OH NO SHE DIDN'T. Umm..are we again casting aspersion about France mishandling a situation, oh causer of the 2003 NYC blackout? It can't possibly be the case that you're all "no way would they let Paris burn for a week," when certain leaders in other parts of the world let a major city flood and the people to fend for themselves for daaaaays. Maybe the cops in the suburbs are fleeing and abandoing their posts, maybe the news media is blowing the situation out of proportion, maybe these suburbs needed a good burning -- either way, ain't none of your business and stop bring bad luck with your judging.

Somehow, in the end, it will be the fault of the United States. Just watch.

Ah, the joys of open borders.

Actually, Dawn, since Katrina had destroyed roads and bridges into NO, it made sense that there would be a problem getting aid in or generally helping people get out. I'm not saying there wasn't incompetence, just that at least there was some reasons for it.

The situation in France is actually more comparable to the riots in Crown Heights which Mayor Dinkins did zero about, ushering in, wow with Bloomberg's win on Tuesday that'll be... 16 years of Republican rule in a wholly Democratic city. I hope much the same happens in France and this Nicolas Sarkozy who wants to be president can lay down the law.

Did you catch the story about 5 very not smart Muslim guys at Giants Stadium?

That should be Chirac's warning to the rioters - "Knock it off, or you're getting Republicans."

Actually Von Bek, France's borders are not open. Only Europeans are freely allowed to travel and settle from one country to another.
Most Muslims living in France were asked to go to France (after WWII) to rebuild the country and also many of them are of Algerian decent (Algeria used to be a French colony.)

I can't believe I'm actually going to defend Chirac but he does not have the same role as the U.S. President. He does not have to be very public, he doesn't make a lot of decisions.

It is the Prime Minister and of course in the case of the riots, the Interior Minister who have to be very active. And they have been.

The problem they are facing is that the police do not have the proper equipment and do not have the power to stop these riots. They are simply not allowed to. I think it is even more problematic in Muslim communities. If the police were very forceful and people were killed, the riots would probably spread in the entire country.

It's a shame, really.

And Mark, I'm pretty sure the French press has already made some connections between these events and the 'horrible society' America is. It's just one of the ills of France, blaming it on others or just saying 'See, how worse it is in America?"

The day France takes a strong stance on crime and defense issues, I'll be willing to walk down a street naked. Which is to say, it'll never happen.

France has practiced apartheid on the Muslims and violence is the result.
France has:

1. Walled them up into large neighbor hoods of high rise apartments in the suburbs.
2. Kept them from assimilating into French culture.
3. Gave them no police protection so all the businesses fled the area taking the jobs with them.
4. Gave them terrible schools
5. Put them all on welfare.

(Left-wing democrats have done exactly the same thing to minorities in 40 urban areas of America)

So France is reaping the seeds they have sown. France now rivals Syria and Iran as the leading breeding ground for Muslim terrorism.

Unlike Karol, I don't think France is worth saving. The French should surrender France to the Muslims and then immigrate to Germany. There, the Germans can take care of the French just as they did during WWII.

Thanks for the information and correction.

The situation in France is actually WORSE than we are being told.

There is an epidemic of violence in the Beur suburbs. Before the riots, many areas were "no-go" zones for the police.
Interior minister Sarkozy says that violence in French suburbs is a daily fact of life.
Moreover,s ince the start of the year, 9,000 police cars have been stoned and, each night, 20 to 40 cars are torched, Sarkozy said in an interview last week with the newspaper Le Monde.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/10/31/news/france.php

The Algerians in France have been supplemented by Muslims from other European countries and from illegals.

PM Villepin and Sarkozy are locked in a battle for leadership of the UPM in the next Presidential election.
Villepin has also bee appeasing the Muslims, waiting for Sarkozy to make the politically dangerious decisions.

In the long run the problem is the unwillingness of the political class to deal with the existential threat posed by the Muslims.

Finally, Arhus, Denmark is also overrun.
http://nycright.blogspot.com/2005/11/europe-is-burning-this-ramadan.html

Europe will either expell a majority of Muslims, or it will cease to be Europe.

Well, they're certainly not going to expel Muslims. I vote for option 'B'.

Well, la di da, look who is calling Bloomberg's terms in office "Republican rule." Choo choo indeed.

The al Jazeera timeline conveniently begins about 11 days after the bombing of the Indonesian Embassy in Paris. A letter taking responsibility suggests Paris would face increased Islamic violence in 2005.

