NationStates Jolt Archive

400 arrested overnight in France, two policemen seriously injured by buckshot, churches and schools becoming more frequent targets, two people killed.

Somehow, I don't think any of this is the fault of the US, which Europeans seem to blame for everything they don't like. Might be nice to clean up your own house before raising hell about ours. :rolleyes:

400 arrested overnight in France, two policemen seriously injured by buckshot, churches and schools becoming more frequent targets, two people killed.

Somehow, I don't think any of this is the fault of the US, which Europeans seem to blame for everything they don't like. Might be nice to clean up your own house before raising hell about ours. :rolleyes:

It's rather hard to be a policeman in France. They have largely switched away from regular firearms, and are now carrying a pistol-like object that throws up to two racquetball-sized rubber balls to a very short range and limited effect.

If the rioters have shotguns, you're in a lot of trouble as a policeman. Also, if there are more than a few rioters, that one "flashball" (they don't flash) pistol is not going to stop anyone.

It's rather hard to be a policeman in France. They have largely switched away from regular firearms, and are now carrying a pistol-like object that throws up to two racquetball-sized rubber balls to a very short range and limited effect.

If the rioters have shotguns, you're in a lot of trouble as a policeman. Also, if there are more than a few rioters, that one "flashball" (they don't flash) pistol is not going to stop anyone.
Let's hear it for gun control! Sigh. :rolleyes:

Riots spreading to Germany? I must have missed that. :confused:

Let's hear it for gun control! Sigh. :rolleyes:

Actually, France doesn't have as much gun control as other European nations.

You are, for instance, not only permitted to buy a silencer in France, but it is a requirement at most shooting ranges. For preservation of your hearing!

Yes, there are permits and such. But there are probably far more firearms in circulation in France than in a place like the UK.

This is similar to the LA riots in the nineties. Thousands of marginated poor people defying the enslaver system.

The difference? Here they have chances of being heard and live as humans. Well, in Belgium and Germany, for sure.

When did the riots spread to Germany? That's the first thing I hear...
There's nothing on the German news pages, either. :confused:

Riots spreading to Germany? I must have missed that. :confused:
It was just on the news a few minutes ago. Sorry, but no link yet.

This is similar to the LA riots in the nineties. Thousands of marginated poor people defying the enslaver system.

The difference? Here they have chances of being heard and live as humans. Well, in Belgium and Germany, for sure.

It's not even a close comparison. The Watts riots were far smaller, and the LA riots were smaller than the Watts riots.

The riots in France are extending out across the whole nation. Nice is not a suburb of Paris, but they have the problem as well.

I was reading The Australian last night, and it appears that the racist bent of the native French, and the social welfare policy of warehousing the poor immigrants in public ghettos has finally come home to roost.

Gee, riots from poor immigrants in Welfare States? Who'da thunkit?

It was just on the news a few minutes ago. Sorry, but no link yet.

Nothing on the news here yet. Did they mention where exactly?

I was reading The Australian last night, and it appears that the racist bent of the native French, and the social welfare policy of warehousing the poor immigrants in public ghettos has finally come home to roost.

Revolution of the Masses!!!!

And they spread to Belgium and Germany simply because they want to do the same thing, they think it's cool, we have an expression for that: "When it rains in Paris, it drips in Brussels" (freely translated)
In Brussels however, it will never have the full strength as in Paris simply because we don't have equally large problems, we hardly have any ghetto's like in Paris

I really didn't care about the riots in france, but why Belgium!

Belgium is the coolest european state this side of Moldovia!

Revolution of the Masses!!!!

The US discovered that similar social welfare policies (warehousing the poor in huge apartment blocks in special areas) was a recipe for disaster.

Most US states are now trying to dismantle those apartment blocks and redistribute the population of poor in subsidized housing more uniformly within the regular population. It helps a lot.

Social welfare just for the sake of social welfare is not progressive. Social welfare that actually achieves a good goal without causing other major problems is progressive.

And they spread to Belgium and Germany simply because they want to do the same thing, they think it's cool, we have an expression for that: "When it rains in Paris, it drips in Brussels" (freely translated)
In Brussels however, it will never have the full strength as in Paris simply because we don't have equally large problems, we hardly have any ghetto's like in Paris

I read that some Italian minister was fearful it would come to Italy - he says that if the French have problems with immigrants, the Italian problem is worse.

Revolution of the Masses!!!!
This has nothing to do with the masses, this is poor youngsters (sometimes even 12 year olds) runing amoc and destroying property of their fellow citizens, really, how many police stations were attacked, how many cars of rich people were burned?
Currently it is violence for violence's sake

Gee, riots from poor immigrants in Welfare States? Who'da thunkit?

FYI, they're not rioting against the welfare state. They're rioting because of a completely different issue.

Europe, as countries historically not used to immigration, is hard on immigrants. It is expected in most European countries that individuals assimilate. Those that refuse are often marginalized, economically and socially. France is the most pertinet example. France has followed the ideas of Laicete(sp?) for a while now, which basically means that for immigrants, they must become French if they expect a piece of the pie. This strategy kept things relatively peaceful when it was but a trickle of immigrants.

As immigrants come in larger waves, they are able and more willing to resist Laicete. The consequense is that large swaths of individuals become more marginalized. This is naturally felt by the victims as unfair, which has led to mounting tensions, greater sectarianism and general alienation. All that was missing is the spark. The deaths of those two teens that possibly occured at the hands of authorities brought to the surface tensions that had been running underneath French society for a while. In no way has France's welfare policies contributed to this at all. Instead it's policies on multiculturalism have backfired, and this is the result.

EDIT : it's like saying the US's welfare policies were responsible for the LA riots. Just because nation X has program Y, and then Z happened doesn't in and of itself prove Y leads to Z.

400 arrested overnight in France, two policemen seriously injured by buckshot, churches and schools becoming more frequent targets, two people killed.

Somehow, I don't think any of this is the fault of the US, which Europeans seem to blame for everything they don't like. Might be nice to clean up your own house before raising hell about ours. :rolleyes:

Noone was blaming the US, fool.

Noone was blaming the US, fool.

USians like to think everybody blames them for everything. It's part of the victim complex.

USians like to think everybody blames them for everything. It's part of the victim complex.

Actually, I am well aware that the UK and Isreal also usually get blamed for shit they didn't cause either.

I just wonder what the French government is going to do about it, currently they're not really doing anything?

FYI, they're not rioting against the welfare state. They're rioting because of a completely different issue.

Europe, as countries historically not used to immigration, is hard on immigrants. It is expected in most European countries that individuals assimilate. Those that refuse are often marginalized, economically and socially. France is the most pertinet example. France has followed the ideas of Laicete(sp?) for a while now, which basically means that for immigrants, they must become French if they expect a piece of the pie. This strategy kept things relatively peaceful when it was but a trickle of immigrants.

As immigrants come in larger waves, they are able and more willing to resist Laicete. The consequense is that large swaths of individuals become more marginalized. This is naturally felt by the victims as unfair, which has led to mounting tensions, greater sectarianism and general alienation. All that was missing is the spark. The deaths of those two teens that possibly occured at the hands of authorities brought to the surface tensions that had been running underneath French society for a while. In no way has France's welfare policies contributed to this at all. Instead it's policies on multiculturalism have backfired, and this is the result.

The movie "La Haine" gives a good impression of the situation of immigrants in France.

The movie "La Heine" gives a good impression of the situation of immigrants in France.

Hmm. Never seen it. Is it a European film?

Hmm. Never seen it. Is it a European film?

Yup. It's a French movie. I got the title wrong first, it's "La Haine".

Here (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113247/) is the IMDB entry. I guess "Hate" is the English title.

Hmm. Never seen it. Is it a European film?

French. Not what you would call a feel-good movie. You should track it down.

Somehow, I don't think any of this is the fault of the US, which Europeans seem to blame for everything they don't like.
Oh yeah, 'cause you really see the French blaming Americans for these riots. Please don't try to discredit your opponents by putting words into their mouths.

The general problem behind these riots seems to be that France rejected a policy of multiculturalism, which means the government couldn't address issues affecting the immigrant subcultures as officially those subcultures don't exist.

