PARIS - A curfew was set up yesterday at Le Raincy, a neighborhood in the eastern suburbs of Paris. The order was issued by the local conservative mayor, Eric Raoult. The prime minister, Dominique de Villepin, made clear on television that similar measures might soon be enforced on a broader scale. "Restoring public safety is our top priority," he said. After 11 days and nights of rioting, the country was coming close to a civil war.
A map published in the afternoon by Le Monde showed that ethnic violence - the "French Intifada," as it is being referred to by some journalists and political leaders - had spread almost all over the country, with the exception of Inner Brittany, western Normandy, and Burgundy, where North African and black communities are small, and Corsica, where a large North African community is held in check by a local nationalist movement that itself is prone to violence. Most major cities, including Lyons, Marseille, Lille, Toulouse, and Bordeaux, have been hit.
Rioting and guerrilla-style street fighting were still rampant in the northern Parisian county of Seine-Saint-Denis - colloquially known as 9-3, after its postal code - where the whole thing started on October 27. The five other Parisian counties were hurt as well. The inner city itself, the ultra-chic City of Paris, was subjected to several ethnic raids over the weekend.
In terms of destruction and casualties, the balance sheet is horrendous. Between Sunday and Monday night, no fewer than 1,408 cars, including buses and trucks, were torched throughout the country. Schools, colleges, sports facilities, factories, shopping arcades, and even two churches - one in Lens, in the north, and one in Sete, on the Mediterranean - were burned. A local resident who attempted to stop a fire was beaten to death in Stains. Elsewhere, a disabled woman narrowly escaped being burned alive in a torched bus. Dozens of firefighters were wounded.
The first question one must ask is why the French government, admittedly one of the strongest and most centralized in the world, and certainly in Europe, did not consider imposing some measure of martial law in the violence-ridden areas much earlier.
There are many constitutional and legal provisions that would have allowed such steps. According to Article 16 of the 1958 constitution, the French president can resort to "exceptional powers" in case of a "major crisis": All he has to do is to consult with the prime minister, the chairpersons of both houses of Parliament, and the president of the Constitutional Council, who all four happen to be loyal followers.
According to Article 36, martial law can be decreed for a period of 12 days, and then confirmed by Parliament for extended 12-day periods, if necessary. The present Parliament is conservative-dominated. As for regular curfews, they can be decreed by the Cabinet without further review under a 1955 law. Moreover, it is an open secret that the for about 15 years French defense forces had made at least contingency plans for "urban battles" similar to what is happening now.
One reason for the government's procrastination has been that in a crisis scenario, much depends on the president, Jacques Chirac, and he suffered a minor stroke several weeks ago. Another reason is that both Mr. Chirac and his heir apparent, Mr. Villepin, were not entirely unhappy about the rioting, at least in its first stage, since it was a blow to their political rival within the conservative camp, the minister of the interior, Nicolas Sarkozy.
The temptation to sack Mr. Sarkozy - as a token of appeasement - may have loomed over them for several days at least. Moreover, Messrs. Chirac and Villepin have built their political identity on a Gaullist pro-Arab and pro-Islamic stand that became fully apparent three years ago, when France distanced itself from America in respect of Iraq. They may expect to harvest a large "immigrant vote" in the coming presidential and parliamentary elections, in 2007, and be reluctant to jeopardize it by taking an aggressive law and order line now.
Still, more factors may have played as well. The government may have been genuinely surprised and intimidated. It is one thing to know in theory that France has undergone major ethnic changes over the past 30 years and another thing altogether to confront a mass ethnic insurgency. The figures are inescapable. There are about 60 million inhabitants in continental France, plus 2 million citizens in the overseas territories (essentially the French West Indies and La Reunion island in the Indian Ocean). About 20 million, most of them white and Christian, are over 50.
Out of the remaining 40 million or so, 10 million or so belong to the ethnic minorities: Muslim North Africans, Muslim Turks or Near Easterners, Muslim Black Africans, Christian West Indian, African or Reunionese blacks. When one regards to the youngest age brackets, the proportion is even larger. It is estimated that 35% of all French inhabitants under 20, and 50% of all inhabitants in the major urban centers, belong to the ethnic minorities. Islam alone may claim respectively 30% and 45%. Since war is essentially the business of youths, the combatant ratio in any ethnic war may thus be one to one.
Which brings us to a second question: How ethnic is the present violence in France? Liberal commentators, both in France and abroad, tend to say that poverty and unemployment, rather than race or religion, are the driving force behind the riots. Mr. Villepin himself tends to share this view, at least in part. He said yesterday on TV that he is earmarking enormous credits for housing rehabilitation, education, and state-supported jobs in the areas where the unrest has developed. But the fact remains that only ethnic youths are rioting, that most of them explicitly pledge allegiance to Islam and such Muslim heroes as Osama bin Laden, that the Islamic motto - Allahu Akbar - is usually their war cry, and that they submit only to archconservative or radical imams.
