We have long realized that there is no such thing as impartial reporting, certainly in the New York Times, but their version of the events in France at the moment, placing much of the blame on interior minister Nicolas Sarkozy, borders on the ludicrous. Whether the current unrest develops into a true European intifada or simply fizzles out, it has been decades in the making. Sarkozy is just one of many politicians who happens to be there now. Of course, the Times, for its fuddy-duddy ideological reasons, must blame today’s cop for dynamics way beyond the compass of a single human being.
And they ask us to pay extra for their opinion writers? We already get them free on the front page.
And they ask us to pay extra for their opinion writers? We already get them free on the front page.–RS
I don’t. I refuse to read the Times. It has proved itself to be merely a propaganda outlet. If you can’t determine by reference only to the story highlighted whether what you have been told is true or untrue, then everything becomes untrue.
I just assume the Times is lying. Saves a vast amount of time in the long run.
Dougf: I don’t assume they’re lying (purposely), I’ve come to the conclusion that they just can’t break out of their ideology and simply wouldn’t recognize the truth if it bit them.
It’s sad in a way, I subscribed to the print edition some 25 years ago, for a few years (we’re talkin’ when they had a backgammon column!), but now I rarely even visit the “free side” of the Web site and certainly would not consider paying them to read the rants of Krugman and Dowd et. al.
They’re fast on the road to oblivion — it didn’t have to be so.
The Times is presiding over its own funeral. Blaming Sarkozy is like liberals who bought Arafat’s propaganda & blamed Sharon for the other intifada. Because the Palestinians were so reasonable until he went & visited the Temple Mount. In fact, the intifada was entirely orchestrated by Arafat, who used Sharon’s visit as an excuse to let the blood flow.
One precept of decayed liberalism: Third World people can never be held to the moral & ethical standards of the West. As Joe at No Pasaran writes:
“Poverty (the state
Roger,
I don’t think the Times scribe is out of bounds here. It’s pretty obvious that Sarkozy has made a major mistake in engaging in such crude and blunt name-calling. Anyone could have predicted that the nonwhite population at large would have taken umbrage at hearing the “thug” epithet repeated again and again.
If a policeman’s peace is never disturbed, then a politician’s dignity during a time of rioting likewise needs to be preserved. I’d be willing to bet that most Frenchmen will now find it difficult to picture Sarko in the Elysee Palace after this show of amateurism and loss of nerve. It’s as if, during the post-Rodney King riots, Police Chief Darryl whats-his-name had been in charge and firing off his mouth at every microphone. Not helpful.
Perhaps, in the interest of balance, Craig Smith could have included some damaging dirt on Villepin, as the Times of London did in its account of the spat between him and Sarko, or perhaps changed his characterization of the Socialists’ reaction from “capitalized” to “exploited.” But I found the article overall to be (to coin a phrase) reasonably fair and balanced.
If a majority of Frenchmen find Sarkozy’s childish language to be presidential and appropriate, then I’ll retract the above post. I seriously doubt it, though. I’m more inclined to bet that Sarkozy’s presidential ambitions are finished.
We’ll be waiting for that retraction. I prefer the always-dry Theodore Dalrymple:
“The imam of the area said that arrests in Clichy-sous-Bois were often strong-armed, and that therefore youths felt humiliated by them. I accept that the French police are not universally appreciated for their tact or delicacy; nevertheless, this seems to be taking the doctrine of every youth’s inalienable right to self-esteem a little far. It is surely stretching credibility to suggest that strong-armed tactics are never required, and that the youths of Clichy-sous-Bois always come quietly, with a frank acknowledgement of the fairness of their arrest.”
We’ll be waiting for that retraction
While you wait you’d do well to grab your coat, byootiful. Winter’s coming.
Dalrymple’s a fine doctor and a good writer who knows little about economics and less about France. Granted that he knows a fair amount English yobs. But has he done any first-hand reporting from France’s projects?
Anyone could have predicted that the nonwhite population at large would have taken umbrage at hearing the “thug” epithet repeated again and again.
In other words, if you throw raw meat in front of an animal, it can’t help itself. Proving once again that no one is more condescending towards minorities than liberals. For myself, I expect them to act like civilized human beings.
As an oppressed homo, I’ve been called every name in the book. Stupid me, I just thought, Sticks & stones, when all along the appropriate response is to run out and burn a car!!
Thibaud:
That’s right Thibaud, rioters aren’t scum, they are poor downtrodden gentle people who can’t take it any more. You are engaging in liberal self-parody. I just can take you seriously.
that’s can’t take you seriously
Please go back to the LA riots, or any other riot in recent US history, and show us
a) a local mayor or governor, or president, who repeatedly lost his cool as Sarko did and lashed out at “thugs”
and
b) how such amateurish outbursts as in a) helped, rather than hindered, a swift resolution of the crisis.