Europe, as countries historically not used to immigration, is hard on immigrants. It is expected in most European countries that individuals assimilate. Those that refuse are often marginalized, economically and socially. France is the most pertinet example. France has followed the ideas of Laicete(sp?) for a while now, which basically means that for immigrants, they must become French if they expect a piece of the pie. This strategy kept things relatively peaceful when it was but a trickle of immigrants.


Hmm. It would seem that the US is ahead of the French in its ability to accept immigrants (even if we do have politicians who oppose it).

Even our illegal immigrants appear to be able to succeed here. And they don't stop speaking their native language.

Heard about the guy who fell off a skyscraper?

On his way down past each floor he kept sayng to reassure himself, "So far so good, so far so good, so far so good."

How you fall doesn't matter.

It's how you land!



Ahem, sorry, I enjoyed La Haine.
Carry on.

Hmm. It would seem that the US is ahead of the French in its ability to accept immigrants (even if we do have politicians who oppose it).

Even our illegal immigrants appear to be able to succeed here. And they don't stop speaking their native language.

It's true. We're an immigrant society, so we are more used to this. Of course it hasn't always been pretty *cough*NoIrishNeedApply*cough* but in general we are better at dealing with multiculturalism than France.

It's true. We're an immigrant society, so we are more used to this. Of course it hasn't always been pretty *cough*NoIrishNeedApply*cough* but in general we are better at dealing with multiculturalism than France.

So one might say that we've been through similar problems, but longer ago. And we've learned at least something over the years.

I still think that concentrating the poor in housing blocks is a recipe for disaster. How are they going to assimilate under those conditions?

Yup. It's a French movie. I got the title wrong first, it's "La Haine".

Here (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113247/) is the IMDB entry. I guess "Hate" is the English title.

Looks interesting. I'll have to look it up sometimes.

So one might say that we've been through similar problems, but longer ago. And we've learned at least something over the years.

I still think that concentrating the poor in housing blocks is a recipe for disaster. How are they going to assimilate under those conditions?

It's the same problem in Germany with the Turkish immigrants, but I don't think that it's as serious as in France. Politicians have simply refused to adress the problems or even to admit that there are problems.

Somehow, I don't think any of this is the fault of the US, which Europeans seem to blame for everything they don't like. Might be nice to clean up your own house before raising hell about ours. :rolleyes:

EH?! What has the US got to do with this AT ALL?! In the now 4 different threads dealing with this topic I have not seen a single post blame the US!

Seems like you're a bit miffed you're not involved on this one.... :p

This is similar to the LA riots in the nineties. Thousands of marginated poor people defying the enslaver system.

The difference? Here they have chances of being heard and live as humans. Well, in Belgium and Germany, for sure.

"the enslaver system"

lol

of course, people should blame others for their own shortcomings... it's never their own fault. "I'm poor because of the man, not because i'm lazy or stupid..."

these people, rather than work hard to better their lot, have decided to use violence. They cannot be assuaged.

So one might say that we've been through similar problems, but longer ago. And we've learned at least something over the years.

I still think that concentrating the poor in housing blocks is a recipe for disaster. How are they going to assimilate under those conditions?

Housing blocks, residential areas separated by race and class are recipies for sectarianism. It reinforces feelings of loyalty to one's own ethnic and religious group, and amps up suspicion out outsiders as it minimizes interaction with them. Course the suspicion becomes mutual. Mixing however creates interracial and interfaith social and economic bonds, which in the long run makes for a more peaceful society.

But then there is the problem of immigrants who live in seperate communities by choice... I know some Muslim immigrants do this to better maintain their religion. There are people who rightly fear that the mixing would exterminate their unique culture.

It's a tough call.

FYI, they're not rioting against the welfare state. They're rioting because of a completely different issue.
Hah!

Europe, as countries historically not used to immigration, is hard on immigrants. It is expected in most European countries that individuals assimilate. Those that refuse are often marginalized, economically and socially. France is the most pertinet example. France has followed the ideas of Laicete(sp?) for a while now, which basically means that for immigrants, they must become French if they expect a piece of the pie. This strategy kept things relatively peaceful when it was but a trickle of immigrants.
Yes, and all the while people from Europe are heckling us for various things [admittedly, a certain amount of which we definately earned], not the least of it being our often criticized, "sub-standard" social policies and so forth. We do it a little, but not nearly as much as you guys.

As immigrants come in larger waves, they are able and more willing to resist Laicete. The consequense is that large swaths of individuals become more marginalized. This is naturally felt by the victims as unfair, which has led to mounting tensions, greater sectarianism and general alienation. All that was missing is the spark. The deaths of those two teens that possibly occured at the hands of authorities brought to the surface tensions that had been running underneath French society for a while. In no way has France's welfare policies contributed to this at all. Instead it's policies on multiculturalism have backfired, and this is the result.
Right, but none of this really contradicts anything I said earlier. The gist of this is that immigrants have had a hard time in Europe [for obvious cultural reasons], and tensions boiled over with $EVENT, involving two teenagers and some cops. You state that there's "no connection" between these riots [a decidedly social phenomenon] and the government's social policy? If you're going to say America is degrading itself by not caring for it's poor [by not handing out more of its wealth to the poor], why do you get to turn around and exonerate your social policies by default when the very people those policies are designed to protect start rioting?

EDIT : it's like saying the US's welfare policies were responsible for the LA riots. Just because nation X has program Y, and then Z happened doesn't in and of itself prove Y leads to Z.
Umm... then what the fuck does?

Also, it's been noted that the LA riots aren't really comparable to these. The LA riots were limited to one city, and was a lot smaller than the ones that occured in Paris even initially, if the numbers I'm hearing are correct.

I'm not really sure [and don't have time to look up, at the moment] whether these riots will end up worse than the LA riots [or whatever our worst period of rioting was] or not. Only one way to find out I guess.

EH?! What has the US got to do with this AT ALL?! In the now 4 different threads dealing with this topic I have not seen a single post blame the US!

Seems like you're a bit miffed you're not involved on this one.... :p

No one is blaming the US, but the US has had similar experiences over the past 200 years in having immigrants arrive.

Small hint: concentrating welfare recipients into massive housing projects is a very, very, very bad idea. You need to do what the US has been doing since the mid-1990s, and dismantle the large projects and distribute the people throughout neighborhoods of all types. Force builders to set aside a few houses in each neighborhood, give the poor housing vouchers that allow them to choose a better neighborhood.

You will find that they have far less crime, and assimilate far faster that way.

The US discovered that similar social welfare policies (warehousing the poor in huge apartment blocks in special areas) was a recipe for disaster.

Most US states are now trying to dismantle those apartment blocks and redistribute the population of poor in subsidized housing more uniformly within the regular population. It helps a lot.

Social welfare just for the sake of social welfare is not progressive. Social welfare that actually achieves a good goal without causing other major problems is progressive.
Like warehousing the poor was ever a viable solution. Sigh. If we expect people to lift themselves out of poverty, we have to give the children a chance to see that there is another way to live, behave, and think. Segregating them in "gettoes for the poor" is definitely no way to accomplish this.

A teacher friend of mine once told me about an incident that drove this home with stunning force: seems she had to give one of the kids from a "getto for the poor" a ride home. The young man, attempting to make conversation, asked her who her caseworker was. When she told him that she didn't have a caseworker, he refused to believe her. Talk about "learned dependency!" SIGH! :headbang:

"the enslaver system"

lol

of course, people should blame others for their own shortcomings... it's never their own fault. "I'm poor because of the man, not because i'm lazy or stupid..."

these people, rather than work hard to better their lot, have decided to use violence. They cannot be assuaged.

WTF? ever heard of racism? When you change your name into Muhamed or Yasser or Ali or any other middle-eastern name, what are your chances of getting a job? I know a guy named Yasser (his parents are Belgians and their parents parents and so on all are) Well if he tries to get a job, he is mostly refused to even come when he applies, only when he comes himself he gets accepted, so don't call people lazy when you're ignorant yourself.

EH?! What has the US got to do with this AT ALL?! In the now 4 different threads dealing with this topic I have not seen a single post blame the US!

