French Riots

Fair enough...

would have been interesting how you would have labelled civil rights riots of years gone by...

 

America didn't exactly welcome free African Americans with open arms, there is a HUGE difference... These people aren't being oppressed, they were immigrants who came to France on their own... Are they poor? Probably but you don't see the slums of other countries deciding to have a riot to get a political point across, most of the riots that have taken place since the cival rights era have been in response to a single action, not a government in general.

 

well...per the article...the death of two teens sparked the riots. And they are in in areas heavily populated by poor African Muslim immigrants and their children who are weary of poverty, crime, poor education and unemployment.

this seems quite different to me from Osma and his gang, or the Iranian president who are basing their battles on theology.

i just haven't heard islam being a factor here, other than many of the rioters being muslim. Perhaps you know something I don't?

 

First of all these immigrants weren't welcomed with open arms. The French have done little to nothing to help the immigrants assimilate in over a generation, their mosques have been bombed, they are subject to searches, ID checks and the like on demand, and they believe it happens with discrimination. Finally two unarmed teens were killed, and nothing was done about it. I am hard pressed to say whether I would call rioting against those conditions radical, but if I did call it radical, I wouldn't say it was a radical brand of islam that caused it to happen.

 

I would suspect though, that the Muslims you know are American, correct? As paradoxical as this may sound, I think the best way to classify Muslims (of a specific country) when analyzing a situation like this is as a racial minority rather than a religious minority. American Muslims for the most part are pretty well assimilated into American society and are middle class to upper class (mostly Arabs) economically. This is because the 1st generation of South Asian and Arab immigrants who migrated here 20 to 30 years ago and even today are the cream of the crop. They come here with educational and economic aspirations and pass those same values on for the most part to their children. That's why you don't see domestic Muslim agression in the states. European Muslims are second class citizens, and large populations of them in Britain and France usually reside in the ghettos and are discriminated upon. The fact that these are Muslims has absolutely no relevance. One other thing is that for all the criticism, the United States truly is a melting pot (atleast relatively speaking in comparison to other "progressive" nations) as these immigrants are not discriminated upon in a wide scale and are accepted into society with open arms. While I have grave concerns regarding the government's policies, there really is no doubt that the people of which this country is comprised of truly make it the greatest nation in the world.

 

bnb, I don't think I know anything you don't; I've done a little research on my own and have been watching it closely, I was just astonished that it stayed out of mainstream American news until today... which is really sad. I guess I've just come to a different conclusion with the same facts that some of you have. This can be compared somewhat to the 50s and 60s for blacks in the US I suppose... but rioting only hurts their cause, it doesn't help it. Luckily for the African Americans of those times they had great leaders to lead them out of the poverty and hard times in mostly peaceful ways (marches, boycotts and the like), but the leader's I've read about that these people have seem to not really care about their cause but more about making a statement.

 

I'm also surprised how invisible this has been to us, given how serious it appears.

Pretty bizarre stuff. I can't say whether it parallels the civil rights movement, or whether it's a bunch thugs out of control. I've no idea.

 

Actually, I take this back. It has "little relevance." I think the fact that they are Muslims serves as a common rallying point of identification for them. The whole "stand up against injustices" and the like. What I am contesting though, is the Islamo-paranoia demonstrated by many conservative writers that any worldwide Muslim agression is in fact a movement to propogate the religion and overthrow western civilization. That couldn't be any more off base.

 

There does seem to be some resistence coming from within Islam in Europe to assimilation, no?

 

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/11/04/business/france.php

interesting read.

 

Some Muslims in Europe are resisting. I wasn't even trying to assess blame for the lack of assimilation... Actually I was blaming the govt. at least in part because they have done next to nothing to help. But I was also leaving it open to spread the blame.

However in the area where this started it wasn't really a lack of willingness to assimilate that was the problem. These people speak the language, work in various places in Paris, and don't seek to isolate themselves. They primarily don't want to be stopped unfairly order to give ID etc. because of their origen or religion. Then once things escalated the two teens were killed and that ignited the powder keg.

 

No, it has nothing to do with Bush or us, it's local French social issues they need to deal with.

 

It reminds me a lot of the LA riots in that in both cases you have a large minority taking offense to perceived 'injustices' against a member of their ethnic group and decide to go on a rampage.

The North African Arabs living in France closely resemble the African-American ghettos in the states. They have similar fears/distrust of the police and their society at large and feel oppressed by the system.

