Civil war in Europe-Hardly mentioned in the press

[Leafless]

"Radical Muslims in France's housing estates are waging an undeclared "intifada" against the police, with violent clashes injuring an average of 14 officers each day. As the interior ministry said that nearly 2,500 officers had been wounded this year, a police union declared that its members were "in a state of civil war" with Muslims in the most depressed "banlieue" estates which are heavily populated by unemployed youths of north African origin."

"[...] Sarkozy, who deployed only policemen in his war, was unable to prevail because he did not have the weapons to win a territorial conflict. After two days of rioting, police officers warned that they did not have the means to win what they (correctly) described as a "civil war." [...] The poor natives who live in the immigrants' neighborhoods know better, however. They know that the generals of Eurabia, the leaders of the "youths," drive BMWs and Mercedes (which no-one dares to set alight), and that they use mobile phones and PCs to instruct their highly mobile troops. The war in France is not about social injustice, but about territory."

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/brussels100806.htm

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

Seems Muslims are learning fast in their quest to establish their territory.

Maybe they can call it 'Musbec'.

Possibly sooner than realized, will form its own nation within France with French citizens paying the shot.

[Black Dog]

You already started a thread on this topic.

[JerrySeinfeld]

"Radical Muslims in France's housing estates are waging an undeclared "intifada" against the police, with violent clashes injuring an average of 14 officers each day. As the interior ministry said that nearly 2,500 officers had been wounded this year, a police union declared that its members were "in a state of civil war" with Muslims in the most depressed "banlieue" estates which are heavily populated by unemployed youths of north African origin."

"[...] Sarkozy, who deployed only policemen in his war, was unable to prevail because he did not have the weapons to win a territorial conflict. After two days of rioting, police officers warned that they did not have the means to win what they (correctly) described as a "civil war." [...] The poor natives who live in the immigrants' neighborhoods know better, however. They know that the generals of Eurabia, the leaders of the "youths," drive BMWs and Mercedes (which no-one dares to set alight), and that they use mobile phones and PCs to instruct their highly mobile troops. The war in France is not about social injustice, but about territory."

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/brussels100806.htm

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

Seems Muslims are learning fast in their quest to establish their territory.

Maybe they can call it 'Musbec'.

Possibly sooner than realized, will form its own nation within France with French citizens paying the shot.

I love use of that term "civil war". It's great a great satire of the people trying to find new ways to lose in Iraq.

[Black Dog]

I love use of that term "civil war". It's great a great satire of the people trying to find new ways to lose in Iraq.

If that's satire, it's clearly the unintended kind. Sadly, though, the people using the term "civil war" wrt to France's catankerous slum-dwellers are being serious (evn though they are objectively unserious people).

[JerrySeinfeld]

I love use of that term "civil war". It's great a great satire of the people trying to find new ways to lose in Iraq.

If that's satire, it's clearly the unintended kind. Sadly, though, the people using the term "civil war" wrt to France's catankerous slum-dwellers are being serious (evn though they are objectively unserious people).

Seriousness is stupidity sent to college - PJ ORourke.

The civil war won't happen for another few years - and native europeans are too lackadaisical to do anything about it anyway - I suspect lots will leave or die. Maybe the young ones will move here and wake up Canada to the perils of excessive tolerance.

[Black Dog]

Seriousness is stupidity sent to college - PJ ORourke.

Speaking of unserious, silly people....

The civil war won't happen for another few years - and native europeans are too lackadaisical to do anything about it anyway - I suspect lots will leave or die. Maybe the young ones will move here and wake up Canada to the perils of excessive tolerance.

This is horseshit on a number of levels. First: there's no reason to belive that the unrest in French slums is a predicator of larger civil strife. Indeed, to the eyes with brains behind them, it appears as little more than gang warfare writ large-certainly all the hallmarks are there. That's not to say that there isn't some caus efor concern: widespread crim is, in and of itself, a Bad Thing, and disaffected youth are mor elikely to fall prey to radical ideologies than those in comfortable middle class situations. But civil war? Again: horseshit.

Second: the idea that "native europeans are too lackadaisical" is totally false. Compared to North America, Europeans are downright militant. Our radical nativists are on the fringe of public discourse: their's are vying for political power (France's upcoming presidential elections demonstrate this phenomenon ably). Europeans, traditionally, have been extremely xenophobic and extremely intolerant. There's little to suggest that much has changed and, in the face of an actual threat, you would most certainly see those traits reemerge.

[Canadian Blue]

I think people like to misuse term's like War Crime, Civil War, Terrorism, Liberty, etc. to make their argument sound really strong, even though they may have no idea what the term actually implies.

[Leafless]

You already started a thread on this topic.

There is a slight difference with this one, as it zero's in on territorial concerns rather than social injustices as the cause for this primitive civil war.