Seems like you're a bit miffed you're not involved on this one.... :p
No, I'm not "miffed" at all. It was just an attempt to point out the tendency among certain Europeans to blame everything on the US. :p

WTF? ever heard of racism? When you change your name into Muhamed or Yasser or Ali or any other middle-eastern name, what are your chances of getting a job? I know a guy named Yasser (his parents are Belgians and their parents parents and so on all are) Well if he tries to get a job, he is mostly refused to even come when he applies, only when he comes himself he gets accepted, so don't call people lazy when you're ignorant yourself.

so... you're assuming that he's being turned away because of his race.

WTF? ever heard of racism? When you change your name into Muhamed or Yasser or Ali or any other middle-eastern name, what are your chances of getting a job? I know a guy named Yasser (his parents are Belgians and their parents parents and so on all are) Well if he tries to get a job, he is mostly refused to even come when he applies, only when he comes himself he gets accepted, so don't call people lazy when you're ignorant yourself.

I'm sitting in a nice office right across from a guy named Muhammed here. And there are plenty of Indians and people from other countries here.

We're all highly paid, too. So maybe there's racism on top of your badly implemented welfare programs.

The LA riots were limited to one city, and was a lot smaller than the ones that occured in Paris even initially, if the numbers I'm hearing are correct.
.

Appartently not...

Smaller, concomitant unrest occurred in other United States cities, especially Las Vegas, Atlanta, and San Francisco, but also including Oakland, New York, Seattle, Chicago, Phoenix, Madison, and even the Canadian city of Toronto.

Estimates of the number of lives lost during the unrest vary between 50 and 60, with as many as 2,000 persons injured. Estimates of the material damage done vary between about $800 million and $1 billion. Approximately 3,600 fires were set, destroying 1,100 buildings, with fire calls coming once every minute at some points. About 10,000 people were arrested

so... you're assuming that he's being turned away because of his race.
No, he's a 100% Belgian, he's just got an arabic name, so when he shows up in person, there's no problem to get the job, when he sends a CV, there is.

No, I'm not "miffed" at all. It was just an attempt to point out the tendency among certain Europeans to blame everything on the US. :p

Where's OceanDrive when you need him :D

Where's OceanDrive when you need him :D

Who is OceanDrive?

Who is OceanDrive?

Skapenroe the Lesser.

Riots spreading to Germany? I must have missed that. :confused:

Berlin: Fünf Autos in Brand gesteckt (http://www.klamm.de/partner/unter_news.php?l_id=8&news_id=595643)

Who is OceanDrive?

That's Hugo Chavez' username on these forums. :)

Skapedroe the Lesser.
ROFLMAO!!! :D

Berlin: Fünf Autos in Brand gesteckt (http://www.klamm.de/partner/unter_news.php?l_id=8&news_id=595643)

Thanks. Not much yet. Let's see how this develops.

I hope I have some clean black clothes somewhere. ;)

Hah!

Qua?

Yes, and all the while people from Europe are heckling us for various things [admittedly, a certain amount of which we definately earned], not the least of it being our often criticized, "sub-standard" social policies and so forth. We do it a little, but not nearly as much as you guys.

Europe and the US criticse each other. I'm anti-American and a europhile, but I'm also mature enough to admit when something Europe did was wrong and has caused a problem. I never even mentioned America's problems.

Right, but none of this really contradicts anything I said earlier. The gist of this is that immigrants have had a hard time in Europe [for obvious cultural reasons], and tensions boiled over with $EVENT, involving two teenagers and some cops. You state that there's "no connection" between these riots [a decidedly social phenomenon] and the government's social policy? If you're going to say America is degrading itself by not caring for it's poor [by not handing out more of its wealth to the poor], why do you get to turn around and exonerate your social policies by default when the very people those policies are designed to protect start rioting?

You're being (IMO deliberately) general to make a particular point. Yes,this is being caused by Social Policy. But not ALL social policy! Hell, environmental regulation is an aspect of social policy... does that mean France's signing of the Kyoto agreement is responsible? Nope. I argue that it is France's policy of Laicete that, as I detailed, creates marginalization and tension that waited for a suitable spark. Once again, you're putting words in my mouth regarding America. I have not attacked America's social policies. I confine my answers to European social policies because American social policies are not on trial here. And welfare policies don't exist to protect people from rioting. Police exist for that. Welfare exists to protect people from deprivation.

Umm... then what the fuck does?

Also, it's been noted that the LA riots aren't really comparable to these. The LA riots were limited to one city, and was a lot smaller than the ones that occured in Paris even initially, if the numbers I'm hearing are correct.

I'm not really sure [and don't have time to look up, at the moment] whether these riots will end up worse than the LA riots [or whatever our worst period of rioting was] or not. Only one way to find out I guess.

It's simple. The existence of Y in X, and the existence of Z in X, does not automatically imply Y and Z have a correlation. There is a Family Guy poster in my room, and a calender. But the calender is not here because of the Family Guy poster. Unless a sound argument - or repeatable scientific experiment - can reasonably connect those two, just because I have a Family guy poster in my room does not mean that its existence leads to the existence of a calender in my room.

Just so we're clear, I'm not absolving France or her policies of blame. This is their mess, they caused it. But it is not her welfare policies that are the proximate cause of the rioting. It is the situation immigrants face under France's current policies on immigration and integration, which are exlusitory and have lead to discrimination.

Berlin: Fünf Autos in Brand gesteckt (http://www.klamm.de/partner/unter_news.php?l_id=8&news_id=595643)
They torched 5 cars in Berlin? Not exactly what I would call a nation-wide riot like what they got in France.

Thanks. Not much yet. Let's see how this develops.

I hope I have some clean black clothes somewhere. ;)

You're my friend :D

Skapenroe the Lesser.

You'll have to pardon me, I'm new here. I don't know who that is either.

A random thought/question, mostly for Europeans methinks - Could this rioting my muslim immigrants have an affect on Turkey's admission to the EU?

Just wondering, because if Turkey comes in, more immigrants are sure to arrive...

You'll have to pardon me, I'm new here. I don't know who that is either.

Don't worry- after a while you'll know what we mean :D ;)

A random thought/question, mostly for Europeans methinks - Could this rioting my muslim immigrants have an affect on Turkey's admission to the EU?

Just wondering, because if Turkey comes in, more immigrants are sure to arrive...

Can't obviously say for certain. If they emigrate- then they're looking for jobs.

Ireland needs to import 3,000 workers a month to keep the growth rate of the economy the same :eek:

We'll gladly take em :D

A random thought/question, mostly for Europeans methinks - Could this rioting my muslim immigrants have an affect on Turkey's admission to the EU?

Just wondering, because if Turkey comes in, more immigrants are sure to arrive...

It doesn't appear to be a matter of immigration. It's a matter of how you handle the immigrants.

Mishandle the immigrants, pack them into housing blocks, add a racist society, and voila!

Thanks to whichever mod corrected my spelling. I can never get his name right!

Can't obviously say for certain. If they emigrate- then they're looking for jobs.

Ireland needs to import 3,000 workers a month to keep the growth rate of the economy the same :eek:

We'll gladly take em :D

Well I think Turkey in the long run will be a good thing for the EU, economically, socially and politically, but I asked because it seems something like this might produce reactionary sentiment -justified or not- against muslims.

question:

are muslims of middle-eastern descent in Western Europe largely due to the rebuilding after world war II?

ROFLMAO!!! :D

Eut gets it, does anyone else?

400 arrested overnight in France, two policemen seriously injured by buckshot, churches and schools becoming more frequent targets, two people killed.

Somehow, I don't think any of this is the fault of the US, which Europeans seem to blame for everything they don't like. Might be nice to clean up your own house before raising hell about ours. :rolleyes:There's riots in Germany? You have a source for this?

question:

are muslims of middle-eastern descent in Western Europe largely due to the rebuilding after world war II?

No. Mostly from decolonisation.

question:

are muslims of middle-eastern descent in Western Europe largely due to the rebuilding after world war II?

Different reasons:

France got a lot of Algerians after Algerian independence.
Germany brought in a lot of Turks as guest workers to supplement the labor force
Spain has had to deal with people trying to swim across, or climb fences.

