Natalka was attacked by adults, not by unknowing children...

8. 10. 2010 / Fabiano Golgo

Miroslav Štěrba protests against Boris Cvek's article condemning the four Czechs who took the time to produce a lethal weapon and went look for a house to throw it over. Štěrba already on the set up of his article lets transpire his sympathy for the accused by criticizing what he calls the perpetrators "youngsters"

By naming them four "youngsters" he takes away the truth about them: they are not just some children who made a silly mistake! They are grown-ups who made an adult, albeit stupid, decision of going out with a weapon they had to take time to manufacture. Time during which, they had the time to change their minds, thus it was no impulsive act, but a well planned one) and who went out look for a house to throw it over.

A Czech version of this article is in CLICK HERE

What those white adults went out consciously do is a qualified crime, independent of having wanted to hurt Gypsies, white people or just some property... Even if the target was not chosen for racist reasons, it is still a horrendous act of violence against unknown people - the same as disrupting train tracks, which then leads to a train wreck and injuries/deaths of passengers. It is a horrific crime, even without any added racist undertones. To try to hurt or kill unknowns or to destroy property just for "fun" is as dangerous to society, if not more, than to consciously target someone. Because when one attacks a specific victim, no matter how twisted the reasons, at least there was some sort of rationalization that led the individual to commit the crime. But when four adult men go out to just destroy, they represent a danger not only to a specific group, but to the whole society.

If Štěrba wants to believe in Santa Claus or that those white Czechs did not aim at Natalka's house because there lived a Gypsy family, that still doesn't take away the need to severely punish them, because to throw a fire bomb into ANY home is a very serious crime! Imagine if they get a mild punishment... that would tell every angry Czech, Gypsies included, that, if they decide to destroy other people's houses, that is O.K. - if they are young, even better, because people like Štěrba will relativize their horrendous act, making them appear less conscious of what they did than they actually had to be, considering their age and proven ideological (ultranationalist, racist) beliefs.

Does anyone think that four people who are no longer even in adolescence should not be locked up and away from society if they think it is "fun" to throw cocktail Molotovs inside people's residences?

Plus, how come Štěrba ignores that at least one of the accused had the guts to show up in Court wearing a shirt typical to the neo-Nazi movement? That at least one of them had been part of the ultra nationalist, racist and fascist Dělnická strana? Those facts are indicative that the crime was perpetrated with racial motives.

The problem is that many Czechs sympathize with those criminals in terms of their possible intolerance of Gypsies, secretly understanding the act, seeing Natalka as an unwanted victim. And then the lawyer tries to throw the guilt over the victim, saying between the lines that Gypsies are so uncivilized that they ran and let Natalka in the fire for a while - had they not, Natalka would not be THAT burnt. She would be deformed, but less... It is like when a rape victim is accused of provoking the attack for wearing a miniskirt. Crime apologizers. In this case, closet racists. What is to be judged is the criminal act, not the desperate response by the attacked!!

For 700 years Gypsies have been the continent's stepchildren, beheaded during the Middle Ages, gassed during the Holocaust and forced into homes during the Cold War and often sterilized against their will even after the Velvet Revolution. As it has recently been medialized, at least a quarter of Roma children who have been sent to special schools do not belong there - meaning that they were sent to those schools not based on their I.Q. or other capabilities, but solely and exclusively because they were Gypsy. .

That is a crime perpetrated not by four youngsters, but by hundreds of white Czech adults. Not during a repressive regime that requires that of them, but misusing their power in free times. Making them the tyrants over those Gypsy children, which are condemned to a life of ostracism. Gypsies get forcifully handicapped by white Czechs. Then those same white Czechs tell them to behave like the rest of society, as if they were not culturally and economically disabled by that same society. .

Štěrba points to the death of a foreign worker as something that gets less attention, as if one tragedy should soften the other... Both the employer that breaks the law and thus endangers the life of his or her employees as well as those who go out put fire in houses are to be severely and exemplary punished. And the media has to make sure society sees how everybody gets the due punishment for such acts.

The problem is that, in Czech Republic, reigns a moral relativity that tends to twist the blame on the victim. Especially if they are Gypsy. It is widely understood that it is their fault that they are discriminated upon. Which shows how ignorant and undeveloped the public discourse about the Roma question is. .

To say that the Gypsy way of life is loud, non-hygienic, with weak work ethics is almost the same description of Czechs during the Habsburg days. For an average Dane, Czechs are loud like Helena Růžíčková and the Homolkas, lack on personal hygiene and look unkempt, is amoral towards petty corruption and has no love for hard work.

Every time I hear someone complain about the costs of supporting the Gypsies, I think not only of all those white Czechs who stole billions from public coffers. I saw a video clearly showing MP Jiří Dolejš accepting to negotiate his support for one million crowns and he is not Gypsy. .

Miroslav Macek and Stanislav Gross made millions thanks to being insiders. Cases like Lucie Talmanová, who has no shame in collecting maternity social benefits, when she does not need that money and her party is ideologically against such help, only shows that even blond Czechs share a similar "who does not steal from work is stealing from the family" mentality. Primátorka Chomutova Ivana Řápková is a good symbol of white Czech hypocrisy: while fighting Gypsies' lack of payments of their bills, she is one of those who got a degree from the Law faculty in Plzeň, but cannot even remember the name of a professor, the address of the university or even answer the most basic questions about something she claims to have a diploma for. Have white Czechs punished her for this obviously suspicious degree? No. Jiří Čunek is the same: he collected money from social benefits when he had more than 3 million crowns in his bank account. All these examples (and many others) of how white Czechs misuse the State funds much more than those who collect less than 5 thousand per month in benefits can be found here: < HERE

Nevertheless, Czech racism is supposedly not about the color of skin, the ethnicity, but a discrimination against certain types of behavior . In this culturally homogeneous and constantly invaded nation, difference has strict borders.


Obsah vydání | Úterý 21.7. 2015