It appears though this is no job for the police as they are not equipped for the type of larger scale violence that is occurring.

If you consider this gang violence maybe you can supply a link that compares countries elsewhere that equals the amount of destruction caused by these African Muslims in relation to out of control property destruction and injuries to local police.

I would also label this a civil war.

[Leafless]

I think people like to misuse term's like War Crime, Civil War, Terrorism, Liberty, etc. to make their argument sound really strong, even though they may have no idea what the term actually implies.

The definition of 'civil war'= ' A war between citizens of the same country'.

[mcqueen625]

"Radical Muslims in France's housing estates are waging an undeclared "intifada" against the police, with violent clashes injuring an average of 14 officers each day. As the interior ministry said that nearly 2,500 officers had been wounded this year, a police union declared that its members were "in a state of civil war" with Muslims in the most depressed "banlieue" estates which are heavily populated by unemployed youths of north African origin."

"[...] Sarkozy, who deployed only policemen in his war, was unable to prevail because he did not have the weapons to win a territorial conflict. After two days of rioting, police officers warned that they did not have the means to win what they (correctly) described as a "civil war." [...] The poor natives who live in the immigrants' neighborhoods know better, however. They know that the generals of Eurabia, the leaders of the "youths," drive BMWs and Mercedes (which no-one dares to set alight), and that they use mobile phones and PCs to instruct their highly mobile troops. The war in France is not about social injustice, but about territory."

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/brussels100806.htm

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

Seems Muslims are learning fast in their quest to establish their territory.

Maybe they can call it 'Musbec'.

Possibly sooner than realized, will form its own nation within France with French citizens paying the shot.

Maybe it is time to pack these radical Islamists up and send them back where they came from for good. These radicals have a stated goal of spreading Islam to the whole world, whether the rest of the world likes it or not. Unfortunately Canada has not figured this out yet, because we always seem to try whatever has failed in other parts to the world, and are naive enough to believe that everyone is inherently good. The truth is that radical Islamists want to spread their intolerance for other religions and customs throughout the whole world.

Also unfortunately Canadian Politicians are not smart enough to realize that fact yet, because these immigrants are still coming to Canada fully expecting Canada to change our traditions and culture to mesh with theirs. At least the U.S. makes no bones about the fact that they do not believe in a failed concept of multiculturalism, and they pull no punches about the fact that the U.S. is a melting pot and immigrants are expected to adjust to fit in. Maybe Canada should be doing the same thing, and tell our immigrants to either fit in or go home. France is now reaping what they have sown, a failed belief of multiculturalism.

[Black Dog]

There is a slight difference with this one, as it zero's in on territorial concerns rather than social injustices as the cause for this primitive civil war.

Why are they seperate? IOW: have you pondered why the "Muslim" gangs have turf?

If you consider this gang violence maybe you can supply a link that compares countries elsewhere that equals the amount of destruction caused by these African Muslims in relation to out of control property destruction and injuries to local police.

Actually the accounts are strikingly similar to those that emerged from New York City in the '70s, particularily in the South Bronx. There's also ehoes of the Brazilian favelas, which are basically governed by rival gangs and where the police don't even set foot. In short: there's little to suggest the situation in the Paris slums is all that different from historical situations involving impoverished minorities.

another p.o.v.

The definition of 'civil war'= ' A war between citizens of the same country'.

Nope. The academic definition of civil war is as follows:

"Sustained military combat, primarily internal, resulting in at least 1,000 battle-deaths per year, pitting central government forces against an insurgent force capable of effective resistance, determined by the latter's ability to inflict upon the government forces at least 5 percent of the fatalities that the insurgents sustain." -(Errol A. Henderson and J. David Singer, "Civil War in the Post-Colonial World, 1946-92," Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 37, No. 3, May 2000.)

[Leafless]

Black Dog

I don't how you can justify the use of 'illicit drugs' such as the case as with the Bronx in the 60's as somehow being justifiable concerning any degree of anarchy or uprising to meet unjustifiable demands.

Low wage earners in any country make the world spin and is simply a fact of life. You do not see the majority of Whitey native citizens as low wage earners participate in the type of uprising (civil war) as you see in France.

I have strong suspicions that it is easier for for certain races to become involved in violent barbaric actions than their White counterparts sorry to say.

This is something countries should strongly consider regarding immigration policies.

[Black Dog]

I don't how you can justify the use of 'illicit drugs' such as the case as with the Bronx in the 60's as somehow being justifiable concerning any degree of anarchy or uprising to meet unjustifiable demands.

The troubles of the Bronx in the '70s were only tangentially related to drugs (the crack cocaine epidemic didn't start until the '80s, before that it was heroin). The rot/root cause was poverty and social isolation. Just like in France.

