Radical Muslims in France's housing estates are waging an undeclared "intifada" against the police, with violent clashes injuring an average of 14 officers each day.
As the interior ministry said that nearly 2,500 officers had been wounded this year, a police union declared that its members were "in a state of civil war" with Muslims in the most depressed "banlieue" estates which are heavily populated by unemployed youths of north African origin.
It said the situation was so grave that it had asked the government to provide police with armoured cars to protect officers in the estates, which are becoming no-go zones.
I have heard from many Frenchies that this is mostly a socio-economic intifada and is rooted in organized crime, much like the gangs that wreak havoc in most large American urban areas.
Senior officers insisted that the problem was essentially criminal in nature, with crime bosses on the estates fighting back against tough tactics.
But there are some that are beginning to have their doubts.
However, not all officers on the ground accept that essentially secular interpretation. Michel Thoomis, the secretary general of the hardline Action Police trade union, has written to Mr Sarkozy warning of an "intifada" on the estates and demanding that officers be given armoured cars in the most dangerous areas.
He said yesterday: "We are in a state of civil war, orchestrated by radical Islamists. This is not a question of urban violence any more, it is an intifada, with stones and Molotov cocktails. You no longer see two or three youths confronting police, you see whole tower blocks emptying into the streets to set their 'comrades' free when they are arrested."
With the Redeker affair fresh in everyone's mind right now, as well as other incidents in Europe, this argument could become a more credible one and certainly will be an issue as the French Presidential election takes place next year. How Sarkozy handles this will certainly have a big impact on how that election turns out.
Is organized crime limited to just the Muslim sections? If not, then why do not other areas break out in this kind of violence against authority?
This needs to be examined more closely and from an objective mindset. And if it turns out to be more to it than just the secular explanation, the future of France will include more violence, resulting in more instability. And one thing I have learned from the French, they don't like uncertainty. In fact, I know of no country in the western world that does.
The thing to note from this article is, the French police unions are getting restless. One thing the French cannot afford right now, is to have the Police union get unhappy to the point that there is a strike. If that were the case, bedlam would surely occur.
3 comments:
Hi LASunsett !
Yes, this article is important.
Apparently the stats are not something that were pulled off the wall or "outa thin air", or invented by a police union, but were issued by the French Ministry of the Interior.
One comment which Amerloque feels is necessary: one must be very careful about how the French use words adopted from foreign languages, whether from English or another one. Two examples are "diaspora" and "intifada".
The first used to mean "the dispersal of Jews throughout the world", but now frequently can be seen associated with other ethnic, um, er, dispersals and exiles, for want of better words: the "Armenian dispora", for example, or the "Irish disapora", or the "Indian diaspora" or the"Chinese disapora".
The second, "intifada", used to be used only in connection with the Palestinian uprising(s) in the Gaza strip and on the West Bank. It is now being used in some cases to mean, quite simply, "a bunch of youths out there in the streets heaving rocks and suchlike at duly constituted police forces on patrol". Any association of the word "Muslim" would be, as the French say, not necessarily reflective of reality: the kids throwing rocks are not necessarily making a political statement associated with "Islam". They could be, yes, but not necessarily.
Best,
L'Amerloque
When are the Europeans going to wake up to what is really happening in the world? Why are Europeans constantly making up excuses for Muslim extremists? No, the US hasn't exactly done everything right in this very real War on Terrorism so many seem to be in denial of, either; but what we are all doing very wrong that is giving the Muslim extremists/ terrorists an upper hand is dividing. United we have a chance of beating these Muslim extremists/terrorists; divided, we have no chance at all. I continually hear Europeans saying they know best about how to handle the extremists/terrorists; yet, we constantly hear how Muslims are taking over cities in their countries. I read in a Swedish newspaper, for instance, that Muslim extremists have taken over Sweden's 3rd largest city and that the Swedes were moving out of their country "in droves" because of their Muslim extremist population. The article said that there are certain parts in the city the police will not even go in, and it sounds like this is exactly what is happening in France now.