The Mediterranean is really a European lake - with jobs on one side and out-of-work people living in squalor on the other.

question:

are muslims of middle-eastern descent in Western Europe largely due to the rebuilding after world war II?Indirectly. The first generation of Turks in West Germany way (Vietnamese to a lesser extent in East Germany). Now a lot come to Germany because the first generation did.

You'll have to pardon me, I'm new here. I don't know who that is either.
Skapedroe gained a certain amount of notariaty on here as being one of the most billegerant, aggressive and random posters ever. Most of us got to the point where we wouldn't even reply to his posts, but would read them just for the entertainment value! :D

Skapedroe gained a certain amount of notariaty on here as being one of the most billegerant, aggressive and random posters ever. Most of us got to the point where we wouldn't even reply to his posts, but would read them just for the entertainment value! :D

I've read a few of the threads here, and I find the place rather flaming.

There's riots in Germany? You have a source for this?

Not real riots. Just some burned cars. Clicky (http://www.klamm.de/partner/unter_news.php?l_id=8&news_id=595643).

There's riots in Germany? You have a source for this?
Yeah. The morning news on TV, but nothing I know of online yet. Sorry.

I've read a few of the threads here, and I find the place rather flaming.
True, but Sakpedroe was so over the top that even folks like OceanDrive were agast! :D

I've read a few of the threads here, and I find the place rather flaming.

He was much worse.

He claimed that Bush's ancestors caused the extinction of the Dinosaurs by firing a beam from a crystal into the center of the earth, thereby changing the rotation, and killing the dinosaurs.

I miss him.

Not real riots. Just some burned cars. Clicky (http://www.klamm.de/partner/unter_news.php?l_id=8&news_id=595643).
Pft. Berlin Moabit. And only five cars. We have worse every Mayday and no one's bothered claiming Germany was on fire.

He was much worse.

He claimed that Bush's ancestors caused the extinction of the Dinosaurs by firing a beam from a crystal into the center of the earth, thereby changing the rotation, and killing the dinosaurs.

I miss him.
Aw, THATs goin' in my sig :D :D

I've read a few of the threads here, and I find the place rather flaming.

Flamiest, spammiest and most downright unpleasant site I've ever seen (with the possible exception of goatse).

Gotta love it.

He claimed that Bush's ancestors caused the extinction of the Dinosaurs by firing a beam from a crystal into the center of the earth, thereby changing the rotation, and killing the dinosaurs.

That deserves this -

http://koti.mbnet.fi/~foo/wtf.jpg

Flamiest, spammiest and most downright unpleasant site I've ever seen (with the possible exception of goatse).

Gotta love it.

I've played a few online games that have built-in forums, and those are full of stuff that has nothing to do with the game.

That deserves this -

http://koti.mbnet.fi/~foo/wtf.jpg
Is that Doctor Smith of Lost In Space fame???

Pft. Berlin Moabit. And only five cars. We have worse every Mayday and no one's bothered claiming Germany was on fire.

well, it does set a trend so Germany may well be on fire within days

Is that Doctor Smith of Lost In Space fame???

You mean the creepy evil guy who was for some reason always alone with the little boy....(I could be wayyy off... Lost in Space was practically before my time) I think so.

I think I found a way to blame the U.S. for the riots.

It's the weather. It's clearly too warm for this time of the year. If it was colder, all those rioters would sit happy in their welfare-heated ghettos. And we all know who the biggest contributer for man-made climate change is.

Just don't take this post too serious. ;)

well, it does set a trend so Germany may well be on fire within days

Something tells me the German police are not as pleasant as the French police. After all, the German police are still issued real pistols, while the French police have guns that shoot racquetballs.

I think I found a way to blame the U.S. for the riots.

It's the weather. It's clearly too warm for this time of the year. If it was colder, all those rioters would sit happy in their welfare-heated ghettos. And we all know who the biggest contributer for man-made climate change is.

Just don't take this post too serious. ;)

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6272/letter4nr.gif

Is that Doctor Smith of Lost In Space fame???

No, that's Dick Emery.

(Of, "more tea vicar?" fame.)

Something tells me the German police are not as pleasant as the French police. After all, the German police are still issued real pistols, while the French police have guns that shoot racquetballs.

What the fuck is a 'raquetball'?

A Squash ball? A Tennis ball? What?

The Germans have some damn good riot police if need be.

well, it does set a trend so Germany may well be on fire within daysSlippery Slope fallacy. So: Not really. Like I said, we've had much worse every Mayday. And I mean every Mayday. And I mean worse.
The Berlin police is a bit better at handling the situation than the French since they have experience in this sort of thing. Note that the Berlin strategy is "Deescalation" as opposed to Sarkozy's "Clean out the scum" approach. These guys probably tried to mimic the French, but it won't necessarily turn into a wildfire like it did in France. It certainly isn't a riot. I know riots. I come from Berlin and I get to see one right after every one of my birthdays. Six burning cars do not constitute a riot.

Something tells me the German police are not as pleasant as the French police. After all, the German police are still issued real pistols, while the French police have guns that shoot racquetballs.Depends. Bavarian police are a bit less friendly, but Berlin police, mainly the ones that have regular experience in containing riots, are more focussed on Deescalation than beating the shit out of a rioter. That's what the French are trying to do and its not working.

What the fuck is a 'raquetball'?

A Squash ball? A Tennis ball? What?

The Germans have some damn good riot police if need be.

As of last May, this is the standard sidearm of the French police
http://www.flash-ball.com/pages-us/i_fb_tech.htm

It's not even a real gun.

You mean the creepy evil guy who was for some reason always alone with the little boy....(I could be wayyy off... Lost in Space was practically before my time) I think so.
He wasn't so much "evil" as just a total wastoid, scared of his own shadow and would rather have been anywhere else than lost in space. Heh!

You mean the creepy evil guy who was for some reason always alone with the little boy....(I could be wayyy off... Lost in Space was practically before my time) I think so.
He wasn't so much "evil" as just a total wastoid, scared of his own shadow and would rather have been anywhere else than lost in space. Heh!

[Image of a letter]
Um... the French aren't negotiating at all actually. They're dealing with the rioters after the same attitude the US is dealing with terrorists...

Um... the French aren't negotiating at all actually. They're dealing with the rioters after the same attitude the US is dealing with terrorists...

The problem is that the French police are using less-lethal guns that have little effect on rioters.

US forces shoot to kill.

The problem is that the French police are using less-lethal guns that have little effect on rioters.

US forces shoot to kill.

How is 'Not Killing people' a problem? :confused:

Somehow, I don't think any of this is the fault of the US, which Europeans seem to blame for everything they don't like. Might be nice to clean up your own house before raising hell about ours. :rolleyes:

They'd blame us for the common cold if they could. :mad:

The problem is that the French police are using less-lethal guns that have little effect on rioters.

US forces shoot to kill.Those aren't comparable. The attitudes behind it are. If the French Police were to manage to kill some more protesters, they'd fan the flames some more.
And an M-16 is about as useful as a pea shooter if there's no-one around to shoot, as it's the case in France, where the rioters are organizing themselves and showing up in places without police presence.

How is 'Not Killing people' a problem? :confused:

Must be one of those cultural differences..

They'd blame us for the common cold if they could. :mad:

...I kid.

How is 'Not Killing people' a problem? :confused:

The flashball guns are notoriously ineffective, especially if your opponent has a real gun (as some of the rioters apparently have shotguns with buckshot).

That's a problem. If you're a policeman, and you go into harm's way with no effective way of defending yourself, you're going to end up wounded or dead, without having changed the course of the rioting.

Um... the French aren't negotiating at all actually. They're dealing with the rioters after the same attitude the US is dealing with terrorists...

Actually they are not doing much of anything. Mostly so when they do smack the immigrants down, it'll look like they had no choice, and therefore get to be really brutal about it. Let's face it, whatever one may think of the french, one is forced to admit that they are very clever about this kind of stuff.

The flashball guns are notoriously ineffective, especially if your opponent has a real gun (as some of the rioters apparently have shotguns with buckshot).

