Duc, sequere, aut de via decede!

Islamic riots in France

November 7th, 2005 . by Matt

Paris or Gaza?

Some of the best coverage for the riots in France is from Parapundit. It looks like Paris is going to become a Beirut or Gaza, with Muslims having a seeming unquenchable rage against the native French, despite the French not participating in the War in Iraq, providing generous welfare benefits to Muslim immigrants, ad infinitum. Really, Parapundit says it better than I am able to, so I would like to direct readers there for Randall’s informed commentary.

I would like to present this video sent to me by France based Luxembourger reader, Lyrt. It is a video of the riots, with Muslims yelling “Allah Akbar” in the streets of Paris while violently rioting. According to media reports, this rioting is actually well organised so terrorists may be co-ordinating or stirring up the riots. This video is a disturbing vision of the future of the French Republic.

Download here (2.5 megabytes).

17 Responses to “Islamic riots in France”

  1. comment number 1 by: Daz

    meh …

    the French are racist anyway …
    they look down on whoever doesn’t speak their language

  2. comment number 2 by: chimp

    and that somehow justifies the destruction of their country? Whatever you may say about the French (i particularly dislike them) it is disgusting that after all the taxpayers have had stolen from them in the name of welfare and social integration the only thank you they get is a big blazing torch to their public and private property. As an immigrant myself, if you do not like the country you are in…go back to your own. simple enough.

    these people are barbarians hiding behind the mask of ‘victim’…if I was Chirac all those people would be on a one way flight to Algeria.

  3. comment number 3 by: Bob Reemus

    To bad the French authorities didn’t just fire on the clowns perpetrating riots. Really. Then, the governmetn could say, “Ihnsh Allah.”

  4. comment number 4 by: Kushibo

    As an immigrant myself, if you do not like the country you are in…go back to your own. simple enough.

    I’m not saying this to agree with anybody engaging in violent protests in France, but I couldn’t disagree more with this statement above.

    I’m not a Korean citizen, but I live in Korea, and there are a lot of legal restrictions placed on me because of my foreign citizenship (I am eligible for ROK citizenship, but I don’t want to give up being a US citizen). Some of these legal restrictions are fair or reasonable, but some of them clearly are not.

    To the government’s credit, things have improved dramatically over the past ten years. But among the unfair or unreasonable restrictions/situations that still exist, some of them exist due to ignorance (like the government not knowing how these restrictions are inadvertently causing problems) and some of them are because of xenophobia or deliberate attempts to exclude “foreigners.”

    As a resident and a taxpayer of this country, I have every legal right, and I would say the moral right as well, to stand up and say something. Appeal the government, protest if necessary. Change won’t happen otherwise.

    I don’t know how hard or easy it is for “foreigners” to reside in France versus what it’s like for foreign citizens to live in Korea. Maybe they are complaining about nothing. But I’m guessing that France, like any other country, has problems that could be fixed, so telling the people on the wrong end of those problems, “If you do not like the country you are in, then go back to your own,” you are part of the problem, not the solution.

  5. comment number 5 by: nig

    Again an very inaccurate posting Matt. The headline “Islamic riots in France” is very wrong.

    Some of the rioters are indeed Islamic but these are not Islamic riots.

    Look at the following bits of media coverage:

    Including the following from Reuters

    French media noted the irony of invoking a measure linked to the Algerian war of independence against youths of North African and sub-Saharan African descent who, along with some poor white youths, have led the protests.

  6. comment number 6 by: nig



  7. comment number 7 by: Matt


    If the rioters are yelling ‘allah akbar’, then how is one expected to describe the rioters? Can you suggest a better label? Am I to call them ‘French youth’, and cover up the real perpetrators like the mass media? (the perpetrators are the same group of people rioting now, but that article refers to them as ‘French youth’, and implies that it is a French problem rather than a problem with a specific ethnic minority that are brought up to disrespect women, especially French women)

    As for the ‘poor white youths’, call me very skeptical. I bet 99.99% of rioters are not ‘poor white youth’, and I would bet those .01% of ‘poor white youth’ are not regular folk but communist political activists trying to take advantage of the chaos.