The fact also remains, according to many witnesses, that the rioters torch only "white" cars, meaning white owned cars, and spare "Islamic" or "black" ones. One way to discriminate between them is to look for ethnic signs like a sticker with Koranic verses or a picture of the Kaaba in Mekka or a stylized map of Africa. Further evidence of the animating influence in the riots lies with the French rap music to which the perpetrators listen. Such music obsessively describes White France as a sexual prey.
A third and last question is what impact this unprecedented ordeal is likely to have on France and Europe? One would reasonably expect the French government to restore its grip over the country. What matters, however, is the long-term outcome. My guess is that the crisis will not be so easily forgotten or washed away among the "non-ethnic" citizens, including those of alien stock who have fully integrated into the French society as it is. Rejection of Islam and of North African, Black African, and Middle Eastern immigration may increase dramatically. And the prospect of Turkey acceding to the European Union may get even dimmer.
Mr. Gurfinkiel is the editor of Valeurs Actuelles, a Paris-based journal.
[Blunderov] Amazingly, this whole affair is becoming even more interesting than it was before.
Bob Woodward, of Watergate legend, has testified before Fitzgerald that Plame's name was revealed to him by an official sometime before Wilson's famous article was published. This has set the cat well and truly amongst the pigeons.
The Right has rejoiced, claiming that this upsets Fitgerald's entire premise vis a vis Rove et al.
"Did Plame out WH plans for finding WMD in Iraq? Submitted by davidswanson on Sat, 2005-11-19 17:21. Media By Hornet, http://houseoflabor.tpmcafe.com
Did the White House plan to 'find' WMD in Iraq until Brewster-Jennings intercepted their shipment? Was that why Plame was in their crosshairs long before Wilson's editorial?
Buried in a TPM Nov 18 blog about what the WH was really thinking when it invaded Iraq, Joshua Micah Marshall writes "This even leads to a sort of inverted conspiracy theorizing when people ask, 'If he knew there was no WMD, why didn't they at least try to plant some to avoid the catastrophic embarrassment which ensued after the war....The real answer, I think, is as banal as it is devastating: I don't think they ever gave it much thought -- not in the sense of trying to get to the heart of the matter."
This WH may be diabolical, but it's not stupid. Apparently, they gave it a lot of thought if the following is true. As Wayne Madsen reports (Nov 11):
"According to U.S. intelligence sources, the White House exposure of Valerie Plame and her Brewster Jennings & Associates was intended to retaliate against the CIA's work in limiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. WMR has reported in the past on this aspect of the scandal. In addition to identifying the involvement of individuals in the White House who were close to key players in nuclear proliferation, the CIA Counter-Proliferation Division prevented the shipment of binary VX nerve gas from Turkey into Iraq in November 2002. The Brewster Jennings network in Turkey was able to intercept this shipment which was intended to be hidden in Iraq and later used as evidence that Saddam Hussein was in possession of weapons of mass destruction. U.S. intelligence sources revealed that this was a major reason the Bush White House targeted Plame and her network." </snip>
[Bl.] Meanwhile back at the ranch, if the right believes that Fitzgerald's case has collapsed, he himself is apparently not aware of it. Whether Fitzgerald's new convening of a Grand Jury is directly related to Woodward's recent testimony or not, nobody is saying. Whatever the case may be, new charges do seem immanent.
New grand jury eying CIA leak By THOMAS M. DeFRANK and JAMES GORDON MEEK DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON - A new grand jury is hearing evidence in the CIA leak probe, which has already resulted in Vice President Cheney's top aide facing perjury and other federal charges, the Daily News has learned. Special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald announced yesterday in court papers that "the investigation is continuing" into who blew the cover of CIA spy Valerie Plame. </snip>
[Bl.] It's the gift that just keeps on giving. Perhaps "Douglas Feith, Judith Miller and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee" is a chapter we can look forward to in the near future?
RE: virus: The game's afoot
« Reply #49 on: 2005-12-12 07:39:33 »
[Joe Dees/Salamantis] It's red, all right; but i would characterize it as red in the face with visceral animus. The site should be renamed Axis of Anti-Bush Ad Hominem.
Hermit] Interestingly Joe Dees/Salamantis demonstrates (again) his ignorance of language and debate by asserting "Ad Hominem" outside of a debate. "Ad hominem" or more properly, "argumentum ad hominem" simply means an "argument against the person" which, unless relevant (which can happen, e.g. when the debater against whom it is applied invalidly claims special or expert status), is a "debating fallacy", i.e. is not useful in advancing or refuting an argument. Nevertheless, if we assume that "to the person" is relevant in any way in everyday life, what should we say to one who defends genocide by the Turks, the Nazis, Stalin or the Kyhmer Rouge? Would it be "ad hominem" to say that they are desirable examples to emulate? Or would it be "ad hominem" to say that they are vile?
