More French riots

[fabian_lidman]

It’s also relevant to see who is unemployed and to ask why this demographic seems to be hit hardest this way. The underlying issue is that France has done a piss-poor job of integrating its immigrant population, and unless you’re able to say that it’s not just “unemployed youth” who are rioting, then the issue is hidden.

Fair enough -- i'm inclined to agree with Grammatron that "unemployed immigrant youth" would be an even more accurate headline. Still hasn't got anything to do with Islam though, even though many of the immigrants in france happen to be muslims.

You’re ascribing opinions to a news agency, and that is a problem. Reuters, and other news wire services, should be more neutral.

I expect a certain degree of dispassionate analysis from a news agency. I don't expect them to send out telegrams that read "Males demonstrate in France" because that would imply a strange and far-fetched analysis, even if it's strictly true.

 

[Orwell]

Orwell has spoken, it’s settled.



That’s a great question. One that will never be raised unless we first notice that the rioters are primarily Muslim.



If true, that’s an important observation. One that would never be made if we first didn’t observe that the rioters are primarily Muslim.



What I’m seeing here is many factors that would lead one to conclude that even though the rioters are primarily Muslim that there are also many reasons not to conclude they are rioting simply because they are Muslim. Therefore I wonder why the issue shouldn’t be raised.

Those "great questions" and "important observations" are trivialities from the point of view of most French, with the possible exception of those who vote for the Front National.

The thing is, the people at Reuters and other news agencies are a lot more aware of what's going on in France than you are, and they write their articles accordingly.

 

[BPSCG]

The thing is, the people at Reuters and other news agencies are a lot more aware of what's going on in France than you are, and they write their articles accordingly.

So now you've gone from ipse dixit to "appeal to authority" as the basis for your argument?

I suippose you would argue that we shouldn't have questioned those documents about Bush's Texas Air National Guard service. The people at CBS and other news agencies are a lot more aware of what's going on in politics than we are, and they write their articles accordingly.

 

[Orwell]

What's the problem, BP, what we are saying does jive with your prejudices? I and others gave a bunch of reasons why the religion angle is not relevant. Go back and read the damn thread again. And the other French speaker (Flo) in this thread agrees with me. We read French newspapers. You probably don't.

Anyway, there is quite of lot of stuff on the French riots in the web, written by French political commentators, in english. Just avoid the stuff that is clearly "Front National" and you'll get quite a lot of info. You will also notice that the overwhelming majority of the articles do not consider the religious question to be important.

Here's for instance, and interview with Emannuel Todd: http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20051107/024507.html

 

[Huntster]

......Anyway, there is quite of lot of stuff on the French riots in the web, written by French political commentators, in english. Just avoid the stuff that is clearly "Front National" and you'll get quite a lot of info. You will also notice that the overwhelming majority of the articles do not consider the religious question to be important.....

"Ignore that man behind the curtain...........I am the Great and Powerful Oz!"

 

[Morrigan]

Those "great questions" and "important observations" are trivialities from the point of view of most French, with the possible exception of those who vote for the Front National.

So now you've gone from ipse dixit to "appeal to authority" as the basis for your argument?

Don't forget the poisoning of the well. A near Godwin here!

What's the problem, BP, what we are saying does jive with your prejudices? I and others gave a bunch of reasons why the religion angle is not relevant. Go back and read the damn thread again. And the other French speaker (Flo) in this thread agrees with me. We read French newspapers. You probably don't.

I read French newspapers, and I tend to side with BP here. I guess that makes me a prejudiced Le Pen fellating right-wing extremist! *lol*

Anyway, there is quite of lot of stuff on the French riots in the web, written by French political commentators, in english. Just avoid the stuff that is clearly "Front National" and you'll get quite a lot of info.

Why should one avoid the Front National, anyway? Evidently they are biased, but every commentator is anyway. What makes them an inferior source to other commentators, other than the fact that they are a) extreme right-wing and b) disagree with you?

"Ignore that man behind the curtain...........I am the Great and Powerful Oz!"

Hehehe.

You will also notice that the overwhelming majority of the articles do not consider the religious question to be important.

And it certainly cannot be because it would be the PC thing to do... no sir.