Low wage earners in any country make the world spin and is simply a fact of life. You do not see the majority of Whitey native citizens as low wage earners participate in the type of uprising (civil war) as you see in France.

They ain't low wage earners: they're no-wage earners. Unemployment is estimated to be as high as 40-50 per cent among young Muslim poor in these French slums.

And again: it's not a civil war.

I have strong suspicions that it is easier for for certain races to become involved in violent barbaric actions than their White counterparts sorry to say.

Can you cite any examples where whites have had to contend with similar circumstances? I'm talking about places where whites are the marginalized minority.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Seriousness is stupidity sent to college - PJ ORourke.

Speaking of unserious, silly people....

The civil war won't happen for another few years - and native europeans are too lackadaisical to do anything about it anyway - I suspect lots will leave or die. Maybe the young ones will move here and wake up Canada to the perils of excessive tolerance.

This is horseshit on a number of levels. First: there's no reason to belive that the unrest in French slums is a predicator of larger civil strife. Indeed, to the eyes with brains behind them, it appears as little more than gang warfare writ large-certainly all the hallmarks are there. That's not to say that there isn't some caus efor concern: widespread crim is, in and of itself, a Bad Thing, and disaffected youth are mor elikely to fall prey to radical ideologies than those in comfortable middle class situations. But civil war? Again: horseshit.

Second: the idea that "native europeans are too lackadaisical" is totally false. Compared to North America, Europeans are downright militant. Our radical nativists are on the fringe of public discourse: their's are vying for political power (France's upcoming presidential elections demonstrate this phenomenon ably). Europeans, traditionally, have been extremely xenophobic and extremely intolerant. There's little to suggest that much has changed and, in the face of an actual threat, you would most certainly see those traits reemerge.

No. It's a very specific group of unassimilated Muslim immigrants and their families behaving as if they're still back home - and as the population of these groups grows so too will the unrest.

You're partly right - in the face of THIS actual threat, european right wing parties have become very xenophobic and intolerant (see new laws banning burqas in school or VERY intolerant parties in Austria and Czech Republic).

[Leafless]

Can you cite any examples where whites have had to contend with similar circumstances? I'm talking about places where whites are the marginalized minority.

Every large city in Canada has sections of housing reserved for Canada's disadvantaged.

And I am certain many of these Canadians consider themselves marginalized and could indeed be true victims of society.

But the situation in France does not appear to be the same pertaining to its Muslim population.

The problem is with the second generation of Muslim youth who have also taken on the characteristics of U.S. Black pop culture.

Are these problems self induced by refusing to properly integrate?

Are they self induced by refusing to separate themselves from their homeland identity and their strong attachment to their Islamic religion?

This problem is also aggravated by lack of public funding in areas of concern. But their birth rate appears to be vibrant and healthy aggravating the existing situation.

The labelling of Muslims throughout the world relating to terrorism is I think is a major contributing factor along with their questionable stringent religion and again reflects in a negative sense on countries who accept these people as immigrants initially, especially in troubled times.

http://www.inthenationalinterest.com/Artic...r2005Feder.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-02...urope-csm_x.htm

http://riotsfrance.ssrc.org/Silverstein_Tetreault/

[bush_cheney2004]

...But the situation in France does not appear to be the same pertaining to its Muslim population.

The problem is with the second generation of Muslim youth who have also taken on the characteristics of U.S. Black pop culture....

Not sure what you mean by this...."U.S. Black pop culture" can mean many different things and is quite diverse. If you mean hip-hop, it is far from being self segregating even if it wanted to be, as mainstream media and culture embrace it for sales and market share. For instance, 1980's MTV wouldn't go near rap or hip-hop but had no problem with heavy metal or punk "sub-cultures". Such is quite different today.

The US also didn't practice colonialism in the way that France did (Algeria). Payback is a bitch.

[Leafless]

...But the situation in France does not appear to be the same pertaining to its Muslim population.

The problem is with the second generation of Muslim youth who have also taken on the characteristics of U.S. Black pop culture....

Not sure what you mean by this...."U.S. Black pop culture" can mean many different things and is quite diverse. If you mean hip-hop, it is far from being self segregating even if it wanted to be, as mainstream media and culture embrace it for sales and market share. For instance, 1980's MTV wouldn't go near rap or hip-hop but had no problem with heavy metal or punk "sub-cultures". Such is quite different today.

The US also didn't practice colonialism in the way that France did (Algeria). Payback is a bitch.

Just reiterating one of the articles where as it was suggested France's Muslim youth have embraced and are emulating characteristics of Black youth and you are correct relating to hip-hop.

BTW- No longer in cyberspace---this is a great site!

[jbg]

I love use of that term "civil war". It's great a great satire of the people trying to find new ways to lose in Iraq.