Probably unrelated, Karol.

Dawn, Republicans are seen as tough on crime and Bloomberg is very tough on crime, probably tougher, in some (insane) ways, than Giuliani.

Interesting D-Rod, I haven't seen that connection made anywhere. I read a bunch of articles but chose to link to the Al Jazeera one because it had the clearest list of events.

Let's be fair here. The police were going to put down the riots, but the farmers called a wildcat strike due to a reduction in brie subsudies. Enjoy the multiculturalism and subsequent sharia. Cheese eating surrender monkeys.

The last Republican who gave a shit about assimilating blacks and giving them police protection was Thaddeus Stevens.

The real tragedy of all this is that everytime I read a story about Paris burning, I can't get Dokken out of my head. :P Gotta love the 80's...

That's funny. It reminds me of a drag queen movie from 1990.

"Europe will either expell a majority of Muslims, or it will cease to be Europe."

Did the U.S. expel the majority of Blacks when race riots occured there ?
Did the U.K. expel the West Indian population when race riots happened throughout the long hot summer of 81 ?

These riots have more root causes in common with what happened in the U.S. and U.K. than with anything else. Especially with the U.K.s case. It is is unfortunately a well worn course for the assimilation of large immigrant communities. In no way justified but it has happened in the past. It will happen again. I did wonder how long it would take for a warped interpretation to appear here.

This is Dawn Summers makes a good point with her first response.

When someone in the government in France proposes a 1 Euro a year subsidy cut, up go the barricades and out come the Molotov Cocktails. The farmers do it, the hauliers do it. The students used to do it. It is a very French thing to do. The government then usually reacts very forceably, and after that, 'forgets' to do the thing that caused the riots.

Yaron:
You would honestly preffer that France lose its heritage and stop being French and that Europe follow this trajectory?
Do you believe that Israel has a right to maintain its status as a Jewish state?

Urbane McMeercat:
"Did the U.S. expel the majority of Blacks when race riots occured there ?"
No. Most American Blacks are descended from the slaves or free blacks here at our Founding. They are Americans. However, we have done a poor job of assimilating them. (Actually post 1980, assimilation has worked in the South. In the north, American Blacks are divided between an urban underclass and government employees. This is a freaking disaster.)

"Did the U.K. expel the West Indian population when race riots happened throughout the long hot summer of 81 ?"
Sadly, no. I believe that many members of the population who took part in the rioting should have been arrested and their families expelled.

There is no God given right to live in a foeign country and remain seperate from it.
You either become a citizen, renounce all other allegences, or leave.

This is Dawn Summers made a few points, some good, some interesting, and some wrong.

I presume that the comment about the 2003 blackout is a joke.

The poor efforts post Katrina are a national embarassment. However, the initial response came from the Democrats who have run NOLA for decades. Nagin is black. Between the endemic corruption he continued and the racist hiring system he imposed, he did more damage to the infrastructure than the Klan could dream of.
Moreover, Homeland Security tried to bring in the National Guard earlier, but the Governor refused to allow this.

Finally, the destruction of physical infrastructure made relief efforts difficult.
There is little such damage in France.

France does not have the Federalist system that we do. Units of the French army could have been called in within 2 days.

France has allowed large areas of its suburbs to be "no go" zones, not controled by local authorities. The failure to address this virtual secession has caused this sitation.

NOLA was corrupt, but not taken over by a foreign civilization.

"Sadly, no. I believe that many members of the population who took part in the rioting should have been arrested and their families expelled."

Like you're a "freaking" expert on U.K. race relations 25 years ago ?
Jesus, people on this site freak out about the BBC WORLD service running a half hour piece on the planets most powerful man. At the same time we have someone from NY who is an expert on retrospective U.K. government policy. Has NY gotten pretty dull since I was last there ?

karol - I don't think I've ever heard you use the word "dude" before! ;)

I agree with Urbane, although I noticed on the news in the U.K. last night (not BBC) they were showing maps of Paris and trying to act like this is some new phenomena of outlying city suburbs being depressed ghettos. Guess they've never been to London or NY.

Living in Amsterdam I am very curious to see what the Dutch respons would if it happend here. Although it seems that it is also happening in Denmark I don not really see it happening over here. If it did happen I do believe mayor Cohen might take a harder stance then when van Gogh was killed. That is drinking tea with all different parties. I still cannot believe he is one of the greatest people of Europe as designated by Time (instead of Hirsi Ali) and just recently called out to be greatest Mayor of the last 25 years in the Netherlands.

