More French riots

[Rob Lister]

We've established that this IS a good question, I believe.



I'm not sure you've shown that they did.

It could be that they didn't hush it up but rather reported only the observably obvious.

To determine religion, a poll must be taken.

But...how is Arab/African nationality observably obvious.

Seems to me, a poll must be taken either way.

Was a poll taken?

Was it just an assumption of the reporter?

If so, why not the far more rational and simpler assumption of muslim?

It seems clear to me that the common thread is muslim, not nationality.

 

[Darat]

That may well be, but it still doesn't get at my two primary questions:

1. Why is the rioting predominantly by Muslims?

Traditionally immigrants from African countries such as Algeria have suffered much discrimination in French society, found it very hard to get jobs etc. so at the moment it is likely that as a group those people are suffering from the worse poverty, feel undervalued and feel disenfranchised from society in general. The fact that they are Muslim is incidental to this.

As an example of this - in the UK twenty odd years ago we had what were known as the "Brixton Riots", these were at the time described by a lot of people as "Blacks rioting", yet they were not rioting because they were Black, but because of what being Black and British resulted in the UK (sadly some would say it remains the same).

1. Why did Reuters try to hush that fact up?

How can you deal with a problem if you deliberately exclude important information from your investigations? The rioters may very well not be rioting out of a sense of religious duty, but their religion is a unifying thread. Why is that fact not worthy of reporting?[/list]

I think you are jumping the gun, you first need to find evidence that it was indeed predominately Muslim French youth that were rioting and then that Reuters knew this originally to be a fact but then decided to distort the truth in an attempt to "hush up" whatever it is they had decided to hush-up.

Reuters often updates reports as time goes on as they get more information on a breaking story. I remember reading one report in March that stated that students and trade unions protesting the proposed new employment laws had started rioting. Yet later on those reports began to be altered as it emerged that the students had dispersed after their protest in a peaceful and orderly manner and the actual rioters were in fact other youths making use of the students protest as a cover, and today when you read the article it is quite different to what was originally reported (see: http://212.58.240.36/1/hi/world/europe/4855084.stm).

 

[Elind]

Well describing them of African and Arab descent seems a very accurate and succinct way to provide background of where the families of these youth immigrated from. Using the term Muslim would not provide any equivalent background and therefore would not have helped the reader understand the story.

Since there are many cultures, languages and nations in "of African and Arab descent" (thousands perhaps) it does not appear to be a very succinct background description in the slightest, unless perhaps one wants to venture a genetic dimension.

Needless to say, a religious common factor does appear to be applicable to many (unless they work for Reuters, or perhaps in Canada). If one can't call it Muslim, what can one call it? How about Islamic Fanaticism, as opposed to true Muslim, just to be fair?

 

[Elind]

Traditionally immigrants from African countries such as Algeria have suffered much discrimination in French society, found it very hard to get jobs etc. so at the moment it is likely that as a group those people are suffering from the worse poverty, feel undervalued and feel disenfranchised from society in general. The fact that they are Muslim is incidental to this.

You say it is because the "French" discriminate. Many others say it is because the "immigrants" don't want to be French.

Disenfranchisement is not a one way street nor is it simply the fault of the one who doesn't want to hire someone who has nothing of value to offer except for an entitlement chip on the shoulder.

You say that the common factor of Muslim has nothing to do with anything. I don't think most people think so.

 

[Darat]

Since there are many cultures, languages and nations in "of African and Arab descent" (thousands perhaps) it does not appear to be a very succinct background description in the slightest, unless perhaps one wants to venture a genetic dimension.

As I posted I disagree, that may be because I have a more "Europaean" viewpoint and as I said it could also be because because I lived in the quite recently indpendent Algeria so have always had an interest in that particular part of French history.

Needless to say, a religious common factor does appear to be applicable to many (unless they work for Reuters, or perhaps in Canada). If one can't call it Muslim, what can one call it? How about Islamic Fanaticism, as opposed to true Muslim, just to be fair?

Again it will be up to you to provide evidence that they rioted because of their religious beliefs if you wish to make that claim.

I've already pointed out using similar incidents of riots in the UK just because people may be of at least nominally one religion (in the case of the Brixton riots Christians) does not mean that religion is the cause of the riots or even indeed plays any significance in the actual reasons for the riots.

As another example I don't remember ever reading a description of the rioters in the 1992 Los Angeles riots as "Christian" yet they nominally were but I do remember the people being described as "Black and Hispanic youths".

 

[Darat]

You say it is because the "French" discriminate. Many others say it is because the "immigrants" don't want to be French.

...snip...

There have been no reports of non-French citizens involved in these riots so I am assuming it is only French people that have been rioting.

You say that the common factor of Muslim has nothing to do with anything. I don't think most people think so.