BTW, Europe is very, very different than America in regards to ethnic relations, and the makeup of their societies is radically different. There simply isn't any place as good/tolerant/diverse as America is, and I think one needs to remember that more often even while we debate the thing we don't like about our country.

In this case, looks very much like thugs acting out.

 

I understand you weren't trying to do that. However, since some others have contended that this is 'strictly social' (meaning social and economic but not religious - a bit of an odd definition...but I digress) I thought it might be pertinent to bring up the point that there is some resistance to assimilation from the Muslim side. And the interesting point that if this is an economic backlash, why then is it Muslim centric? Surely there should be some poor Catholics in there somewhere, right? Not all Parisian poor are Muslim.

As I understand it the two Muslims got electrocuted hiding in the wrong place at the wrong time, not 'killed by the police.' An interesting follow up that I believe touches some of the same points you do, FB:

"Riots have now continued for eight days in and around Paris. Thursday night, November 3, Muslim rioters burned 315 cars. In the previous week, they torched 177 vehicles and burned numerous businesses, a post office, and two schools. They have rampaged through twenty towns and shot at police and firemen. In an episode that summed up the failure of France's efforts to create a domestic, domesticated Islam, when moderate Muslim leader Dalil Boubakeur, head of the Paris mosque, tried to restore calm, his car was pelted with stones and he had to rush away.

The riots began on October 27 when two Muslim teenagers ran from police who were checking identification papers -- why they ran is as yet unclear. The police did not chase them, but evidently the teenagers thought they were being chased; they eventually hid in an electrical power sub-station, where they accidentally electrocuted themselves. That night young Muslims took to the streets for the first time, throwing rocks and bottles at police, burning cars, and vandalizing property. The next day rioters, throwing rocks, bottles, and Molotov cocktails, injured twenty-three police officers in the Paris suburb of Clichy-sous-Bois. The violence continued over the next few days: more destroyed vehicles and injured police officers. Then on Sunday, October 30, a tear gas shell hit a mosque, further enraging local Muslims; French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy stated somewhat cryptically, "I am, of course, available to the imam of the Clichy mosque to let him have all the details in order to understand how and why a tear gas bomb was sent into this mosque." Since then the riots have continued unabated, defying appeals for calm from French President Jacques Chirac and others. The crisis now threatens to swamp the French government.

Why have the riots happened? From many accounts one would think that the riots have been caused by France's failure to implement Marxism. "The unrest," AP explained, has highlighted the division between France's big cities and their poor suburbs, with frustration simmering in the housing projects in areas marked by high unemployment, crime and poverty." Another AP story declared flatly that the riots were over "poor conditions in Paris-area housing projects."

Reuters agreed with AP's attribution of all the unrest to economic injustice, and added in a suggestion of racism: "The unrest in the northern and eastern suburbs, heavily populated by North African and black African minorities, have been fuelled by frustration among youths in the area over their failure to get jobs and recognition in French society." Deutsche Presse Agentur called the high-rise public housing in the Paris suburbs "a long-time flashpoint of unemployment, crime and other social problems."

One might get the impression from this that France is governed by top-hatted, cigar-smoking capitalists, building their fortunes on the backs of the poor, rather than by socialists and quasi-socialists who have actually strained the economy by spending huge amounts of money on health and welfare programs. Nor does the idea that the rioting has been caused by economic inequalities explain why Catholics and others who are poor in France have not joined the Muslims who are rioting. Of course, all the news agencies have either omitted or mentioned only in passing that the rioters are Muslims at all. The casual reader would not be able to escape the impression that what is happening in France is all about economics -- and race.

The areas hardest hit by the riots, according to Reuters, are "home to North African and black African minorities that feel excluded from French society." AP shed some light on this feeling of exclusion: "the violence also cast doubt on the success of France's model of seeking to integrate its large immigrant community -- its Muslim population, at an estimated 5 million, is Western Europe's largest -- by playing down differences between ethnic groups. Rather than feeling embraced as full and equal citizens, immigrants and their French-born children complain of police harassment and of being refused jobs, housing and opportunities."