Jerry – panicking and slinging thoughtless, wild language isn’t Sarkozy’s job. That’s your responsibility, mon vieux.
Which is more effective during a crisis of public order:
a) quiet, moderate language matched with a highly effective, highly visible show of efficient and competent police force, or
b) tough talk with lots of crude language matched by a completely ineffective, weak and incompetent police effort?
Thibaud:
I have responsibility to the nation in my job to ensure that fools like you can utter nonsense in complete safety. I suppose you haven’t answered my questions from the other thread. Please tell why it’s only the Muslim poor who a rioting and not other immigrants groups who are equally poor?
Actually, jerry, we’re both wrong. It’s only boys who are rioting, not girls. So by your logic we can conclude that the cause of the rioting is testosterone poisoning augmented by a very nasty contagion of jock itch.
Now that I’ve answered your question– again– kindly take a stab at telling us whether you prefer a) or b) in each of my two q’s above.
merci,
t
Thibaud:
Dalrymple now lives in France. Ironically, he moved there because he thought the generic European social decay was less advanced in France than in England.
I saw this movie, in black and white no less, ten years ago.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0113247/
Five or so years earlier, a major French director, who was to die five or so years later, made a film set in France in May of a really tumultuous year more than two decades earlier.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0097884/
A year or two before that really tumultuous year, an even more famous, and still living, French director made a film (restored and re-released to much acclaim this past spring) inwhich the male lead says:
Kill a man and you’re a murderer. Kill thousands and you’re a conqueror. Kill everyone and you’re a god.
The response:
I don’t think God exists.
His reply:
We shall see.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0060675/
…and so it goes.
Thibaud has been infected with h.i.v., the human idiocy virus. which causes critical frontal lobe lesions impairing judgement and reason, and causing selective memory loss. Incurable.
Thibaud:
Your response demostrates that you are not bright enough to understand what you just said.
Your very use of boys/girls is effectively an admission that it’s about Islam.
Answer the questions, Jerry– all I ask is an indication of whether you prefer a) or b). Anyone else is welcome to take a stab at them as well.
?Intentional? self parody? Jerry – panicking and slinging thoughtless, wild language isn’t Sarkozy’s job. That’s your responsibility, mon vieux.
Posted by: thibaud at November 4, 2005 09:55 PM
I know how desperate y’all are to make these events into some kind of Islamist “intifada”, and rally around Sarkozy as an imagined Gallic version of Sharon, but this line of analysis is nonsense.
It’s not supported by the facts, which are that these kids are doing what they always do to express their anger at being treated like ni*gers by white Frenchmen: they’re burning cars. They are not attacking jews or synagogues. They are not waving Palestinian flags or chanting Allah akbar! or scrawling graffitti in support of Osama. And Sarkozy is falling on his face. Tough guy rhetoric aside, he’s showing himself to be weak and stupid at the same time.
You folks are doing your level best to make ROger’s Place a tinfoil joke on the order of Daily Kos. Do yourselves a favor and learn something about contemporary France and its african immigrants before you embarrass yourselves further.
I would agree with thibaud’s assessment if not for the fact that Denmark is experiencing similiar problems with those ‘youths’ as well as Sweden dealing with attacks upon jews and their synagogues.
thibaud: It’s pretty obvious that Sarkozy has made a major mistake in engaging in such crude and blunt name-calling.
Yeah! It is not only right but a necessity that we all riot because some politician were insensitive. Lets all burn our neighborhoods in response, that will certainly show them our sensitivities.
I simply dont know enough about the conditions in the projects to comment; although I do tend to defer to those who have first hand knowledge–This has been an interesting discussion (with a few sidetracks into invective)–clearly there is at least one short term problem: a huge unemployment rate; there are also significant socio-cultural issues european ethnocentrism (and specifically the nationalist versions) which I cant help believe fuels the frustration; then there are the political poseurs (and here I agree with Thibaud, that the police dude is NOT handling this situation well)–and finally there are the longer term prospects.
I think Knuck dealt with those in the last thread–assuming the rioters are not islamic jihadists, does this rioting provide a fertile ground for jihadist recruiting? Even the London bombers were home grown (although of Pakistani, not north african origin)–Is there the potential for the creation of a jihadist substate resulting from the riots?
I simply dont know, and would welcome the groups views on these questions–an islamic “substate” in Europe portends nothing good in a war on terror.
Thibaud:
The French treat African Christians as n*****s but they aren’t rioting. There are a large number of poor immigrants from Eastern Europe and live in housing estates who form gangs and engage in various forms or crimminal activity but they aren’t rioting. So what is different about the rioters even if they are all boys? You are engaged the liberal tradition of the bigotry of low expectations. You take it for granted that poor African Christians who get treated like n*****s won’t riot. You take as given that poor Eastern Euorpean punks don’t riot but if poor downtrodden Muslims riot then “well what can you expect.”
