? —No, first I think —
01:12   sorry if I’m the one answering… —You are very polite! —first I think that French people,
01:17   French people experience this immigration. You may say,
01:21   true, the numbers are slowing down, so therefore there’s perhaps less migration:
01:25   TODAY, in 2018. Except, that French people are experiencing it.
01:29   If you walk in Porte de la Chapelle [metro station], you can see the immigration, if you walk
01:32   in Béziers, you can see the immigration, and it isn’t a DISCREET immigration.
01:37   It’s an immigration, in fact, that’s INTRUSIVE and OBTRUSIVE. Therefore French people
01:42   know well what they are experiencing, they can see well the reality of their day-to-day life.
01:45   And it’s for that reason, when they are being told: “Oh, you know, the immigration is over now,
01:49   we passed the high point, so it’s over, it’s diminishing.” It’s not what they experience every day.
01:53   I would like to add, that on top of everything, it’s wrong,
01:57   because I think that [according to] the last book by Stephen Smith [American anthropologist]
02:01   about Africa, I think that the bulk of the immigration wave is still before us!
02:05   Just have a look at the birthrate in Africa! We first met in Africa,
02:09   and we worked a lot in Africa. There’s a wave of economic immigration,
02:13   which will be MONSTROUS! —Monstrous? —It’s true.
02:17   Oh, yes, I think monstrous, Stephen Smith, who is… —But monstrous in the sense: “terrible”?
02:21   In the sense “terrible”, in the sense “atrocious” in the sense “scary”? —In the sense of the
02:25   numbers! I think there are tens and tens of millions of people who
02:29   will arrive! Because there are ecological problems… —Isn’t there a paradox? One moment.
02:33   …ecological problems, which will cause that. —I’m going back to what you just said a minute ago:
02:37   you met each other in Bamako [Mali]. You, Emmanuelle Ménard, at the time you were working
02:42   at the International Federation of Human Rights, you were responsible for the African zone,
02:46   and you, Robert Ménard, you were a spokesperson for Reporters Without Borders.
02:50   What happened in order for you two,
02:54   who met in Africa, who were working for the human rights,
02:58   you, who worked for an association called Without Borders!
03:02   At a point one has the feeling… What had happened, that today, on the contrary, you employ
03:06   a logic where there are borders. Clearly, in your imagination,
03:10   of both of you? —The confrontation with reality, simply. Simply.
03:14   You have to, when you…
03:18   when you live in the streets of Béziers, when you live
03:22   — again — in Calais, Porte de la Chapelle, you are
03:26   confronted with that reality. And therefore, at a certain point, you know
03:30   that, [concerning] immigration, you have to say STOP if you want to be able
03:34   to integrate and assimilate the people who are already here.
03:38   In a country that has several millions of unemployed today, you cannot
03:42   continue with mass immigration. Today we saw it
03:46   with all the numbers that were given to the Parliament, during the study of the law about
03:50   immigration. The asylum law is the law which is rogue,
03:54   which is sort of a gate to a mass migration, when you know that
03:58   96 percent of the asylum seekers whose asylum applications are rejected
04:02   DO stay on the French soil. At some point
04:06   you need to take measure. As a practising Catholic, of course, I do recognize
04:09   the distinction between Christian charity,
04:15   the duty of assisting to a person in danger and the fact —
04:19   when I hear the pope who, says: “Welcome them with open arms,” fine, we welcome them… how?
04:23   And I’ll repeat my question: do we welcome them in Porte de la Chapelle? No.
04:27   I don’t want to welcome people that way, precisely because this isn’t charity. —So you
04:31   are you in favor of the French state spending more money for the means… —this is not dignity.
04:35   …on the welcome, on the integration… —to welcome with dignity…
04:39   Well, careful! I think that there is… —Isn’t there a little, please…
04:43   There’s a little schizophrenia in your spouse! —No, no, I’ll answer very frankly… —Do you feel like
04:47   you’re being pulled in different directions, when you hear the pope? Do you have, deep inside,
04:51   voilà, moments, when you’re saying to yourself: What am I supposed to do? —Well,
04:55   there’s also a problem in politics. It’s politics… we cannot, we cannot…
04:59   we cannot decide about immigration policies based on particular cases.
05:03   Of course, if I see a migrant in front of my building… —So the pope
05:07   is a demagogue? —Yes! —Yes, absolutely! —Yes, I think yes. If I see someone in front of my building
05:11   dying of thirst and hunger, I’m not going to let him die of thirst and hunger.
05:15   It seems obvious! —But all those people who arrive are dying of thirst and hunger and they’re
05:18   taking serious risks! —But it’s not true! It’s not true! —How can you say that,
05:21   Monsieur Neumann? —Well they’re taking serious risks! —Well, because I see thousands of dead
05:24   in the Mediterranean Sea, I can see the risks… —No, no, wait, what is… —But we make them come;
05:28   we make them arrive. —This year, from what country did most of the asylum seekers originally come?
05:32   From Albania. —Albania. Is there a sea between Albania and France?
05:36   Albania: are people dying of hunger in Albania? —Logically the Albanians are
05:40   being deported! —Is there a military dictatorship in Albania? Of course they aren’t being deported!
05:43   This is the reality. —But is it because of Albanians that you have those precise positions?
05:46   Of course not! What I’m trying to say… —Or, on the contrary,
05:49   what’s going on across the Mediterranean Sea? —Not at all, not at all!
05:52   We spent our lives defending people! I know better, WE know Africa better, or the Arab world,
05:56   than 95 percent of people we have discussions with about it. My concern
06:00   is that people should be happy in their own countries! Do you really believe — I do understand
06:04   right away that a guy in Bamako, for example or in Ouagadougou, [Burkina Faso]
06:08   wishes to come here, of course! I would never be angry at him for that!
06:12   The problem is OUR attitude. We, the politicians, we have a responsibility
06:16   towards people HERE. I’m sorry, it’s to them we owe a number of explanations,
06:20   the rest is… —So you don’t make politics with your personal convictions?
06:24   But of course we create politics with our personal convictions! Personal convictions welcome
06:28   people whose lives are threatened in their countries; it doesn’t mean we will open the borders
06:32   for all who want to come here! Madame, half of Africa will come here! —In detriment.
06:36   This, Robert Ménard, happens to be the right to asylum; however, you were giving the impression
06:41   a moment ago, that you were questioning it. You were saying: “It’s a gate; we have perverted
06:45   the right of asylum” —Yes, we perverted it. —But you describe here exactly the right to asylum…
06:49   —Yes, but wait, the asylum law says that people, when they are recognized as [asylum] seekers
06:53   and they are accepted, they may stay here. When they are not [recognized],
06:56   they should be deported. —I’m sorry, again it’s “perverted”, because nobody, or almost nobody…
06:59   It’s not, when you say “perverted”, it’s not the rules of the asylum law
07:02   that are perverse… —It’s the application! —It’s the application,
07:05   the fact that the refused people aren’t being deported? — Exactly! It’s all we’re asking for! —And
07:10   then you know well that people talk: when precisely the Albanians arrive in France, file the
07:13   asylum request, which — of course — in 99 percent of cases,
07:17   are refused, because they have no right to political asylum,
07:21   what do they do? They stay in France. They aren’t deported. People talk.
07:25   And: go ahead, come on, you can come, in any case, even if your request is refused,
07:29   you can stay afterwards. And you can stay in conditions…
07:33   — again — and there I’m going back to the question that was asked me concerning charity —
07:37   in unimaginable conditions, which makes
07:41   the drug dealers happy, the employers who look for illegals,
07:45   and it makes the little people unhappy, precisely, in France, who
07:50   have to face the competition with all this workforce.
 