That's a problem. If you're a policeman, and you go into harm's way with no effective way of defending yourself, you're going to end up wounded or dead, without having changed the course of the rioting.

But no one has been killed by gunfire yet.

Once you enter guns into the equation the death toll will soar rapidly... it will inflame the rioters due to the heavy handedness of the authorities and cause more destruction, pain, suffering and death.

Again, I point ot Northern Ireland as evidence of such attempts to quell riots.

But no one has been killed by gunfire yet.

Once you enter guns into the equation the death toll will soar rapidly... it will inflame the rioters due to the heavy handedness of the authorities and cause more destruction, pain, suffering and death.

Again, I point ot Northern Ireland as evidence of such attempts to quell riots.

There are people and police who have already been wounded by shotgun - I would say that the rioters have already escalated.

If they are using guns, and the police are not, it won't be long before the police are overwhelmed.

But no one has been killed by gunfire yet.

Once you enter guns into the equation the death toll will soar rapidly... it will inflame the rioters due to the heavy handedness of the authorities and cause more destruction, pain, suffering and death.

Again, I point ot Northern Ireland as evidence of such attempts to quell riots.One person dead due to the riots so far

Also, might I add that the best example that using lethal force will only make things worse is the fact that the deaths of two boys being chased by the police is what started this whole mess.

There are people and police who have already been wounded by shotgun - I would say that the rioters have already escalated.

If they are using guns, and the police are not, it won't be long before the police are overwhelmed.What do you mean it won't be long before the police are overwhelmed? They already are! That's why they haven't been able to stop these riots.

One person dead due to the riots so far

Also, might I add that the best example that using lethal force will only make things worse is the fact that the deaths of two boys being chased by the police is what started this whole mess.

IIRC, the two boys were trying to hide in a power transformer and were electrocuted.

It's not as if the police shot them.

One person dead due to the riots so far


I know- but not through gunfire. He was beaten and slipped into a coma and then died.

I know- but not through gunfire. He was beaten and slipped into a coma and then died.
Police have already been wounded by gunfire - from rioters. No one dead from that yet, but it won't be long.

If you were a policeman with no effective weapon against firearm wielding opponents, would you go out on the street and volunteer to get shot?

IIRC, the two boys were trying to hide in a power transformer and were electrocuted.

It's not as if the police shot them.Not to you, but it is to some police-hating immigrant rioter.
If they thought like you did, they wouldn't be destroying cars, jobs, and infrastructure.

Like warehousing the poor was ever a viable solution. Sigh. If we expect people to lift themselves out of poverty, we have to give the children a chance to see that there is another way to live, behave, and think. Segregating them in "gettoes for the poor" is definitely no way to accomplish this.


Yeah, it's like New Orleans never happened :rolleyes:

I know- but not through gunfire. He was beaten and slipped into a coma and then died.Won't really matter much. "Death by police" usually doesn't list the "how". The rioters are just going to hate the flics more.

Police have already been wounded by gunfire - from rioters. No one dead from that yet, but it won't be long.

I don't fight fire with fire. I fight fire with water. ;)


If you were a policeman with no effective weapon against firearm wielding opponents, would you go out on the street and volunteer to get shot?

A gun does not protect you against someone else.... unless you kill them. When the first fatality occurs from the police firing on protestors.. all hell will be unleashed. They'll 'suspect' the person had a weapon... and that will be justification.
http://www.mapageweb.umontreal.ca/brodeuj/documents/images/bloody%20sunday%202.jpg

http://www.infosatellite.com/images/articlepics/bloodysunday.gif

Yeah, it's like New Orleans never happened :rolleyes:

Nearly half of the crime in the US is or was committed in such housing projects - which is why since the mid-1990s the US has been actively trying to eliminate such concentrations (Chicago has made extreme strides in this regard).

The US recognizes that warehousing the poor in government-sponsored ghettos is a bad idea - and has been working for the past 10 years to eliminate them, and deconcentrate the poor.

It looks like France had no idea that concentrating poor immigrants in government-sponsored ghettos was a bad idea.

Won't really matter much. "Death by police" usually doesn't list the "how". The rioters are just going to hate the flics more.

No. The rioters beat the guy to death, not the police.

They'd blame us for the common cold if they could. :mad:

Look. THis is a thread about rioting in France. And possibly in Belgium. Maybe someone has thrown a glass in Berlin.

No one, but no one has mentioned the US. Apart from Americans.

Perhaps that is the issue?:rolleyes:

A gun does not protect you against someone else.... unless you kill them. When the first fatality occurs from the police firing on protestors.. all hell will be unleashed. They'll 'suspect' the person had a weapon... and that will be justification.

It works the other way around here.

As soon as the looters in New Orleans realized that the police and National Guard were going to contest the looting with lethal force, it stopped.

I believe there's a deterrent effect in there.

No. The rioters beat the guy to death, not the police.Interesting. (You might want to remove the first picture. You could get into trouble for it...)

Look. THis is a thread about rioting in France. And possibly in Belgium. Maybe someone has thrown a glass in Berlin.

No one, but no one has mentioned the US. Apart from Americans.

Perhaps that is the issue?:rolleyes:

Someone blew his nose over here...

It works the other way around here.

As soon as the looters in New Orleans realized that the police and National Guard were going to contest the looting with lethal force, it stopped.

I believe there's a deterrent effect in there.The looting stopped after lethal force was in play? When did that happen?

It works the other way around here.

As soon as the looters in New Orleans realized that the police and National Guard were going to contest the looting with lethal force, it stopped.

I believe there's a deterrent effect in there.

Thats the point- you can't transpose what works over there and expect it to work over here.

Its not the same kind of deterrent. It just simmers below the surface waiting for other ways to manifest itself. It makes people harder here when the police/army march through the streets saying 'Anyone comes out... we kill you on sight'.

It works the other way around here.

As soon as the looters in New Orleans realized that the police and National Guard were going to contest the looting with lethal force, it stopped.

I believe there's a deterrent effect in there.

I think the situation in France and New Orleans are quite different. Looters in New Orleans were more fueled by the oppertunity of looting, while the French rioters seem to act out of frustration.

Interesting. (You might want to remove the first picture. You could get into trouble for it...)

Why? Its a picture from Bloody Sunday. I'm using it to demonstrate the point that authorities with guns kill innocent people- and its not pretty.

Thats the point- you can't transpose what works over there and expect it to work over here.

Its not the same kind of deterrent. It just simmers below the surface waiting for other ways to manifest itself. It makes people harder here when the police/army march through the streets saying 'Anyone comes out... we kill you on sight'.

I was about to comment that there is a different social attitude over there.

If you shoot looters over here, most of the population grins and says, "Good riddance".

Over there, people who weren't even involved in the initial dispute suddenly take sides against the government.

Why? Its a picture from Bloody Sunday. I'm using it to demonstrate the point that authorities with guns kill innocent people- and its not pretty.Leonstein used similar pictures, I hear, to demonstrate a point of his. He got deleted.

Nearly half of the crime in the US is or was committed in such housing projects - which is why since the mid-1990s the US has been actively trying to eliminate such concentrations (Chicago has made extreme strides in this regard).

The US recognizes that warehousing the poor in government-sponsored ghettos is a bad idea - and has been working for the past 10 years to eliminate them, and deconcentrate the poor.

It looks like France had no idea that concentrating poor immigrants in government-sponsored ghettos was a bad idea.

I find it hard to believe that the French should be unaware of this fact. I just wonder why they didn't implement some sort policy according to this.

Leonstein used similar pictures, I hear, to demonstrate a point of his. He got deleted.

Oh, i didn't know that. Well, if I hear of any complaints or if the mods want me to take them down then I'll gladly oblige.
:(

Oh, i didn't know that. Well, if I hear of any complaints or if the mods want me to take them down then I'll gladly oblige.
:(From what I hear, Leonstein didn't get any warning.

From what I hear, Leonstein didn't get any warning.
Oooookay then..... a quick edit is in order :eek:

I find it hard to believe that the French should be unaware of this fact. I just wonder why they didn't implement some sort policy according to this.

There are some forms of social welfare that work - and some that have bad consequences. Just because the government is spending money on social welfare doesn't mean it is solving any problems - in fact, it may be creating them.