You share with Kos kid an the DU the view that Islamic hatred it really just about the Jews. No Palistinaian Flags, no attacks on Jews then it can’t be about Islam. But if you weren’t suffering the bigotry of low expectations you would know that Muslims attack Christians, Hindus, Buddists, Ba’hists and even wise redical secularists like yourself. It’s not about Jews as much as you might hope that to be true, its about Islam.
I suggest you bone up on the formerly no go zones in France. You will find that women, even non-muslim women, are forced to wear the Abaya under threat rape; honor killings abound; and it is taken for granted the Osama is a hero. Muslims don’t need to shout Allah A’bar as they riot or carry around pictures of OBL or wave Palistinian flags for it to be about Islam. It is the culture of Islam that enables the kind behavior that we are seeing in France today.
Like many Liberals with bigotry of low expections you see this as function of bread and not spirit. We have thrown more money at the urban poor then we have on defense over the last 40 years yet pathaology of the inner city grows worse. So you liberal bigots project your own bigotry on the rest of society. Liberal New Yorkers who shrugged their shoulders at the Crown Heights Pogrom were agast at Rudi Gulliani’s get tough policy. They said the same things about him that you are saying about Sarkozy. They said there would be riots and unrest because it was about jobs and not expectations of civilized behavior. Well Rudi proved them wrong didn’t he? New York became a civilized place again where you can walk the streets in saftey. The same bigotted iberals like yourself would have New York go back to the Dinkins way of doing business and return New York to a state of nature. You beknighted Liberals were wrong about Gulliani and you wrong about Sarkozy. You cannot solve the problems of the poor unless you restore order.
Over and out.
Here’s what a friend of mine in Paris emailed me yesterday: “Sarkozy recognises that there are problems that need to be addressed and has put forward some ideas as what to do – this is a refreshing change. Just like corruption, publically admitting them, grinning apologetically and then ultimately dismissing it doesn’t cut any ice. On the side of the residents of the banieues, they have to ensure that the hotheads don’t run the show. What I have been seeing on the evening news is a lot of frustrated people trying to make that stand, but with no support from anyone but Sarkozy who has been strung out to dry and painted as the opposition.
As you may guess, I’m pretty desperate for Sarkozy to come through this somehow unblemished so as to make a fair challenge for the presidency. Although I have my doubts on some of his platform his willingness to challenge established practices could be a real tonic in many areas.”
I’m sure the NYT is horrified by anybody that doesn’t coddle rioters and refer to them as “victims”. They bend over backwards to ignore the fact that the rioters are Muslim but quickly cast blame on Sarkozy for his comments days after the riots began. And Thibaud should educate himself on the attacks on Jews and synagogues in France over the last two years before casting off on those that are aware of them.
“Captain Hate”,
This time around the riots are not about jews, or Israel, or Bush or Iraq or any other Islamist bogeyman. That’s precisely my point. The events and behavior we’re witnessing are not being driven by Islamism. Got it?
Y’all are doing to this story exactly what the New York-based MSM did to the Katrina story: importing a meme of your choosing that does not fit the facts, and then seeking evidence to justify your distorted story angle. To continue the analogy, yes, FEMA’s incompetence was relevant to the Katrina story, but it was really a small sideshow next to the real story, which was the spectacular incompetence, corruption and mendacity of the local officials in Louisiana. In this story, of course Islam is relevant to the background issue, ie the failure to assimilate France’s africans, but is not the story. That story is France’s miserable record in creating and perpetuating mass youth unemployment and its deplorable treatment of the nonwhite Frenchmen trapped in its hideous, dilapidated, third- world-quality housing projects.
Thibaud, I halfway agreed with you before, and I still do. But there ARE signs that Islam is a factor–what else do we make of “Allah Akbar” yells during the rioting? And foreign-born imams have a habit (to put it mildly) of emphasizing the difference between the believers and the non-believers and the unjustness of kuffir society. I just cannot believe that that does not play into this.
But certainly the huge unemployment rates must also be a factor, not to mention France’s statism in general.
I am not sure we know enough. (But I do not trust the NYT to investigate!!!)
***
Jerry, TomTom, it’s foolish of you to pile on Thibaud in this way. He’s no Kossite, not by a long shot. He’s posted here a long time and does not deserve name-calling.
–Please go back to the LA riots, or any other riot in recent US history, and show us
a) a local mayor or governor, or president, who repeatedly lost his cool as Sarko did and lashed out at “thugs”
and
b) how such amateurish outbursts as in a) helped, rather than hindered, a swift resolution of the crisis. –
Why limit yourself?
NOLA.
From the Beeb, a commentor named Alam said this:
“The French must turn over the disputed areas to the people who live there. Only Muslim law and leaders can control this violence. Police action is only making it worse. If they would announce that Imams were in control and send the murderous police home, a new era of peace would begin.”
