The figures are stark. An average of 112 cars a day have been torched across France so far this year and there have been 15 attacks a day on police and emergency services. Nearly 3,000 police officers have been injured in clashes this year. Officers have been badly injured in four ambushes in the Paris outskirts since September. Some police talk of open war with youths who are bent on more than vandalism.
Liberals will tell you that Islam is the religion of peace...here is another story of Muslims being violent and uncivilized...why does this happen so often in the religion of peace?
Pope makes some correct comments...burn down churches.
cartoons make you mad, blow up stuff...
maybe its just that once again, liberals don't understand what is actually going on around them and in the world...but we are going to put them in charge in a few weeks? We will get what we pay for...
Well, based on what liberals here say, as soon as Dem's are incharge, all the violence in the middle east will stop, because liberals will be nice to terrorists and they will like us again...
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Why 112 cars are burning every day
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
12 comments:
If it wasn't for France's unflinching support for democracy in Iraq, we never would have seen the French Intifada. /s
This goes downhill from here for the French. They've put their immigrants in socialist housing instead of letting themselves take responsibility for their own lives in the marketplace. So they've mixed Marx and Qutb and will get the historically inevitable jihad they deserve.
Don't get me wrong. If France had more economic freedom, their Muslims would still hate the Jews and funnel money to terror groups like the Party of God. However, in the shortterm, they would not get violent toward their neighbors and live peacefully as generally occurs in the United States.
Plus our public is armed to the teeth if Muslims get any ideas.
Actually, I believe I can say that many must feel that way.
From Wikipedia:
"Commenting [on] other demonstrations in Paris a few months later, the BBC summarized reasons behind the events included youth unemployment and lack of opportunities in France's poorest communities. But during the riots, many focused on other social issues and particularly on immigration and racial discrimination as rioteers were mostly second-generation immigrant youths.
The head of the French intelligence agency (Renseignements généraux - RG) denied any Islamic factor in the riots..."
Jim--
The socialists running the show in France need to let go of political correctness and examine the facts.
In France, everyone gets a free education, free healthcare, free retirement, and the unemployment compensation is quite generous. I don't care what liberal media says, these people are NOT oppressed, and when Muslims chant "God is Greatest!" and "Slaughter the Jews!" in the streets of a Western society, it is prudent to take them at their word.
If the issue is Western racism, as the leftists claim, where are the Indian rioters in Western societies? Or the Chinese rioters?
I know people like you and the clowns in institutions like the BBC think the West is tainted by original sin and is responsible for violence anywhere on the planet. But sometimes you need to call religious fanatics who go nuts when a cartoon is printed, when a leader of a different religion disagrees about their Prophet (peace be upon him), or when dumbass members of their own faith do something stupid to kill themselves during a police chase -- exactly what they are.
Apparently you are too dense to separate those who foment the chaos and those who participate. Too nuanced for you, I guess.
You obviously have no clue what I think. It's the same tactic that Game and the rest of the wingers use, putting words in our mouths that we've never said and thoughts in our heads that don't exist.
Jim--
You confirmed what Game wrote about liberals.
Game wrote that liberals think we're not being nice enough to Muslim fundamentalists, and if we're nicer, they'll cool out. You claimed, like Ségolène Royal and the ruling Socialist Party officials in France, that the fanatics are frustrated, misunderstood, and desperate. Even though they get free healthcare, education, retirement, vacation, and housing-- you implied we need to coddle them in some other way. Are you suggesting Muslim fundamentalists need even more compassion and love? Perhaps it is time to go to the cafe, light up a ciggie, and ask what we can do to make Muslim zealots love us as much as liberals love them.
Note that most other immigrant groups behave like civilized humans, which means either A) these other immigrant groups are letting themselves get screwed by Europeans in the West and aren't resisting, or B) or too many Muslims are fanatics.
The answer is B.
Sarkozy is going to win, btw.
No. No. No. NO. NO. I have not said that, and I have NOT confirmed what Game says.
The refusal of you people to read what we write and attempt to understand it is unfathomable.
I will say it again. The leaders who foment the chaos may be Islamic fundamentalists (or they may simply be anarchists). That does not mean the people in the street are.
Please find one credible source that demonstrates that these people in France are rioting because THEY are Islamic fundamentalists. I will be happy to read it.
As usual you conflate understanding of what motivates THE MASSES with "being nice to the terrorists." That's simply a bovine excrement claim. Nobody does that.
Show me someone who calls Islam the religion of peace. There are people who say that at its best Islam is peaceful, and they abbreviate that by calling it a religion of peace, but I don't know anyone who thinks it's the only peaceful religion, which is what's implied by calling it the religion of peace.
Jim--
Achmed and Sayyid are doing the violence, not Francois and Michel.
Here is an example:
French riots
The mobs shouting Allah Akbar! and other jihadi slogans wearing the scarves belong to a religion called Islam. Have you heard of it?
You would think after the kids who pulled off 911, we would take this stuff seriously instead of blaming ourselves.
Jason, trying to debate your nonsense is fruitless. You say something, I refute it, you say it again, I refute it, you say it again. Your last sentence is simply inane.
Further effort on this topic is pointless.
It's not bailing when further debate is futile. It is not worth my time to respond to the same crap that I have already responded to and keep getting the same answers that have already been rebutted.
Let's nuke all the A-Rabs. Will that solve all your problems? It's what you all are really trying to say isn't it. You talk about being tough, having "stones", defeating the "Islamo-fascists" with force.
With what army are you going to accomplish that. Our army is in Iraq. Can't take them out because that's cut and run. We can't relieve the soldiers that are their now.
So what, you're going to bomb them with cruise missiles and F-18s? Who? Where?
Come on folks, what's your plan? Tell us what your solution is. Stop whining about the A-Rabs and tell us what you propose to do about it!
Our plan is what is currently in place. Support the Iraqi government until they are fully capable of handling their own business. You whine that it isn't proceeding on some timeline that is suitable to you, rather than recognize the unique set of circumstances to which our forces must constantly adjust. No acknowledgement of the progress made by both our forces and the Iraqi forces by anyone leaning left, while such progress is ongoing, though again, not without obstacles.
And you bail because there's no where for you to go with what you call an argument. You default to calling our arguments bullshit, or that we "want" to nuke the Middle East, or like the next thread, nuke N Korea. This is patently absurd. That we can so obviously see the threat flowing from those sources while you see what you want to see, is hardly bullshit, nor is it evidence of a desire to nuke. In this case, we have seen yet again, another incident where violence is initiated by one group, and that is radical Islam. To say their religion has nothing to do with it flies in the face of reason, as we have yet to be shown a parallel example from any other group. No one has responded to perceived or real slights in the manner that Islamic groups have. No one riots while saying "God is Great!" in any language other than theirs. You have NOT submitted ANYTHING that trumps that.
We've seen what your side can do. From my perspective, it seems neither side has been perfect. But there is one major difference, that being that this administration won't play the game of pretending that we're dealing with people like ourselves when we deal with these two areas. Madmen and despots canNOT be treated as if they are reliable, credible or honest. Nothing's changed in the way we're perceived by our foes except that now, no one's BULLSHITTING around, and what's believed is now out in the open. Objective observation cannot equate our people with the enemy.
By the way, we aren't concerned with using force as an only weapon, but as an option that is truly on the table, rather than the empty threats of Bubba's term.
Post a Comment