However the mayor reasons it would not happen here is they do have jobs over here and are alot better off than in Paris. And the areas they live in are not as much cut off from society as in Paris.

Urbane, I consider the threat from Islamofascism the biggest one facing civilization today. So, sorry if I care that the suburbs of Paris have been on fire for 8 days and no one seems to care. I have a personal investment in making sure that any Muslim rage is put down immediately and not allowed to fester and spread, as it obviously has in Paris. Just because the BBC is mostly ignoring this story, doesn't mean it's not important. We have a personal stake in what goes down in Paris and Europe in general. The behavior of the authorities there has a direct reprecussion to our lives here.

And yes, the 2003 blackout comment from Dawn was a joke. I blogged about civilized countries having air conditioning and not letting thousands of people die needlessly in a heat wave and Dawn blames that comment for the blackout of '03.

Apparently, there's also been Muslim rioting recently in Denmark.

I think it is good that you are taking an interest in France. I am not sure about your interpretation that's all.
The blog you link to is funny. He is going on about BBC America.How much space is Fox giving it ? The BBC here on the other hand is devoting plenty of time to the story. Certainly more time than was devoted to the Bush anniversary (didn't personally see or hear that being covered though I am sure it was)..

"The problem they are facing is that the police do not have the proper equipment and do not have the power to stop these riots"

No the problem is that the citizens don't have the ablity to protect their property. One of the reasons why you seldom see riots in red states is because if you riot you get shot and no one cares. Yes the police are overwhelmed, but if they killed a few of the rioters that would even the odds.

Oh, should have checked back here before... RonL, I meant that that's the option that I think will happen, not what I think they should do... if it were up to me, I'd tell them to triple their police force and dismantle their whole welfare state right away. Sadly, no one there has asked for my advice.

Yes, and they're using that time to deleting Islamist/Muslim involvement in violence from the picture - as they usually do.

Here's MSNBC's coverage:

It is, however, going to take more than a few tapes to explain the precise dynamics behind the nightly battles of Clichy-sous-Bois. The electrocution deaths may have set the suburb ablaze, but it was a murky incident at a crowded mosque that seems to have aggravated the expanding cycle of violence. The two-story Bilal Mosque is behind the market, sharing a building with pastry and meat shops and the public bath known as a hammam. Four years after it opened, the mosque has no signs out front, but, for the faithful, it needs none. It was packed with some 700 people last Sunday night when the week's street violence drifted into its tiled prayer room on a cloud of tear gas. Worshipers fled tearful and barefoot into the night.

Here's the BBC's roundup of events, where there's no mention of the significant mosque incident, or of the fact that this event added to the "expanding cycle of violence"

In all their reports of the riots, the BBC concentrates on postive input from Muslims. This phrase is repeated in their reports:

Muslim leaders have urged politicians to show respect for immigrant communities.

While tough-guy Sarkozy is relentlessly criticized for 'inflaming' the conflict.

One thing I've been meaning to ask a Brit about - why are publications like the Guardian and the BBC more pro-Islamist than the Arabs? Both publications fawn over and flatter these fascists with an over-the-top celebrity-worshipping sycophancy that would embarrass a reporter from al Jazeera; or a reporter from Entertainment Tonight.

The Guardian actually hired Islamists to write articles castigating the British public for not respecting Islamist cultural values - after 7/7.

I asked about this on my blog. Does the BBC have a Lawrence of Arabia fixation?

The BBCs round up ? What ? One source on the web ? What about the T.V and Radio ? You been paying close attention to that too ? Jesus, you really think nit picking round a few weblinks builds an argument from the opposite side of the Atlantic ?
As for the Guardian - so what if it hired "Islamists" (whatever you define them as). People are free to read and disagree. When going with something like that they tend to balance it out.

Oooh oooh, I asked this on my blog ! Wow, you're the new Ann Coulter. Give the gal a coconut !
Anyway, I have had enough of this bollox. I am merely wasting time at work here. I seriously hope that there are better things to do in NY on a Friday than trawl the web to make an argument.
Have a nice weekend.

Touched a nerve, did I? sorry.

If Muslims do not want to share the Earth with us, it is our obligation to help them.