Going into Iraq without all of our allies was a huge mistake, but one that is no worse than trying to appease the Muslim extremists/ terrorists as the Europeans have been trying to do. You cannot appease these people. France's Muslim population is causing all of these problems because they know they can. They know the French are not going to be tough on them, and being tough on these people seem to be all they understand. If there is one thing the Muslim extremists/terrorists in the world have found out that is hurting all of us, is that the west is not going to be tough on them. Even the nutty dictators in the world are taking advantage of our weaknesses and because we are so divided. They seem to be taking over. They know that Europeans and the USA's far left extremists are tying our hands, making us incapable of doing anything about the nutty dictators and Muslim extremists/terrorists in the world. We will all pay dearly for this someday.
All one has to do is look around the world and they will see Muslims fighting in almost every country where they are 10, 15, 20, etc. percent of the population, depending on how appeasing the country is. The more tolerable the people are in a country, the harder they are being hit by their Muslim populations.
Everyone needs to clear all of the propaganda from their heads and the guilt these people have worked so hard to put on all of us and think, think, think. Since when throughout history hasn't there been someone wanting to take power over the world? Since when was it not the most dangerous thing in the world for someone with this ambition, especially if you throw religion on top of it? Has there ever been a time that someone with this ambition could be appeased into dropping this ambition, especially if they think their religion calls for them to fight and kill until they rule the world? I'm not sure why so many non-Muslims cannot see what is happening, but it is time to wake up. The longer we live in denial, the more people will be killed in the end. These Muslim extremists/ terrorists have the mindset like the people in ancient times. They have no respect whatsoever for people who try to appease them. They only see us as being weak when we try to be "nice", and will only respect us when we use an iron fist. Is Europe, once again, going to let the Muslims take some of Europe, or perhaps, all of Europe this time? They tried to take over the world once and was almost successful. Has their doctrine changed any since then? The dictators in the Muslim world are much harder on the extremists than we are, because they know exactly how dangerous they are and what they have in their minds. In fact, I now see this as the reason the Muslim world ends up with so many brutal dictators. It is the only way to have peace in their world. I know that's blunt and not politically correct, but this politically correct BS is one of the things that is causing us to lose this war and some of our countries and it is one of the reasons so many are being killed.
People are making the US and others who are trying to fight this war go by the Geneva Convention rules. We cannot go by these rules in this type of war. Those rules were written for totally different types of wars. You cannot win a war by being "nice"!
Time to wake up, unite, and use all of the power we all have together to save ourselves and our freedoms. Otherwise, we'll all be wearing veils. And it is my understanding that many women/ girls in certain parts of France have to wear them already just to be able to go outside their houses without being raped. If/when we so stupidly let the Muslims take over the world, do you think these people are going to be "nice" to us? Do you think we will even have the opportunity to run our own countries? At first, I didn't think this could ever be possible. And it wouldn't be possible if the far left extremists weren't fighting for the Muslim extremists/terrorists to take over our countries...inadvertently, of course...and they didn't have all of the Communists, Nazis and everyone else that hates our freedoms on their side. Of course, these people will be the very first ones the radical Muslims will kill if they did ever manage to win this war; but right now, they hate us enough to help them. Hatred blinds people to logical thinking skills.
There's so much to write about all of this, I could go on and on all day about it. Everyone needs to read, read, read, and educate themselves to really know this enemy we face before it's too late.
Anonymous,
//People are making the US and others who are trying to fight this war go by the Geneva Convention rules. We cannot go by these rules in this type of war. Those rules were written for totally different types of wars. You cannot win a war by being "nice"!//
I do see one aspect of the left's argument on the Geneva Convention. We have set ourselves a pretty high bar as far as standards are concerned. We have usually been known to take the high road, despite what the others have done, in the past.
But I do see your point very well, a point that basically says what I have always said:
You either go to war to win, or you do not go at all.
You are 100% right, we cannot allow the PC police to fight the war, we cannot allow the enemy to dictate the terms of the war. We know this isn't prudent, because they expect us to abide by certain principles, that they do not abide by, themselves.
I would sum this particular point up by saying one other thing:
This is not a law enforcement issue. This is war. They are two different things, altogether.
Thanks for your comments.
Post a Comment