 

[Orwell]

Ah donc vous lisez les journaux français, vous? Dans ce cas las, j'imagine que vous n'aurez pas de difficulté à lire ceci!

On doit éviter les choses écrites par les sympathisants du Front National parce ce sont des racistes. Et, en ce qui me concerne, les gens qui des idées racistes n'ont pas de crédibilité: ils ont tendance à croire n'importe quoi, tant que ça renforce leurs préjugés. Et en ce qui vous concerne, je ne vous connais pas, vous. Peut-être que vous êtes un sympathisant de Le Pen, peut-être pas. Mais si vous accordez de l'importance à ce que des racistes déclarés disent, alors, moi, je pense que je vais pas vous prendre au sérieux.

Est-ce que c'est clair?

 

[Orwell]

"Ignore that man behind the curtain...........I am the Great and Powerful Oz!"

Do you know anything about the "Front National"?

Here's the wiki on it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Front_(France)

If you wanna take seriously the opinions of sympathisers of a party whose leader once referred to the existence of death camp gas chambers as a "detail of history", well, be my guest...

 

[Huntster]

...Est-ce que c'est clair?

Aucun il n'est pas clair. Cela ressemble à de la propagande.

 

[Orwell]

Aucun il n'est pas clair. Cela ressemble à de la propagande.

T'as rien compris, eh?

'Stie qu'ils sont caves!

 

[Huntster]

Je ne vous connais pas ou Front National.

 

[Huntster]

The Front National posts a comprehensive political platform on its website. The party advocates economic protectionism and opposes immigration, particularly Muslim immigration from North Africa/West Africa and the Middle East. It opposed the Treaty for a European Constitution and opposes Turkey's admission to the European Union. It supports preferential treatment of French citizens for public sector jobs and social services. In a standardized pamphlet delivered to all French electors in the 1995 presidential election, Jean-Marie Le Pen proposed the "sending back" of "three million non-Europeans" out of France, by "humane and dignified means". [6] However, in the campaign for the 2002 French presidential election, the stress was more on issues of law and order – one of the recurrent themes of the National Front is tougher law enforcement and higher sentences for crimes, and the reinstatement of the death penalty.

The Front National regularly campaigns against the "establishment", which encompasses the other political parties as well as most journalists. Le Pen lumped all major parties (French Communist Party (PCF), French Socialist Party (PS), Union for French Democracy (UDF), Rally for the Republic (RPR)) into the "Gang of Four" (an allusion to China's "Cultural Revolution"). According to National Front, the French right-wing parties are not true right-wing parties, and are almost indistinguishable from the "Socialo-Communist" left; the corrupt "establishment" is betraying France, and it opposes by all means the coming of the Front.

Other main positions include:

greater independence from the European Union and other international organizations; in 2002, withdrawal from the Euro was suggested, but the suggestion was then largely withdrawn;
the establishment of tariffs or other protectionist measures against cheap imports threatening the local agriculture or industry;
anticommunism
a return to more traditional values
in the family area: making access to abortion more difficult or even illegal; paying parents (mainly mothers) who raise children; refusing gay culture;
in the cultural area: refusing "aberrant" modern art and promoting local traditional culture.
historical revisionism and Holocaust denial (Le Pen has been condemned for statements according to which the "gas chambers were only a point of detail"

I don't think this platform is all that bad.

In the 2002 presidential election many commentators were shocked when Jean-Marie Le Pen gained the second highest number of votes, and thus entered the second voting round.

Looks like a near majority of the French people might agree.

 

[Mycroft]

Those "great questions" and "important observations" are trivialities from the point of view of most French, with the possible exception of those who vote for the Front National.

People are rioting in the streets, yet you call these issues "trivialities"? How odd.

The thing is, the people at Reuters and other news agencies are a lot more aware of what's going on in France than you are, and they write their articles accordingly.

If they are more aware, then it's their job to explain. Personally, I've often noticed the press only has a shallow understanding of many issues.

 

[BPSCG]

Ok, here's a bit of pointing out the bleeding obvious.

(...snip...)

The common thread connecting these rioters isn't religion.

It isn't? Are you claiming the rioters aren't overwhelmingly Muslim?