You are right ghandi, drive the bastards from the planet.
This is the muslim way to thank Frogs for saving their asses in Bosnia and Kosovo by spilling Serb blood.

I would have a lot less trouble following the "Republicans aren't racist and we really just want to share Democracy with the Muslims" argument if any discussion about a failure of Muslims to integrate didn't immediately devolve into a call for genocide.

Who is a racist Sam? Muslims, whatever race they are, are dangerous people trying to seize entire world.
So Islam must be declared not a religion but rather a political party unwelcomed in US as they did with communists.
If those creeps will continue beheading of the "infidels" we have to build factories to process their kind into organic fertilizer.

Mary, the reason the guardian can hire whoever they like to write in their paper, is because we have a freer press than you do in the US. The trick is, if you don't agree, or if someone opinion doesn't interest you, disagree or stop buying the paper. Ignoring an opinion or fact will not change it!

Mary, the reason the guardian can hire whoever they like to write in their paper, is because we have a freer press than you do in the US.

Freer press? LOL. Tell us about British libel laws.

In any case, that wasn't my argument. I was just wondering why the Guardian chose to promote the writings of an Islamist who despises the British culture and the British people.

Islamists believe that they are superior to everyone else and some of the British press appears to agree with them. I was just wondering why. Is it masochistic self-abasement, a love of Salafist culture or is it more complex than that?

If you don't put them into print, you can't expel them, like we did Omar Bakri. I think the UK libel laws don't make for a less free press, you don't get nutters from all sides making bizarre and untrue claim, without being able to back it up. I also think the sub-judice laws are good too, which mean you can get tried in court before you get tried on television.
However, the Guardian reports what people have said, even if it is against the UK. You have a first amendment for that. The easiest way to show that someone has a redundancy of ideas, or that their opinion is dangerous, is to report what they think, and let the reader decide. I can't see this as promotion. I think this shows the differences between our countries. Neither better, just very different!

I can't see this as promotion. I think this shows the differences between our countries.

I don't believe that the BBC or the Guardian are pro-Islamist when compared to the American press. I believe that they're pro-Islamist when compared to al Jazeera or other Arab press outlets like Lebanon's Daily Star. Even Arab News is more critical of Islamic extremism than the BBC.

Britain gave the Saudis control over Mecca and Medina. Most Arabs and Muslims did not support that at all. I saw more Saudis in Harrods than I saw in all of Muslim Malaysia. I'm just wondering this British affection for Wahhabi/Salafist culture comes from?

"I saw more Saudis in Harrods than I saw in all of Muslim Malaysia. I'm just wondering this British affection for Wahhabi/Salafist culture comes from? "

Why is wealthy Arabs shopping in a world famous store a reflection of a British affection ?
Where does this affection come from ? Your imagination it would seem. Living here I can not get what you are on about at all. You believe what you want to believe. Makes no difference to me I guess.
What is the root of your fixation ?

I've travelled and shopped in a number of places, and just noticed that black abaya-clad Saudis appeared to be most comfortable in Britain. After Saudi sponsorship of 9/11, they don't seem to be as comfortable wearing their native dress in NYC.

This close Saudi-British friendship can probably be traced back to the 1927 Treaty of Jedda, when Great Britain recognized Saudi authority over Hijaz and Nejd (despite the Saudi-led massacre and grave descration that had taken place in Hijaz, angering the Muslim/Arab world)

Muslims have often told me that, of all nations, the British were the most tolerant of Salafist/Wahhabi terrorist groups. Even after 7/7, publications like the BBC and the Guardian seem to be carrying on that tradition.

Given that tradition, it's easy to explain the BBC's tendency to downplay or ignore the crimes of extremists. It's a habit.

Errr, okay. So a relatively low selling left of centre newspaper is influenced in it's editorial decision making by the behaviour of the right wing British Establishment in the 20s. Nothing tenuous about that in the slightest.
Remind me, who is the biggest arms supplier to the Saudi's ?
Who armed and trained the Taliban ?
I would have thought that these facts are more relevant to the modern world than the colonialism of early last century. Maybe not, I stand to be corrected.
As we affectionately say in the N.E. : ye hiv a bit o' a wint quine. Yer feyl !