So evidently France's failure to live up to its policy of playing down the differences between ethnic groups has bred the simmering anger that has now boiled over in the riots. However, in fact France has done just the opposite of playing down the differences between ethnic groups. In her seminal Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, historian Bat Ye'or details a series of agreements between the European Union and the Arab League that guaranteed that Muslim immigrants in Europe would not be compelled in any way to adapt "to the customs of the host countries." On the contrary, the Euro-Arab Dialogue's Hamburg Symposium of 1983, to take just one of many examples, recommended that non-Muslim Europeans be made "more aware of the cultural background of migrants, by promoting cultural activities of the immigrant communities or 'supplying adequate information on the culture of the migrant communities in the school curricula.'" Not only that: "Access to the mass media had to be facilitated to the migrants in order to ensure 'regular information in their own language about their own culture as well as about the conditions of life in the host country."1

The European Union has implemented such recommendations for decades -- so far from playing down the differences between ethnic groups, they have instead stood by approvingly while immigrants formed non-assimilated Islamic enclaves within Europe. Indeed, as Bat Ye'or demonstrates, they have assured the Arab League in multiple agreements that they would aid in the creation and maintenance of such enclaves. Ignorance of the jihad ideology among European officials has allowed that ideology to spread in those enclaves, unchecked until relatively recently.

Consequently, among a generation of Muslims born in Europe, significant numbers have nothing but contempt and disdain for their native lands, and allegiance only to the Muslim umma and the lands of their parents' birth. Those who continue to arrive in Europe from Muslim countries are encouraged by the isolation, self-imposed and other-abetted, of the Islamic communities in Europe to hold to the same attitudes. The Arab European League, a Muslim advocacy group operating in Belgium and the Netherlands, states as part of its "vision and philosophy" that "we believe in a multicultural society as a social and political model where different cultures coexist with equal rights under the law." It strongly rejects for Muslims any idea of assimilation or integration into European societies: "We do not want to assimilate and we do not want to be stuck somewhere in the middle. We want to foster our own identity and culture while being law abiding and worthy citizens of the countries where we live. In order to achieve that it is imperative for us to teach our children the Arabic language and history and the Islamic faith. We will resist any attempt to strip us of our right to our own cultural and religious identity, as we believe it is one of the most fundamental human rights." AEL founder Dyab Abou Jahjah, who was himself arrested in November 2002 and charged with inciting Muslims in Antwerp to riot (Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt said that the AEL was "trying to terrorize the city"2), has declared: "Assimilation is cultural rape. It means renouncing your identity, becoming like the others." He implied that European Muslims had a right to bring the ideology of jihad and Sharia to Europe, complaining that in Europe "I could still eat certain dishes from the Middle East, but I cannot have certain thoughts that are based on ideologies and ideas from the Middle East."

What kind of ideologies? Perhaps Hani Ramadan, grandson of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hasan Al-Banna and brother of the famed self-proclaimed moderate Muslim spokesman Tariq Ramadan, gave a hint when he defended the traditional Islamic Sharia punishment of stoning for adultery in the Paris journal Le Monde. In Denmark, politician Fatima Shah echoed the same sentiments in November 2004. That same month, filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, who had made a film, Submission, about the oppression of women by Islamic law, was murdered in Holland by a Muslim, Mohammed Bouyeri. Bouyeri later declared in court: "I did what I did purely out my beliefs. I want you to know that I acted out of conviction and not that I took his life because he was Dutch or because I was Moroccan and felt insulted." In other words, his problem was religious, not racial: Van Gogh had blasphemed Islam, and so according to Islamic law he had to die. Significantly, Bouyeri maintained during his trial that he did not recognize the authority of the Dutch court, but only of the law of Islam.

How many European Muslims share the sentiments of Mohammed Bouyeri? How many of these are rioting this week in Paris? Alleviating Muslim unemployment and poverty will not ultimately do anything to alter this rejection of European values by growing numbers of people who are only geographically Europeans. And the problem cannot be ignored. For France is not alone: Muslims in Århus, Denmark have also been rioting this week. And in France, Sarkozy recently revealed that this week's riots are just a particularly virulent flare-up of an ongoing pattern of violence: he told Le Monde that twenty to forty cars are set afire nightly in Paris' restive Muslim suburbs, and no fewer than nine thousand police cars have been stoned since the beginning of 2005.