If so, how do you know this? I'm sure it's "bleeding obvious" to you, but I'm a little slow today, so I'm sure you won't mind telling me how you know the rioters aren't overwhelmingly Muslim. Please show me facts and figures. A cite would be nice, too.

 

[Flo]

It isn't? Are you claiming the rioters aren't overwhelmingly Muslim?

If so, how do you know this? I'm sure it's "bleeding obvious" to you, but I'm a little slow today, so I'm sure you won't mind telling me how you know the rioters aren't overwhelmingly Muslim. Please show me facts and figures. A cite would be nice, too.

They are described as overwhelmingly muslim, but last that I checked, no press agencies had published the results from a reliable study on the subject.

BTW, they are also overwhelmingly wearing clothes inspired from LA "gangsta culture" and listening to French rap music, which can be verified by watching the news on French TV. Curiously, no press agency seems to stress the possible correlation with these facts and violence

 

[Orwell]

People are rioting in the streets, yet you call these issues "trivialities"? How odd.

One of the meanings of the word "trivial" is something that is obvious and dull; "trivial conversation"; "commonplace prose".

Like in "Mycroft usually posts trivialities".

 

[Orwell]

I don't think this platform is all that bad.



Looks like a near majority of the French people might agree.

You don't know much about French politics, do you?

Some Jean-Marie Le Pen (Front National supreme leader) quotes:

I have said and I repeat, at the risk of being sacrilegious, that the gas chambers are a detail of the history of the Second World War.

I'm not saying that the gas chambers didn't exist. I couldn't see them myself.

If you take a book of a thousand pages on the Second World War, in which 50 million people died, the concentration camps occupy two pages and the gas chambers ten or 15 lines, and that's what one calls a detail.

In French politics, there isn't a single anti-Semitic party, from the political-ideological standpoint.

There was no reason to label us as anti-Semitic.

There wasn't anti-Semitism in France.

They are strengthened demographically both by natural reproduction and by immigration, which reinforces their stubborn ethnic segregation, their domineering nature. This is the world of Islam in all its aberrations.

When Joan D' Arc was asked by her judges why as a Christian she did not love the British, she answered that she did love them, but she loved British in their country. In the same way, we do not hate the Turks, we love them, but in their country.

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/jeanmarie_le_pen.html

 

[Mycroft]

One of the meanings of the word "trivial" is something that is obvious and dull; "trivial conversation"; "commonplace prose".

No.

Checking a thesaurus I see that synonyms for "trivial" are atomic, commonplace, diminutive, evanescent, everyday, flimsy, frivolous, immaterial, inappreciable, incidental, inconsequential, inconsiderable, insignificant, irrelevant, little, meager, mean, meaningless, microscopic, minor, minute, momentary, negligible, nonessential, nugatory, paltry, petty, piddling*, puny, rinky-dink, scanty, skin-deep*, slight, small, small-town, superficial, trifling, trite, two-bit, unimportant, valueless, vanishing, wee, and worthless.

Synonyms for "obvious" are accessible, barefaced, bright, clear, conclusive, conspicuous, discernible, distinct, distinguishable, evident, explicit, exposed, glaring, in evidence, indisputable, lucid, manifest, noticeable, observable, open, outstanding, overt, palpable, patent, perceivable, perceptible, plain, precise, prominent, pronounced, public, recognizable, self-evident, self-explanatory, straightforward, transparent, unconcealed, undeniable, understandable, undisguised, unmistakable, unsubtle, and visible.

The two words are distinct, their meanings do not overlap.

However, not to get too far from the topic, if we take it you meant to say "obvious" yet again, then we should point out that claiming everything is "obvious" as you do is not offering evidence to support your argument.

Like in "Mycroft usually posts trivialities".

Your ad hominems don't make your argument any stronger.

 

[Skeptic]

It so happens that France has a disproportionally large number of North-Africans who are treated like second-class citizens.

Yes, but many groups around the world are treated as second class citizens (all religious minorities in most, if not all, Muslims countries, for startes...) and do not riot.

 

[Darat]

Yes, but many groups around the world are treated as second class citizens (all religious minorities in most, if not all, Muslims countries, for startes...) and do not riot.

And many groups that are treated around the world as second class citizens do riot - go figure - you'd almost think it was something to do with human nature wouldn't you?

I mean you would if you didn't happen to know the real reason...