    This is a must read link to understand the problems boiling before the riots.

  8. comment number 8 by: nig

    “If the rioters are yelling ‘allah akbar’, then how is one expected to describe the rioters?”

    They were yelling all sort of things. In a riot that large in those neighbourhoods there were bound to be some fundamentalists involved.

    The causes are clearly economic and social rather than secular.

  9. comment number 9 by: Matt

    The causes are clearly economic and social rather than secular.

    You mean religious, not secular, right?

    In sheer numbers there are more poor French whites than non whites, so why are there not more than 50% of rioters white, if the problem is entirely economic?

    Does economics explain this?

    Back in April, 11 young black males went on trial in Paris for the gang rape of a 14-year-old white girl seven years ago. Rapes happen all the time, of course, but this one was unusually notable. It turned out to be a ritual for initiation into a gang.

    The ritual is known as a “tournante,” meaning “Take your turn,” and it consists of a black male becoming “friendly with” (seducing) a white female, preferably a teenager. Once they’ve become chums, the male lures the girl to a location where his buddies in the gang “take their turns” with her. In the case on trial in Paris, it was no fewer than 14 buddies. Unlike many victims of such fun, this young lady lodged a complaint with the police. As a result, she was gangraped a second time—this time, allegedly, by the 11 who went on trial in April.

    The incident is not isolated. Police investigations of similar rapes were underway in three other French cities, and one French magistrate says the game has been going on since at least the 1980s. “Their technique was to pick up a young girl—a white girl—and once she had become the girlfriend of one of the members, he would allow his mates to make use of her,” magistrate Sylvie Lotteau told the press last spring.

    Economics cannot explain that, and it cannot explain the senseless violence we see in France now. These people use violence as a first resort, not a last resort. People like that are not the kind of people I would like in my society.

    These rioters are also supported by government welfare. Its not enough to say that they live in terrible neighbourhood, because they make their own neighbourhoods terrible.

  10. comment number 10 by: Matt

    I should point out that I dont think that Islam is responsible for the riots – rather, it is racial hatred towards whites fueling it.

  11. comment number 11 by: nig


    Yes. I didn’t mean to use the word secular in that way. Typed without thinking on the way to lunch. Sorry about that.

    “I should point out that I dont think that Islam is responsible for the riots”

    Then why use the headline ‘Islamic riots in France’?

  12. comment number 12 by: Matt

    Then why use the headline ‘Islamic riots in France’?

    Because although the problems would still exist if Islam was not a factor, Islam itself represents a unifying force and is a tool for identification against the occident. Apparently most of the rioters do not consider themselves French, but consider themselves Muslims, thus ‘Islamic riots in France’.

  13. comment number 13 by: Malaclypse

    There’s something about the way this is being covered by the liberal and conservative media that is so confusing to me.

    Liberal media outlets seem to want to cover their ears and ignore the religious aspect of the situation.

    Conservative media outlets seem to want to cover their ears and ignore the economic aspect of the situation.

    And then there are other aspects that both tend to gloss over because they are too complex to fit into quickie mainstream media sound bytes or conservative talking points.

    It seems like there’s a lot of layers to this cake, but a lot of people only like to look at the layers that might support or lend credence to their currently entrenched political outlook.

    I’m curious what you think of comparisons of these riots to the urban riots in the USA in the sixties? Also about the fact that the Muslim population in France is not nearly as well integrated into French society as American Muslims are into American society, and why this is so?

  14. comment number 14 by: Silly Sally


    Allow me clear up your confusion: you are falling prey to the great distraction of liberal vs. right-wing thinking. There are ulterior motives that delight in our naive right-wingish comtempt for uppity rag-heads taking over and trashing the town.

    The current French riots illustrate well how racial minorities can be used as a weapon. These riots were aggravated by the provocations of the French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy and are designed to make unpopular the anti-globalist President Jacques Chirac and his Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin. These riots are also beginning to generate in France a paranoid need for a totalitarian (police) state.