If we want to make it even harder to assimilate an immigrant, all we have to do is isolate them in housing projects and massive apartment blocks - where they will never mingle with the native French.

400 arrested overnight in France, two policemen seriously injured by buckshot, churches and schools becoming more frequent targets, two people killed. Only 2 people killed?

Those Frenchies do not know how to riot.

Yeah, it's like New Orleans never happened :rolleyes:
WTF does that mean???

There are some forms of social welfare that work - and some that have bad consequences. Just because the government is spending money on social welfare doesn't mean it is solving any problems - in fact, it may be creating them.

If we want to make it even harder to assimilate an immigrant, all we have to do is isolate them in housing projects and massive apartment blocks - where they will never mingle with the native French.And to top it off, refer to them as "scum" and swear to clean them out. ;)

What do you mean it won't be long before the police are overwhelmed? They already are! That's why they haven't been able to stop these riots.

And why the troops should be called in.

It makes people harder here when the police/army march through the streets saying 'Anyone comes out... we kill you on sight'.
Is this to imply that's what happened in the US???

Is this to imply that's what happened in the US???
...no... its saying what would happen on the Continent.

You know Eut, the world doesn't revolve around the US. :p

And why the troops should be called in.Yeah, good idea. An example of brutal force not working:
I hear they still call it the War of Northern Aggression in parts of the South.

Subduing them won't solve anything. It just shoves the problem into another corner where it will fester, rot, and become another problem.

There are some forms of social welfare that work - and some that have bad consequences. Just because the government is spending money on social welfare doesn't mean it is solving any problems - in fact, it may be creating them.

If we want to make it even harder to assimilate an immigrant, all we have to do is isolate them in housing projects and massive apartment blocks - where they will never mingle with the native French.

Well, it's the same situation here in Germany with Ghettos with Turkish immigrants. I'm unsure if there is an active policy that promotes the creation of ghettos, but nothing is done to prevent them either. And instead of preventing ghettos, the resulting alienation and anti-turkish sentiments are used for propaganda against a EU membership of Turkey. :rolleyes:

And to top it off, refer to them as "scum" and swear to clean them out. ;)
I'm surprised that Chirac hasn't asked him to resign. That would probably defuse a lot of tension.

Yeah, good idea. An example of brutal force not working:
I hear they still call it the War of Northern Aggression in parts of the South.

Yea they do even though the Northern Aggression didn't happen since it was started by Southern Aggression. However that is a debate for a different thread.

Since the police are incapable of stopping this thing, isn't the next option Martial Law?

Subduing them won't solve anything. It just shoves the problem into another corner where it will fester, rot, and become another problem.

First, quell the riots then talk.

Well, it's the same situation here in Germany with Ghettos with Turkish immigrants. I'm unsure if there is an active policy that promotes the creation of ghettos, but nothing is done to prevent them either. And instead of preventing ghettos, the resulting alienation and anti-turkish sentiments are used for propaganda against a EU membership of Turkey. :rolleyes:

In the US, new policy has zoning laws that force builders of any new neighborhood to set aside houses (of comparable value) in the same neighborhood to be used for public housing. They also have vouchers for the poor to use to rent property that is not in the "projects".

It's not perfect, and they aren't finished, but the idea is to deconcentrate the poor - mingle them with everyone else.

Sure, some people didn't like the idea, but it's better than having government-created combat zones.

I'm surprised that Chirac hasn't asked him to resign. That would probably defuse a lot of tension.Complete agreement. Firing Sarkozy might just be that sign of good will that would get the rioters to stop, or at least reduce it to a really crazy minority.

First, quell the riots then talk.
*sigh*
You haven't learned anything from the other thread have you...? :(

WTF does that mean???

I provided your quote to put it in context :)

What do you think it means? You're whining that the US will get the blame when no-one is blaming the US, then your crowing over the wonderful social policies of the US when the whole world has seen the effects of the US social policies all over the news for weeks.

In the US, new policy has zoning laws that force builders of any new neighborhood to set aside houses (of comparable value) in the same neighborhood to be used for public housing. They also have vouchers for the poor to use to rent property that is not in the "projects".

It's not perfect, and they aren't finished, but the idea is to deconcentrate the poor - mingle them with everyone else.

Sure, some people didn't like the idea, but it's better than having government-created combat zones.

Now that you mention it, I think I've heard of similar projects here in Germany.

*sigh*
You haven't learned anything from the other thread have you...? :(

I've learned plenty. However even I wouldn't talk until things quiet down. I don't care how it is done but it needs to be done and fast.

Now that you mention it, I think I've heard of similar projects here in Germany.

It has a very positive effect.

Yea they do even though the Northern Aggression didn't happen since it was started by Southern Aggression. However that is a debate for a different thread.

Since the police are incapable of stopping this thing, isn't the next option Martial Law?

First, quell the riots then talk.Talk about what? To be honest, "quelling" riots isn't what makes my home city a bit safer every 1st of May. Deescalation has.
To be honest, I have no idea if it's even legal in France to use the military to do something like that, given its history. It wouldn't be legal in Germany.

I've learned plenty. However even I wouldn't talk until things quiet down. I don't care how it is done but it needs to be done and fast.There are no quick solutions to a situation like this. Prevention is the only real strategy.

Talk about what? To be honest, "quelling" riots isn't what makes my home city a bit safer every 1st of May. Deescalation has.
To be honest, I have no idea if it's even legal in France to use the military to do something like that, given its history. It wouldn't be legal in Germany.

It would have been better to prevent the conditions that stoked the fire for the rioting in the first place.

It could not have been a secret that the immigrants were living under these conditions.

Somehow, I don't think any of this is the fault of the US, which Europeans seem to blame for everything they don't like. Might be nice to clean up your own house before raising hell about ours. :rolleyes:

Erm, before you express that kind of view it might be good to actually ask some europeans, you know, seeing as we dont all think with a collective mind, I personally think that without the US europe would ten times worse than it is now, but hey, whats the view of one european against that of the huge stereotyping industry you guys seem to have!

There are no quick solutions to a situation like this. Prevention is the only real strategy.

It obviously failed.

I'm surprised that Chirac hasn't asked him to resign. That would probably defuse a lot of tension.

He should resign. A French friend was complaining about him before these riots started, after he met up with Bill Gates. My friend called Sarkozy a proto-hitler, but unfortunately the article he posted was in French and I couldn't understand it.

I can't understand why Chirac can't just fire him. There is no love lost between the two of them. Does Sarkozy have popular support in France?

Hmm. It would seem that the US is ahead of the French in its ability to accept immigrants (even if we do have politicians who oppose it).

Even our illegal immigrants appear to be able to succeed here. And they don't stop speaking their native language.
Not just that, but the United States of America is the foremost nation in the world in terms of actually allowing immigrants to seek and hold elective government office.
Schwarzenegar is just but the most famous example. My former congresswoman was also an immigrant from another nation.
As far as I know, the european nations don't allow immigrants to hold public office.

It obviously failed.Something that isn't attempted in the first place never fails...:D

Schwarzenegar is just but the most famous example.

You know... that's nothing to be proud of.

He should resign. A French friend was complaining about him before these riots started, after he met up with Bill Gates. My friend called Sarkozy a proto-hitler, but unfortunately the article he posted was in French and I couldn't understand it.

I can't understand why Chirac can't just fire him. There is no love lost between the two of them. Does Sarkozy have popular support in France?Chirac is the head of state, not government. He has a lot of power, but de Villepin is still Sarkozy's boss. Who knows what other power games are going on in the French government. Sarkozy doesn't need support from the people, just from the right people.

As far as I know, the european nations don't allow immigrants to hold public office.

"The European Nations"? :rolleyes:

Well it's not a problem in Germany.

Not just that, but the United States of America is the foremost nation in the world in terms of actually allowing immigrants to seek and hold elective government office.
Schwarzenegar is just but the most famous example. My former congresswoman was also an immigrant from another nation.
As far as I know, the european nations don't allow immigrants to hold public office.
Citizens are allowed to hold public office everywhere, Whittier--. Everywhere.
Schwarzenegger can hold public office because he's a citizen.