I have not said that.

 

[Mycroft]

There have been no reports of non-French citizens involved in these riots so I am assuming it is only French people that have been rioting.

I'm pretty sure he meant a French cultural identity rather than a legalistic French citizenship.

 

[Alphaba]

This paper by French publisher François Gèze (in English) brings some interesting clues to this debate:

1. "it is illegal in France to gather statistics based upon ethnic or religious lines" [official statistics that is to say]
   
   
2. "Less than 10 per cent of the descendants of those born in Muslim countries say that they seriously practise the Islamic religion."

So #1 means that no official (reliable?) statistical figures exist (and can exist) allowing to claim that the rioters were Muslims, and #2 suggests that very few youngsters in these 'hot' suburbs may be considered practising Muslims (and incidentally shows that ascribing a religion to people isn't a straightforward task in France [and certainly in other European nations as well).

Also, the minutes of French Senate information mission on suburbs (in French), mostly devoted to an analysis of November 2005 riots, are mute about the hypothetical religion of the young rioters.

 

[Elind]

As I posted I disagree, that may be because I have a more "Europaean" viewpoint and as I said it could also be because because I lived in the quite recently indpendent Algeria so have always had an interest in that particular part of French history.

I don't know what a European viewpoint is, generically speaking; but, while I don't claim exceptional expertise I do also have a certain viewpoint based on having lived in the Arabian Gulf countries for some 10 years and that includes working with people from every country in the region. However I have the feeling that the people you associated with in Algeria were plobably not the same social group that we see rioting in France.

Again it will be up to you to provide evidence that they rioted because of their religious beliefs if you wish to make that claim.

Tricky phrase. I claim that their religious background cripples them in terms of assimilating into "European" society, and you doubtless understand what that means. I don't claim that they justified the riots with religious arguments, like a suicide bomber might, but your stated experience should let you also appreciate how much of the social fabric in Muslim societies is derived from very specific and detailed rules about everyday life; which I maintain are often in conflict with European cultures.

I've already pointed out using similar incidents of riots in the UK just because people may be of at least nominally one religion (in the case of the Brixton riots Christians) does not mean that religion is the cause of the riots or even indeed plays any significance in the actual reasons for the riots.

I never claimed that only Muslims riot; and there can be different reasons for different situations, but we were talking about these specific ones.

As another example I don't remember ever reading a description of the rioters in the 1992 Los Angeles riots as "Christian" yet they nominally were but I do remember the people being described as "Black and Hispanic youths".

As I said above; different situations different reasons. In this case it was because the drug trade was getting too competitive and social welfare checks weren't making up for the lost profits, so rioting seemed like a good idea to them at the time, to get attention and more handouts.

 

[Elind]

There have been no reports of non-French citizens involved in these riots so I am assuming it is only French people that have been rioting.

There were not a great number arrested at all, strangely. However there were plenty of reports of non-French citizens arrested and deported and they made a fair fuss of the determination to deport them toute suite.

As to the rest; yes they were French citizen on paper. Mostly first generation from immigrant parents, or recent immigrants, having been granted French status thanks to the generosity of France, not to mention their dole. (I can't believe I'm defending the French here)

I have not said that.

Perhaps I phrased it poorly. A repeat anyway. Never mind.

 

[Darat]

There were not a great number arrested at all, strangely. However there were plenty of reports of non-French citizens arrested and deported and they made a fair fuss of the determination to deport them toute suite.

Can you provide me any links to these details? I've not been able to find any. I have to say it seems incredible that any one that had been arrested is already slated for deportation. The French police and courts must have processed them remarkably quickly!

As to the rest; yes they were French citizen on paper. Mostly first generation from immigrant parents, or recent immigrants, having been granted French status thanks to the generosity of France, not to mention their dole. (I can't believe I'm defending the French here)

What more is there to French citizenship then "on paper"? As far as I was aware "the generosity of France" bestows French citizenship on all people born legally in France?

Perhaps I phrased it poorly. A repeat anyway. Never mind.

Phrased it badly? Er no it was simply nothing that I have said or suggested.

 

[Elind]

Can you provide me any links to these details? I've not been able to find any. I have to say it seems incredible that any one that had been arrested is already slated for deportation. The French police and courts must have processed them remarkably quickly!

Perhaps I am wrong on the processing speed.

A quick search of news comes up with "France has taken a tough stance on the rioters, with the interior minister saying that local authorities were instructed to deport foreigners convicted of involvement."

I haven't checked the French news for similar, but I'm sure I recall there were some illegals arrested, for what that proves. Certainly it is not part of my argument.

What more is there to French citizenship then "on paper"? As far as I was aware "the generosity of France" bestows French citizenship on all people born legally in France?