7 thoughts on “Robert and Emmanuelle Ménard on Mass Immigration

  1. “Madame, half of Africa will come here! ”

    This couple is very effective at communicating the anti-mass migration message. And because of their liberal credentials and experience in aid issues, hard to dismiss as heartless rightwingers.

  2. This kind of discussion is happening all over Europe – people have woken up and it’s too late to stop their thought processes. The establishment has been left hanging, the support for its world view is dissolving beneath its feet. And now it sits there, Canute-like, knee deep in water, demanding that the tide turns tail.

  3. The elephant in the room is completely ignored. It’s time to face facts – importing people who have a mass murdering, child abusing, rapist “prophet” as their ultimate role model is obviously madness. It just guarantees you get religiously sanctioned mass murder and a religiously sanctioned rape epidemic. The elephant’s name is Islam.

    • Thank you for that succinct summation. I mean, that’s it, in a nutshell. It’s not like Europe is experiencing a mass migration of folks who are obsessed with banjo playing or ballet; what Muslims bring to the table is a history of violence paired with zero cultural attainments. They’re not the Medici, for heaven’s sake!

    • There’s an Ellovan elephant in the room,
      But no-one’s allowed to say.
      The most numerous name for newborns
      Begins with an M today.

  4. It felt like they went round and round and the 2 pro-migrant speakers would not accept the couple’s extensive experience & sincere warning. The pro-migrant globalists want these 2 silenced. It’s the same everywhere, arrogant elitists insisting that everyone accept their plan for cultural destruction.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.