Add to that, what you see of the BBC is probably 1% of what a British person would see, and is no reflection. Even our dramas have dealt with arab terrorism (we call it 'spooks', you call it 'MI5' I think), several times.
Yes there are muslims who live in the UK wearing muslim dress, also sikhs, rastafarians and scots. What they wear does not neccessarily denote that they are terrorists. In fact, didn't the 9/11 perpetrators purposefully live westernised lifestyles to deflect attention?

As we say in Brum, "yowm rung!"

Remind me, who is the biggest arms supplier to the Saudi's ?

The Saudis have the lamest army in the unfree world. Who cares how many planes they have?

Who armed and trained the Taliban ?

Who dismembered the Taliban?

On the other hand, Britain is still the most tolerant nation when it comes to terrorist groups, and they're still, like every nation around the world, willing to call the Sauds allies. We should all stop doing that.

Historically, the British/Saudi alliance appears to be built on real friendship. I mean, why else would they give the hated extremist Sauds control of Mecca and Medina? That wasn't simple colonialism, it was equivalent to giving the Nazis control of the Vatican. What were they thinking?

ye hiv a bit o' a wint quine. Yer feyl !

Ach. Trying to read brogue always gives me a headache.

It is Doric, not brogue - though I expect you to prsent half a dozen links to tell me otherwise. Not sure about relationships with Saudi (oil, rather than real friendship would be the driving force there I would have thought), but you really seem to have an unhealthy chip on your shoulder about Britain. I take it that you are of Irish descent ?

Bryan - kipper tie ?

you really seem to have an unhealthy chip on your shoulder about Britain. I take it that you are of Irish descent ?

Yes, I am, but I'll admit that there are a lot of things to admire about Britain; most of British literature, Ealing studio films (with Alec Guiness) fruit crisps with bird's custard, yorkie bars..

I just don't trust British advice or press coverage as it relates to terrorism. Like dancing or winemaking, dealing with terrorism is just not a British skillset.

My parents are both Irish, but moved here in the 1950's. This is why I can relate to all of the economic migrants into this country; move over, get job, bring wife, then mother and any other family, start family, push family to do well in education. This pattern has been repeated over most of the ex-colonial migrants in the UK.
As to UK and terrorism. It was a good thing that the Northern Irish stopped fighting and started talking (even if it needs still yet more work). I do think that the USA had this bizarre idea of what was going on. McDonalds used to give money to NORAID, the fundraisers for the IRA, and those awful films with their awfuller accents (Brad Pitt, Tommy Lee Jones). Had the fundraising gone on, the policy of bombing those who arm and support terrorism post 9/11 may have begun to sound a mite bit hypocritical.
McMeercat, Ar! an faggits and pays an'all!

Apropos of nothing; Miss England is our First Muslim Miss England!

bryan - you say McDonalds used to give money to NORAID, the fundraisers for the IRA

Do you have any links to legitimate sites that prove that McDonalds funds the IRA? All I can find are urban-legend references. It sounds like that KFC-headless chicken breeding rumor.

In any case, McDonalds is not a branch of the US government, and neither is Brad Pitt. Islamist terrorism is supported by state officials and billions of petrodollars. That's just one of many reasons why indiginous terrorism in Ireland isn't comparable to state-funded international Islamist terrorism.

Yes, I thought you might say that. The innocent victims in my home town and their families would probably disagree. The only government that sponsored Osama Bin Laden was yours, and if you can find a link to prove otherwise, or that any other government did, I'd very much like to see it. Did you have to put up with harrassment or violence because of IRA activities. My family did. As I said, the perception of the troubles in the US is bizarre.

McDonalds used to give money to NORAID, the fundraisers for the IRA

The only government that sponsored Osama Bin Laden was yours.

Oh, for pity's sake. What next, are you going to tell me the moon landings were faked?

I don't really like discussing anything with conspiracy theorists, sorry.

I'll admit the McDonald's thing is an urban myth, and that has me wrong. The Osama one isn't. I also notice that you have abandoned defending the IRA, UVF etc as much more cuddley terrorists. THAT was fairly ridiculous.

The Osama bit is a myth too, too transparent to bother with. I know something about the IRA, UVF - I've discussed this issue also; If all of those terrorist groups and their supporters had been jailed or shot back in the '70's the world would be a better place. I have never said that they're cuddly. Stop making stuff up.

IMO you know as little as you claim I do about Islamists. As to your anti-British feeling, there's something to that. It's a shame you couldn't expand on why you think UK libel laws are so bad. Isn't it a good thing that people cannot be smeared by newspapers whose owners have a vendetta?