Montrealers were rightly scared last week when they learned that a killer was roaming the city, gunning down his victims indiscriminately.
And they were certainly relieved when they learned that the police, at whom he had also shot twice, had neutralized him.
Abdulla Shaikh was shot dead by the police.
It was soon learned that the man had mental health issues. Without surprise. A balanced man rarely feels the need to shoot his fellow man.
Scandal!
Learning that the killer was no more, François Legault summed up the feeling of most of his compatriots. I quote: “I’m glad we got rid of this individual.” It was a cry of relief.
It was enough, however, for his opponents to denounce his supposed lack of humanity.
They thus accuse him of having treated mental health problems with a mixture of contempt and casualness. It’s wrong ! He commented on the neutralization of an assassin!
The opposition, panicked at the thought of being swept away in the October 3 election, is so desperate for a handful against François Legault that it even throws itself on imaginary handfuls.
And, of course, the herd of sheep of the commentariat added to it. Oh dear ! François Legault has chosen swear words! That’s what you had to say to sound humanistic in the media.
We even found some to say that François Legault confessed his method thus: he would like to get rid of problems without worrying about the complexity of the world.
He even lacked sensitivity for the killer’s family.
As for me, I think of his victims.
In the end, François Legault thought it necessary to apologize, saying he had chosen his words badly. The media pressure was probably too much. He should not have.
Because this episode is especially revealing of the existence of a police force of the language, which tracks down the supposed skids everywhere to create with that artificial controversies.
And this is not the first time that we have done it to François Legault. Some examples. Let us remember a controversy of another nature, concerning the Louisianization of Quebec.
The Prime Minister only recalled here, with a historically charged and symbolically powerful word, the risk of the disappearance of the Quebec people.
This is what is hidden behind what is too often called the clumsiness of François Legault: a word that is not filtered by the pseudo-communication experts whose essential work, in life, consists in sanitizing public discourse, to smooth it down to insignificance.
Aseptisation
Politicians are told to talk like robots and get scolded if they don’t. Common mortals are fed up.
Democracy is then lost in the great lake of insignificant communication and theatrical indignation.
It is not forbidden to think that François Legault finds part of his success in the fact that we understand him, quite simply, when he speaks.