Yes it does, to their credit, as opposed for example to what the Muslim nations do for their bretheren from neighboring countries. (Or for that matter what the Mexicans do to Central Americans who dare try to stay in Mexico; but that's another story I'm sure you will agree). What you seem to deliberately avoid is that this is expected to be a reciprocal gift.

Phrased it badly? Er no it was simply nothing that I have said or suggested.

Since you insist; you did seem to suggest that Islam has nothing to do with behaviour, even antisocial behaviour, in a social context (yes, I'm rephrasing).

 

[daredelvis]

I think you are jumping the gun, you first need to find evidence that it was indeed predominately Muslim French youth that were rioting and then that Reuters knew this originally to be a fact but then decided to distort the truth in an attempt to "hush up" whatever it is they had decided to hush-up.

I think the real point here is that this seems to be the latest talking point on the right wing blogs, another way to paint the liberal media as an enemy of the truth. Sort of the neo-con “why do they hate us?”

Daredelvis

 

[BPSCG]

I think the real point here is that this seems to be the latest talking point on the right wing blogs, another way to paint the liberal media as an enemy of the truth. Sort of the neo-con “why do they hate us?”

So Reuters tried to hide first the fact that the rioters were predominantly Muslim, and subsequently the fact that they were predominantly African and Arab immigrants, as a way of presenting the truth to the world?

Here's the editorial progress in this story (future revisions in red):

• Rioters, predominantly African and Arab youths of Muslim extraction, burned a number of automobiles in the suburbs of Paris last night...
• Rioters, predominantly African and Arab youths burned a number of automobiles in the suburbs of Paris last night...
• Rioting youths burned a number of automobiles in the suburbs of Paris last night...
• Rioters burned a number of automobiles in the suburbs of Paris last night...
• People burned a number of automobiles in the suburbs of Paris last night...
• People did some bad things in the suburbs of Paris last night...
  [*]People did things in the suburbs of Paris last night...

As you can see, we are getting closer and closer to the truth.

 

[Darat]

Perhaps I am wrong on the processing speed.

A quick search of news comes up with "France has taken a tough stance on the rioters, with the interior minister saying that local authorities were instructed to deport foreigners convicted of involvement."

I haven't checked the French news for similar, but I'm sure I recall there were some illegals arrested, for what that proves. Certainly it is not part of my argument.

I am still unable to find any such comments etc. regarding the rioting incident from the OP.

Could you be mistaken?

Yes it does, to their credit, as opposed for example to what the Muslim nations do for their bretheren from neighboring countries. (Or for that matter what the Mexicans do to Central Americans who dare try to stay in Mexico; but that's another story I'm sure you will agree). What you seem to deliberately avoid is that this is expected to be a reciprocal gift.

"reciprocal gift"

Since you insist; you did seem to suggest that Islam has nothing to do with behaviour, even antisocial behaviour, in a social context (yes, I'm rephrasing).

I did not "insist" on anything I merely again corrected you as I will have to do for the third time. Yet again I will say it - I have not said anything like you are stating I have.

 

[Darat]

So Reuters tried to hide first the fact that the rioters were predominantly Muslim, and subsequently the fact that they were predominantly African and Arab immigrants, as a way of presenting the truth to the world?

Here's the editorial progress in this story (future revisions in red):

• Rioters, predominantly African and Arab youths of Muslim extraction, burned a number of automobiles in the suburbs of Paris last night...

Hang on a mo' - I thought originally you were complaining that they hadn't described them as Muslim?

Just gone back and yes that is what your original compliant was about:

I noticed this in the story, with references to the riots of a few months ago (amphasis mine):Reuters could have saved two words by replacing the highlighted ones with "Muslim." But I suppose if they had, it might have touched off more riots among adherents of the Religion of Setting Cars on Fire Peace.

 

[BPSCG]

Hang on a mo' - I thought originally you were complaining that they hadn't described them as Muslim?

Just gone back and yes that is what your original compliant was about:

You're right, of course. That means the Muslim reference either got cut out before the original story was printed, or the authors self-censored.

Neither scenario lends any credibility to the idea that Reuters is doing its job to provide important information in a complex world.

 

[Belz...]

You're right, of course. That means the Muslim reference either got cut out before the original story was printed, or the authors self-censored.

Neither scenario lends any credibility to the idea that Reuters is doing its job to provide important information in a complex world.

You forgot the possibility that it was actually never there, then.

 

[BPSCG]

You forgot the possibility that it was actually never there, then.

That's what I meant by "self-censored."

"Hmm, we'd better take out that reference to Muslims; the editors will never let it get through."

 

[daredelvis]

That's what I meant by "self-censored."

"Hmm, we'd better take out that reference to Muslims; the editors will never let it get through."

Are you saying that this is a demonstration of your mind reading ability?
Daredelvis