The comments are quite interesting: http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=1&threadID=144&start=15&tstart=0&edition=2&ttl=20051105151521&#paginator
Thibaud is simply importing a meme that has no relevance to the situation: the Noble Savage, which is endemic to liberal ideology. The rioters can’t help committing crimes because Sarkozy said something that hurt their feelings, since after all, they’re just beasts.
Ditto the Palestinians, who were so psychologically wounded by Sharon’s Temple Mount stunt they couldn’t help strapping explosives to their kids to see how much money they could get for blowing them up. (Although come to think of it, even dogs protect their young…..)
“The French treat African Christians as n*****s but they aren’t rioting.”
Evidence?
Thibaud,
“This time around the riots are not about jews, or Israel, or Bush or Iraq or any other Islamist bogeyman. That’s precisely my point. The events and behavior we’re witnessing are not being driven by Islamism. Got it?”
Yeah, I got it; did you read anything I posted before you responded? For somebody whose posts I always read and consider well thought out, you’re being extremely quick to jump to predetermined conclusions. I don’t deny that France’s socioeconomic are a major component in this situation. But rather than jump on Sarkozy for his statements (again, well after the rioting had begun) why don’t you hold Chirac’s feet to the fire for doing absolutely nothing to address this since he’s been in power.
This is a situation that has many causes and for you to accuse posters that recognize an Islamic component of turning this place into Kos is name-calling that usually means lack of tolerance for contrary viewpoints.
That’s “France’s socioeconomic conditions”
I’d say PIMF except I’d already done it; maybe effective previewing is my friend.
The biggest favor the French could offer the banleaue is to enforce law and order. Out of control teenagers make the sinks unliveable: the parents fear for their lives, their cars are burnt, no doubt they are robbed. Anyone with aspirations of education and a normal life will be at a severe disadvantage.
The second biggest favor the French could offer would be to tear down the buildings. Immigrants always congregate, it is perfectly natural and expected. What is not acceptable is for the government to choose to isolate them on the outskirts of the cities in ugly and poorly designed government housing that embodies a stupid “industrial living” philosophy. There is no scope in that.
The prescient Dalrymple speaks to both of these issues here.
Thibaud
Richard, IIRC police chief Darryl what’s-his-name did precisely nothing during the first 48 hours of the riots. As I wrote, above,
“Which is more effective during a crisis of public order:
“a) quiet, moderate language matched with a highly effective, highly visible show of efficient and competent police force, or
“b) tough talk with lots of crude language matched by a completely ineffective, weak and incompetent police effort?
… Darryl fulfilled the requirements for the second half of b), which is why the riots escalated so rapidly and got out of control.
Sarkozy is emulating Darryl’s incompetence and adding meaningless tough talk to it as well, thereby turning himself into a national joke. Sad, but there it is.
Thibaud:
I don’t know so I will ask you. How many Jews live in the areas where the riots are taking place? How many synagogues? I really don’t know, I am not trying to be a smartass.There have been quite a few Jewish cemetaries, houses of worship and French Jewish citizens attacked in the last few years. That is what brought on the proposed law for the ban on all religous headgear in the schools. A few threads ago I said it wasn’t all about economics, It wasn’t all about Islam. If one ignores what is happening all over the world with Islamic radicalism I would say that your racist/economic argument might have more weight. And I know that you have not argued that there is no Islamic radical influence. And there is also the criminal gang problem. but I do think there is more Islamic seperatism going on here then you seem to think there is.
thibaud
I came to your defense, and even offered a citation of an article tending to support your position on another thread (though I disagreed with, at the very least, the emphasis of your position there) but don’t you think it’s perfectly appropriate to call people who engage in thuggish behavior “thugs”?
To do so doesn’t mean they have no just grievances. (I think of some sixties-era bumper sticker proclaiming “Thugs Never Have a Nice Day”
, but still, if I am behaving thuggishly, I think I would not feel justified in bristling at being called a thug.
But maybe I’m more reasonable than these other thugs.
Jamie Irons
thibaud
Peaktalk has recorded the burning of a synagogue in the riots, and the rioting’s spread to Rennes, Rouen, Toulouse, Nantes and Nice.
If we are going to castigate Sarkozy it should be for a weak response not name calling. Burning cars is arson. To ignore looters or arsonists is to invite a complete breakdown of civil authority. This endangers everybody in a society. As soon as the second car was torched the authorities should have announced that arsonists would be shot on sight (with real bullets)and then backed that announcement up with action. As soon as police were fired on an announcement should have been made that anyone attacking police with weapons would be shot on sight and that should have been backed up with action. If that was done the riots would have been over in two or three days tops. After order was restored then it would be time to address the social problems, not before.
But Sarkozy was probably under orders from Chirac or the guy with the girls name not to respond with force.