If that's satire, it's clearly the unintended kind. Sadly, though, the people using the term "civil war" wrt to France's catankerous slum-dwellers are being serious (evn though they are objectively unserious people).

Seriousness is stupidity sent to college - PJ ORourke.

The civil war won't happen for another few years - and native europeans are too lackadaisical to do anything about it anyway - I suspect lots will leave or die. Maybe the young ones will move here and wake up Canada to the perils of excessive tolerance.

Nobody ever wants to face the real danger. Worrying about climate change is easier than worrying about the wolf at the door or, in this case, the barbarians at the gate.

[Black Dog]

Nobody ever wants to face the real danger. Worrying about climate change is easier than worrying about the wolf at the door or, in this case, the barbarians at the gate.

*Fap fap fap*

[scribblet]

There is much going on in Europe not reported by the press, also in Australia.

this is worth watching, and I think pertains to the unrest and problems in Europe.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...e#StartComments

More young Muslims back sharia, says poll

A growing minority of young Muslims are inspired by political Islam and feel they have less in common with non-Muslims than their parents do, a survey reveals today. The poll, carried out for the conservative-leaning Policy Exchange thinktank, found support for Sharia law, Islamic schools and wearing the veil in public is significantly stronger among young Muslims than their parents.

In the survey of 1,003 Muslims by the polling company Populus through internet and telephone questionnaires, nearly 60% said they would prefer to live under British law, while 37% of 16 to 24-year-olds said they would prefer sharia law, against 17% of those over 55. Eighty-six per cent said their religion was the most important thing in their lives.

-snip-

Nearly a third of 16 to 24-year-olds believed that those converting to another religion should be executed, while less than a fifth of those over 55 believed the same. The survey claimed that British authorities and some Muslim groups have exaggerated the problem of Islamophobia and fuelled a sense of victimhood among some Muslims: 84% said they believed they had been well treated in British society, though only 28% thought the authorities had gone over the top in trying not to offend Muslims. Munira Mirza, a doctoral student at Kent University who wrote the report, said: "The government should engage with Muslims as citizens, not through their religious identity."

[marcinmoka]

Just stumbled upon this thread.

Are these problems self induced by refusing to properly integrate?

Yes. I've been living there the past few years, and I've worked with these kids. Give them all the state help in the world, and they'll still be torching cars for it will never replace shoddy parenting.

But keep in mind, these were males whose average is 16 and 9/10, are drop outs. Then they complain about not getting a job because employers are racist. Bullocks.

One thing we must not do, is generalize. These kids aren't AT ALL religious. Most don't even any speak Arabic apart from derogatory slang. This has NOTHING to do with Islam (directly).

Though a case could be made that this is the result of the overtly patriarchal societies, (which unfortunately un progressive strains of Islam support) from which the parents of these kids hail, giving rise to a culture which unfortunately subjugates the daughters, but lets the sons do WHATEVER they please without any parental interference.

[marcinmoka]

Though that recent British poll raised many questions.

Why are young British, Canadian muslims religious, whereas in France they somewhat do stick to overall secularity?

[jbg]

Yes. I've been living there the past few years, and I've worked with these kids. Give them all the state help in the world, and they'll still be torching cars for it will never replace shoddy parenting.

Did they invite you to their carbeques?

[GostHacked]

Whites came to North America. Killed the natives and scattered them around to small pockets.

WWI and WWII were fought mostly by whites, caused by whites as well.

Whites invaded many parts of the world in the last few hundred years. (Africa/slaves)

So when you say ...

I have strong suspicions that it is easier for for certain races to become involved in violent barbaric actions than their White counterparts sorry to say.

... you are actually lying. It just seems to be a glitch in overal human nature that allows us to be violent. Humans have not lost the barbaric touch at all. All humans can/do/will resort to the lowest form in desparate situations.

[jbg]

Whites came to North America. Killed the natives and scattered them around to small pockets.

Sorry, smallpox got those honors.

WWI and WWII were fought mostly by whites, caused by whites as well.

Are you saying that Africa and Asia don't have plenty of wars having little or nothing to do with whitey?

Whites invaded many parts of the world in the last few hundred years. (Africa/slaves)

The Africans sold the slaves into slavery.

So when you say ...

I have strong suspicions that it is easier for for certain races to become involved in violent barbaric actions than their White counterparts sorry to say.

... you are actually lying. It just seems to be a glitch in overal human nature that allows us to be violent. Humans have not lost the barbaric touch at all. All humans can/do/will resort to the lowest form in desparate situations.

You may be onto something here. Primates don't make good pets past the beginning of adolescence since they become far too violent to maintain in a household. Violence may be somewhat engrafted on human nature, and need civil society (i.e. a government monopoly on legitimate violence) to restrain and overcome the violent tendencies.