Read a book, read a newspaper. Something, anything, but read!

Not just that, but the United States of America is the foremost nation in the world in terms of actually allowing immigrants to seek and hold elective government office.
Schwarzenegar is just but the most famous example. My former congresswoman was also an immigrant from another nation.
As far as I know, the european nations don't allow immigrants to hold public office.You know, this one other guy was also an Austrian immigrant. Came to Germany. Got citizenship. Few weeks later, he's Chancellor. Started WW2 and all that mess. So much for Austrian immigrants in public offices...:p

You know, this one other guy was also an Austrian immigrant. Came to Germany. Got citizenship. Few weeks later, he's Chancellor. Started WW2 and all that mess. So much for Austrian immigrants in public offices...:p

Watch out for those paper hangers...

I provided your quote to put it in context :)

I thought it was a no-brainer, but I overestimated my audience. What do you think it means? You're whining that the US will get the blame when no-one is blaming the US, then your crowing over the wonderful social policies of the US when the whole world has seen the effects of the US social policies all over the news for weeks.
I'm "crowing over the wonderful social politices of the US???" Surely you jest! Where, pray tell, did I perform this verbal prestidigitation???

You know, this one other guy was also an Austrian immigrant. Came to Germany. Got citizenship. Few weeks later, he's Chancellor. Started WW2 and all that mess. So much for Austrian immigrants in public offices...:p

ZING!

You know, this one other guy was also an Austrian immigrant. Came to Germany. Got citizenship. Few weeks later, he's Chancellor. Started WW2 and all that mess. So much for Austrian immigrants in public offices...:p

The Austrians are very clever people: they managed to make everyone believe that Hitler was German and Beethoven Austrian. ;)

The Austrians are very clever people: they managed to make everyone believe that Hitler was German and Beethoven Austrian. ;)They only did it because the French stole the Croissant from them...;)

http://www.belgraviadispatch.com/archives/004844.html

"Now, I am not one who believes that some pan-Eurabian intifada is in the offing, or that the implications of these riots rival 9/11, or that Shamil Basayev's guerilla tactics are being adopted off la Place de la Republique--as breathless, under-informed 'commentary' has it in some quarters of the blogosphere. But we certainly have a pivot point here, one where the ruling elite's inefficacy and ineptness is being laid crudely bare for all the world to see. They have been tone-deaf and caught off guard by the depth of the alienation in their midst, and it has now caught them very much unawares and seemingly clueless on how next to respond."


Now, he's not talking about Bush and Katrina - he's talking about France now.

snip.

He might have a point. This might be a wakeup call to states and govts alike that they need to care for the underprivileged to make sure resentment isn't manifested in thsi way.
You tackle the root causes of these problems and the difficulties melt away.

No one is blaming the US, but the US has had similar experiences over the past 200 years in having immigrants arrive.

Small hint: concentrating welfare recipients into massive housing projects is a very, very, very bad idea. You need to do what the US has been doing since the mid-1990s, and dismantle the large projects and distribute the people throughout neighborhoods of all types. Force builders to set aside a few houses in each neighborhood, give the poor housing vouchers that allow them to choose a better neighborhood.

You will find that they have far less crime, and assimilate far faster that way.
Actually we don't force builders to do any such thing. We give them financial incentives like taxbreaks and exemptions from certain local ordinances and laws in exchange for them setting aside housing for minorities. We don't fine or jail them just because they don't set aside some of their houses for a certain qouta of minority.
The reason is that would lead to an equal resentment from the other side.

He might have a point. This might be a wakeup call to states and govts alike that they need to care for the underprivileged to make sure resentment isn't manifested in thsi way.
You tackle the root causes of these problems and the difficulties melt away.It's been a wake up call for German politics. The designated Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble is saying we need more emphasis on integration and preventing immigrants to "batten down the hatches" on the rest of society.

Whittier--, POST 158. Check it out.

It's been a wake up call for German politics. The designated Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble is saying we need more emphasis on integration and preventing immigrants to "batten down the hatches" on the rest of society.

Now just imagine if it wasn't Schäuble, but Beckstein! :eek:

Actually we don't force builders to do any such thing. We give them financial incentives like taxbreaks and exemptions from certain local ordinances and laws in exchange for them setting aside housing for minorities. We don't fine or jail them just because they don't set aside some of their houses for a certain qouta of minority.
The reason is that would lead to an equal resentment from the other side.

It is certainly true here in Virginia. If you are building a development that has more than 15 houses in it, and you fail to set aside the houses of equal value, the county can come take your property away.

It's not a minority set-aside. It's a set-aside for the poor.

Now just imagine if it wasn't Schäuble, but Beckstein! :eek:My mom said Beckstein's a real nice guy in person...:p

Anyone here remember the veil law? Maybe that had something to do with it.

I think I left-wing gvt. wouldn't have had these problems. It would not have enforced stupid "French above all" policies.

It is certainly true here in Virginia. If you are building a development that has more than 15 houses in it, and you fail to set aside the houses of equal value, the county can come take your property away.

It's not a minority set-aside. It's a set-aside for the poor.

What do you mean by "set aside houses"?

Anyone here remember the veil law? Maybe that had something to do with it.

I think I left-wing gvt. wouldn't have had these problems. It would not have enforced stupid "French above all" policies.The veil law? With all the Imams saying "follow the law to show what good citizens we are"? Not really. A lot of these kids live in areas where the only way to make a living is by criminal action. I heartily doubt they give a damn about the veil. Their main motivation is the hated flics...

What do you mean by "set aside houses"?

In the 1960s, the big idea was to put welfare recipients in massive housing projects - like Cabrini Green. Ostensibly block upon block of massive high rise apartments - that became combat zones.

In the mid-1990s, the US (at a Federal, State, and county level) started dismantling the huge blocks.

In their place, they gave people vouchers to go find places to rent. And, in order to prevent them from all being concentrated in low-rent areas, real estate developers were FORCED to set aside a certain percentage of every community they developed - well mixed - so that these people could find places to live, blended in with everyone else.

If you don't do the set-aside (around here it's 5 percent of the houses in any development larger than 15 houses), the government takes your property and fixes the problem. You lose millions.

The veil law? With all the Imams saying "follow the law to show what good citizens we are"? Not really. A lot of these kids live in areas where the only way to make a living is by criminal action. I heartily doubt they give a damn about the veil. Their main motivation is the hated flics...
Sure. You're right - and I've backed this view in my posts.
This was just to say that, if this is to be massacred as Us vs. Them (where we "have" to talk about Muslims and Christians), and if this contributed the least bit to general attitudes, it was French nationalism that takes the ideological blame.
The Imams complied as good citizens, but everyone would've been better without this extra push.

mid a week of rioting by young French Muslims, riot police were deployed Thursday to Seine-Saint-Denis, an area of northwest Paris, in efforts to deter further destruction. The violence, which was ignited Oct. 27 in Clichy-sous-Bois by the accidental electrocution deaths of two youths, thought to be running from police when they died, escalated seriously the night of Nov. 2, when youths fired on police and set buildings on fire in the predominantly Muslim suburb of Aulnay-sous-Bois.

Significantly, the riots are occurring in areas populated mainly by poor Muslims. The causes for the underlying anger are complex. Though many of the residents are citizens who were born and raised in France, they also are of North African descent -- and thus often feel alienated within French society. France's overall unemployment rate is running at 9.2 percent, but the rates among people of "foreign" origin is higher, at 14 percent, according to the French National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies. The trend holds among university graduates. Overall, unemployment for those with degrees is 5 percent, but five times higher -- 26 percent -- among "North African" university graduates.

Thus, the deaths of two youths amid a police chase touched off much larger demonstrations that are feeding off social undercurrents. In total, hundreds of cars and several buildings have been burned since the unrest began.

So far, there has been little visible reaction by French government officials. At the highest level, there have been meetings (some of them over breakfast) and statements calling for calm. Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin postponed a visit to Canada in order to deal with the issue, but government officials are proceeding slowly and carefully, fearing action that could further enflame the rioters or cause them to spread. The deployment of the riot police, however, is a sign of growing concern among the leadership.