[Hermit] Weykening that Bush and his fuckwitted supporters are the most horrible post-reformation examples of belief run amok (The shrub apparently believes that God told him to invade Iraq), the corruption of power to its logical extreme (currently the US appears to fear no retribution, apparently imagining that it will always be able to buy or bomb itself out of trouble), the power of demagoguery (exemplified by fux TV) and the overwhelming success of propaganda on the brain-fried to the extent that some of them (e.g. Joe Dees) continue to propagate government propaganda long after even its originators have given up advocating it due to the lies being too blatant (e.g. Weapons of Mass Delusion), should we call these wonders desirable examples to emulate? Or should we call them vile?
[Hermit] When we need to answer, "but how could people let this happen" asked of any nation, we need look no further than those revolting people who not only corrupted the process in order to establish TheFumingShrubTM in office, but supported his insane campaigns against stability, progress and the environment. The reaction of the Soviets, Germans and Cambodians to Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot should no longer be inexplicable to us. We have the same phenomena writ large in America today. Like any playground bully, quivering in fear internally, lashing out at those around in the hope that projected brutality will stop people from suspecting the truth. What a tragic end for a grand experiment. Is it a wonder that the number one leader in oppression, at home and abroad, should inspire "visceral animus" in those sensible enough to see the end of the republic at the hands of knaves and fools as an end not to be desired.
[Hermit] In a nation where over 2 million of her people are incarcerated; where the top 5% of the country own 59% of its wealth (and the top 10% own 71%); in a nation where she leads the industrial nations in STDs and teen pregnancy; in a nation with more people are without any meaningful form of healthcare than in any other industrialized nation in the world; in a nation which leads the world in energy use, in waste, in armament expenditure and in CO2 production per capita; in a nation which trails the world in international aid or even social aid in proportion to GDP; in a nation which asserts that she is freedom loving, yet hires East Germans, notorious for oppression, to run her internal security apparatus; in a nation that seemingly has no compunction about twisting honor, law and truth and in perverting institutions which she established in an happier hour to ensure peace between nations, to use its chambers to putatively justify illegal attacks against others; in a nation which passes laws requiring attacks on others were her citizens to be taken before a recognized International Court, but which performs invasions, kidnapping and torture of the citizens of other nations in secret places at will and without oversight herself; in a nation with the temerity to attempt to defend the "necessity" to torture when a few of her own citizens object; in a nation which consistently defends genocide on the part of Israel, her "friend" and engages in it herself in Iraq; when such a nation considers herself to be good and an example to nations, this is not sick. This is demented or this is evil or this is both*. There are no other options, trifurcation be damned.
[Hermit] Should those who create such a vile, perverted beast not be hated? After all, when the world seeks an example of the worst class of leadership and most brutal trampling of law, sense and people extant, they need no longer reach back further than President George W Bush, his cronies and their supporters. In such a case as this, "ad hominem" is a virtue and staying silent is to renounce ones humanity through "loving the vile", just as effectively as calling any other genocidal fuckwits "desirable examples to emulate" would be. Given the minuscule support which the Bushites enjoy, perhaps Planet Earth should be renamed "Planet of Anti-Bush Ad Hominem" a label to be worn proudly in an effort to disassociate the planet from this macabre and disgusting spectacle. The deliberate and vituperative demolition of these once United States of America.
Hermit
*The funny thing is, I think, the people doing this know it too. Perhaps this why they are so extremely aggressive and voluminous right now. It's just razzle dazzle and flim flam to try to keep you from seeing that they are frightened shitless that somebody will see them for the evil stupid greedy bullying bastards** they are. As Richard Geere sang in "Chicago":
(Singing) Give 'em the old razzle dazzle Razzle Dazzle 'em Give 'em an act with lots of flash in it And the reaction will be passionate Give 'em the old hocus pocus Bead and feather 'em How can they see with sequins in their eyes?
What if your hinges all are rusting? What if, in fact, you're just disgusting?
Razzle dazzle 'em And they;ll never catch wise!
Give 'em the old Razzle Dazzle
BILLY AND COMPANY Razzle dazzle 'em Give 'em a show that's so splendiferous
BILLY Row after row will crow vociferous
BILLY AND COMPANY Give 'em the old flim flam flummox Fool and fracture 'em
BILLY How can they hear the truth above the roar?
BILLY AND COMPANY Throw 'em a fake and a finagle They'll never know you're just a bagel,
BILLY Razzle dazzle 'em And they'll beg you for more!
BILLY AND COMPANY Give 'em the old double whammy Daze and dizzy 'em Back since the days of old Methuselah Everyone loves the big bambooz-a-ler
Give 'em the old three ring circus Stun and stagger 'em When you're in trouble, go into your dance
Though you are stiffer than a girder They'll let you get away with murder Razzle dazzle 'em And you've got a romance
COMPANY(The same time as BILLY's) Give 'em the old Razzle Dazzle
BILLY Give 'em the old Razzle Dazzle Razzle dazzle 'em Show 'em the first rate sorcerer you are Long as you keep 'em way off balance How can they spot you've got no talent Razzle Dazzle 'em
BILLY AND COMPANY Razzle Dazzle 'em Razzle Dazzle 'em
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999