Blame for the riots in France has thus far focused on Sarkozy's tough talk about ending this violence. On October 19 he declared of the suburbs that "they have to be cleaned -- we're going to make them as clean as a whistle." Six days after this, Muslim protestors threw stones and bottles at him when he visited the suburb of Argenteuil. He has been roundly criticized for calling the rioters "scum"; one of them responded, "We're not scum. We're human beings, but we're neglected." However, as a solution the same man recommended only more neglect, saying of the Paris riot police: "If they didn't come here, into our area, nothing would happen. If they come here it's to provoke us, so we provoke back." Others complained of rough treatment they have received since 9/11 from police searching for terrorists: "It's the way they stop and search people, kneeing them between the legs as they put them up against the wall. They get students mixed up with the worst offenders, yet these young people have done nothing wrong."

But of course, all these problems are exacerbated by the non-assimilation policy that both the French government and the Muslim population have for so long pursued: the rioters are part of a population that has never considered itself French. Nor do French officials seem able or willing to face that this is the core of their problem today. It is likely that the riots will result only in intensification of the problems that caused them: if French officials offer an accommodation to Muslims, it will probably result only in further intensification of the Islamic identity, often in its most radical manifestations, among French Muslims. The French response to the riots is likely to unfold along the lines of a decision by officials in Holland last May: they declined to ban a book called De weg van de Moslim (The Way of the Muslim), even though it calls for homosexuals to be thrown head first off tall buildings. The Amsterdam city council did not want to contravene "the freedom to express opinions."

That decision is a small example of what the Paris riots demonstrate on a large scale: the abject failure of the multiculturalist philosophy that disparate groups can coexist within a nation without any idea that they must share at least some basic values. The French are paying the price today for blithely assuming that France could absorb a population holding values vastly different from that of the host population without negative consequences for either.

That French officials show no sign, on the eighth day of the Paris riots, of recognizing that this clash of values is the heart of the problem only guarantees that before they will be able to say that their difficulties with their Muslim population are behind them, many more cars will be torched, many more buildings burned, and many more lives destroyed."

http://www.aina.org

 

If I'm not mistaken, the riots are because two teens were running from the cops and were electrocuted in an electricity substation. I fail to see how this is an example of persecution.

In any case, NOTHING should excuse this:

------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-13457760,00.html

Disabled Woman Set Ablaze
Updated: 12:36, Friday November 04, 2005

A handicapped woman was doused with petrol and set on fire by youths during another night of rioting in Paris.

The 56-year-old suffered third degree burns to 20% of her body in the attack.

Witnesses said a youth poured petrol over the woman and then threw a Molotov cocktail on to the bus she was travelling on in the suburb of Sevran.

Other passengers were able to flee but she was unable to escape because of her disabilities.

It was the worst incident so far in more than a week of rioting.

For the first time, there were also signs of copycat rampages elsewhere in France.

Police said several cars in the eastern city of Dijon were set alight, while similar attacks took place in the western Seine-Maritime region and the Bouches-du-Rhone in the south of the country.

More than 160 cars were reportedly torched in the Paris region, as well as 33 in the provinces.

But police said the night seemed calmer than the one before, when 315 vehicles were burnt in the Ile-de-France region around the capital.

Buses, fire engines and police were again stoned in the Paris suburbs, with five policemen reported slightly injured.

However, there were fewer direct confrontations between police and "troublemakers".

One of the worst incidents took place at Neuilly-sur-Marne where police vans came under fire from pellet pistols, but nobody was hurt.

Neuilly-sur-Marne is in the worst-hit northeastern region of Seine-Saint-Denis, where 1,300 officers were deployed, and more than 30 people were arrested there and elsewhere.

The rioting is a direct challenge to the authority of the French government and to Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin in particular.

On Thursday he told parliament authorities "will not give in" to the violence and will make restoring order their "absolute top priority".

 

That is just the triggering point, similar to the acquittal of the 4 officers in '92 prior to the "L.A. Race Riots." They're not specifically rioting because of the deaths, but due to the underlying causes of high unemployment, and forms of discrimination. It's a typical reaction in any arena of civil unrest. And I agree, the actions are deplorable.

 

But the French unemployment rate is 10% across the board. It's a result of their system of government. It's being felt by all sectors of French society not just these people. I understand, however, that one action can be a rallying point. I just fail to see how these people feel oppressed.

 

Send in the tanks, Tianamen style. Then arrest all these scumbags and deport them. If you can't civil, then be prepared to be treated like animals.

 

Actually they were already treated like animals, that is what helped build the conditions where the rioting happened.

It is interesting to see someone advocate a Tianamen style solution and talk about behaving civilly. The minister of France used similar language as you and proposed similar solutions. Somehow the result wasn't peace and quiet but an upsurge in rioting.