De Villepin has been in talks with officials from Parisian suburbs affected by the rioting, as well as with Interior Minister Nicholas Sarkozy -- who, incidentally, has ignited controversy of his own by referring to the rioters as "scum" and alluding to the need to clean out the poor suburbs from which the rioters hail. All told, there are several flashpoints in the situation: The racial and ethnic component and the political rivalries between Sarkozy, who likely will be de Villepin's rival for the presidency in 2007, and current President Jacques Chirac. Sarkozy could be trying to exploit the situation to his own ends -- making inflammatory statements about the rioters that might tap into sentiments held by the French majority. Unlike most other French politicians, he has made tough-talking, law-and-order rhetoric a major feature of his political agenda.

In contrast to Sarkozy, de Villepin has avoided tough rhetoric. He pledged to restore order and denied that rioters have been able to assert control over entire neighborhoods. Meanwhile, because domestic issues generally fall under the jurisdiction of the prime minister and interior minister, President Chirac has had the luxury of watching fairly passively from the sidelines, all the while urging calm. Overall, the French government's plan seems to be to hold fast and contain the unrest -- preventing it from spreading beyond Greater Paris -- while waiting for the rioters to run out of steam. At the same time, it appears that French security forces are watching for any leaders to emerge among the rioters -- and particularly for any known jihadists -- in order to disable them at the right time.

There is a potential threat here not only to the safety of Parisians, but to French society at large. The unrest among the French Muslims could be an opportunity for foreign militant groups to exploit the tension and possibly stage attacks inside France. A number of groups are known to have active networks in France, including Algerians, Chechens and some connected to the jihadist insurgency in Iraq.

The French government is mindful not to crack down too hard on the rioters. Too severe a response in the Parisian suburbs could incite Muslim communities in other cities, such as Marseilles, Lyons or Montpellier. If it becomes apparent that foreign elements are influencing the course of the unrest, Paris will have no choice but to act decisively -- but it cannot do so before then.

In the US, new policy has zoning laws that force builders of any new neighborhood to set aside houses (of comparable value) in the same neighborhood to be used for public housing. They also have vouchers for the poor to use to rent property that is not in the "projects".

It's not perfect, and they aren't finished, but the idea is to deconcentrate the poor - mingle them with everyone else.

Sure, some people didn't like the idea, but it's better than having government-created combat zones.
As stated earlier, we don't have such zoning laws.
It could be that you are confused. We do have laws that require local governments to set aside zones for low income housing, but there are no laws in the US that force builders to set aside housing for the poor or minorities. State laws and federal economic assistance regulations require cities and other local governments to set aside a certain amount of the cities zoned lands for low income housing. But that's if the city wants to get money from the state or federal governments, which all cities do.
Being a major in Public Administration, and having worked with city officials, this is something I know about.

As stated earlier, we don't have such zoning laws.
It could be that you are confused. We do have laws that require local governments to set aside zones for low income housing, but there are no laws in the US that force builders to set aside housing for the poor or minorities. State laws and federal economic assistance regulations require cities and other local governments to set aside a certain amount of the cities zoned lands for low income housing. But that's if the city wants to get money from the state or federal governments, which all cities do.
Being a major in Public Administration, and having worked with city officials, this is something I know about.

It is certainly the law around here. Low income housing is housing for the poor - the only difference is the level of subsidy.

It was the hallmark of the Clinton Administration - where HUD started a massive program to destroy and tear down every major public housing project in America, and replace them with the set-aside and voucher programs.

And it's working now. I may not agree with most of what was done under Clinton, but that was a great idea that worked.

Perhaps it is a state/local thing?

Perhaps it is a state/local thing?
It was a policy forced on the states (who force it on the counties) by the Federal government.

One of the big achievements of the Clinton admin.

It is certainly true here in Virginia. If you are building a development that has more than 15 houses in it, and you fail to set aside the houses of equal value, the county can come take your property away.

It's not a minority set-aside. It's a set-aside for the poor.
It's illegal and unconstitutional. If that is really happening in your state, your state is the only one that has that policy.
But then again, isn't your state run by Democrats? But that's beside the point. Even in demo. controlled California, if the state tried to do that, it would be struck down as violating the US and state constitutions. As it would be in the other 48 states.
It could be that that's the law in your state only because no one has challenged it in the courts.
As we all know, tyranny always prevails when no one stands up to challenge it. I think if just one person challenged the french governments policies on welfare and immigration, it might have prevented what is currently happening or at least the french riots would a lot smaller than they are now.

It's illegal and unconstitutional. If that is really happening in your state, your state is the only one that has that policy.
But then again, isn't your state run by Democrats? But that's beside the point. Even in demo. controlled California, if the state tried to do that, it would be struck down as violating the US and state constitutions. As it would be in the other 48 states.
It could be that that's the law in your state only because no one has challenged it in the courts.
As we all know, tyranny always prevails when no one stands up to challenge it. I think if just one person challenged the french governments policies on welfare and immigration, it might have prevented what is currently happening or at least the french riots would a lot smaller than they are now.

In Oct 1996, Cisneros made this Federal policy.

A 716 million dollar tear-down of the major housing blocks in the US.
Replaced by Section 8 vouchers
Replaced by conditions placed on the States to implement this
The States either had to comply, or lose all HUD funds.
Counties were forced to change zoning laws and building permit laws.

No one has successfully challenged it in the courts.

In Oct 1996, Cisneros made this Federal policy.

A 716 million dollar tear-down of the major housing blocks in the US.
Replaced by Section 8 vouchers
Replaced by conditions placed on the States to implement this
The States either had to comply, or lose all HUD funds.
Counties were forced to change zoning laws and building permit laws.

No one has successfully challenged it in the courts.


That's not the same as forcing the builders themselves to set the stuff aside, as you were claiming. That law requires the states and local governments to set portions of each city for low income housing. It says nothing about forcing builders to set aside anything of the sort.
Now of course, if a builder wanted to build in such a set aside, he would have to follow the city's ordinance or go build elsewhere.
It's a certain percentage of the total city community that has to be set aside for low income housing, not a percentage of one's own privately owned land. If the builder doesn't make room for low income people, it is the city that gets in trouble.
And to avoid losing funds, the cities negotiate with the contractors by giving them special treatment in return for voluntarily creating set asides. Though, some cities, when they do this, still create segregated areas of the city for all low income housing. But such policies have been found to be in compliance with the federal regulations. And there have been no complaints about them.

That's not the same as forcing the builders themselves to set the stuff aside, as you were claiming. That law requires the states and local governments to set portions of each city for low income housing. It says nothing about forcing builders to set aside anything of the sort.
Now of course, if a builder wanted to build in such a set aside, he would have to follow the city's ordinance or go build elsewhere.
It's a certain percentage of the total city community that has to be set aside for low income housing, not a percentage of one's own privately owned land. If the builder doesn't make room for low income people, it is the city that gets in trouble.
And to avoid losing funds, the cities negotiate with the contractors by giving them special treatment in return for voluntarily creating set asides. Though, some cities, when they do this, still create segregated areas of the city for all low income housing. But such policies have been found to be in compliance with the federal regulations. And there have been no complaints about them.


The way that most states and counties have implemented it, if you're a developer, and your development has more than 15 units on it, you have to do the set-aside or face forfeiture.

The city writes local ordnances that make sure the city doesn't get in trouble.

The way that most states and counties have implemented it, if you're a developer, and your development has more than 15 units on it, you have to do the set-aside or face forfeiture.

The city writes local ordnances that make sure the city doesn't get in trouble.
Actually that is not the law in most states. It might be in Virginia but not the other states.

Actually that is not the law in most states. It might be in Virginia but not the other states.

Well, the Federal housing blocks have all been torn down. Since 1996. So you had better have something in place. Or your state isn't getting the HUD funds.

I'm sure your state is, so they have some way for forcing the counties to comply.

Counties issue building permits - and adding a condition for a building permit requires no legislation at all. It's merely a change to the regulations.

That's what was done up and down the East Coast (to my knowledge) and in most places in the US. Maybe not in your state. But it's the law of the land, and there's no place else for the poor to be housed.