    The riots started in reaction to the still uncleared deaths of two teenagers trying to escape a police control. These were of African descent and had no criminal records. In France, as generally in the Western world, the relations between the police and the poor immigrant communities are hostile and mini-riots are common in reaction to badly managed police operations. But, this time, the French Interior Minister and, seemingly, some elements of his anti-riot police have fed the fire with provocations which can be qualified either stupid or calculated.

    After two days, the riots were fading away, due in particular to the intervention of many social workers belonging themselves to the pertinent communities. Then came the first provocation, almost unbelievable: a few men, presumed to be from the anti-riot forces, threw gas grenades into a mosque where peaceful people were praying.

    These facts are today largely confirmed. Instead of apologizing, the Interior Minister referred to the war against the muslim extremism and later, speaking of the suburb`s youngsters implied in the riots, he promised publicly to “clean up these rabble”.

    In the eyes of many in France and particularly the Muslim immigrants, the figure of the French Interior Minister N. Sarkozy is himself a provocation, due to his well-known strong pro-Zionist and ultra-liberal positions. His relations with the President J. Chirac are ordinarily hostile and one can wonder why N. Sarkozy is still member of this government.

    From 1981 to 1995, three successive “socialist” French governments favored by various means a massive illegal immigration from the Middle-East and Central Africa. Especially the two successive governments of Francois Mitterrand who was among the main builders of the totalitarian European Union. These self-professed socialist governments allowed the corporations to use the undereducated and desperate immigrant workforce to weaken the French syndicalism and depress the salaries as well as the working conditions. As the ultra-liberalism progressed, the unemployment increased and the right wing politics persuaded a large public that all the problems were due to the immigrants.

    In short, the leftists provoked the massive immigration to undermine social cohesion and empower a destructive ultra-liberalism while the rightists camouflaged the social destructiveness of this ultra-liberalism by putting the blame on the immigrants: such a sordid teamwork illustrates how false and artificial could be the dichotomy of “left” and “right” wing politics.

    Then came the 9/11 and the neo-con “war on terror” which allowed the “neo-con” (globalist, ultra-liberal and Zionist) agents inside the French State to impose a local version of the American Patriot Act and to enhance the repressive role of the police. Meanwhile, these French neo-cons managed to drastic ally reduce the social help to the unemployed and the poor in general.

    Most immigrants of the first and many of the second generation are jobless and relegated to ghetto-like suburbs. The intense social frustration in these ghettoes makes them very inflammable. These suburbs are a social bomb in the hands of the negative forces wanting to blow up the traditional resistances of the French people to the totalitarianism.

    The negative forces in question are also called the “central bankers” since they are controlling the Western world’s Central Banks. In fact, they are controlling the whole Western financial system as well as most of the mainstream medias, the entertainment industry and also many corporations through their banks and their shareholding.

    Never in the human history such a great (negative) power was concentrated in such a few (malevolent) hands. In the Anglo-Saxon world, the agents of these negative forces are commonly called “neo-cons”.

    Last summer, the President J. Chirac had the courage to fire the neo-con Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin. Immediately, another neo-con agent, the Minister of the Economy N. Sarkozy presented himself as the only possible successor of J.-P. Raffarin. However, the President J. Chirac designated instead the antiglobalist D. de Villepin who was until then the Minister of the Foreign Affairs and a nightmare of the American neo-cons as one of the main opponents to the Irak war.

    Moreover, J. Chirac took back also two other strategical ministries from the neo-cons: the Economy, hold then by N. Sarkozy and the Justice, hold by another neo-con. It seems that J. Chirac had not enough power to dismiss completely N. Sarkozy from the government since the latter became the new Minister of the Interior.

    The French Presidential elections will take place in 2007 and N. Sarkozy has since long declared his intention to became the next President of France. His main challenger will be certainly the actual Prime Minister D. de Villepin, the antiglobalist protege of the President J. Chirac. That`s why it is so important for N. Sarkozy and his hidden coaches the central bankers to destabilise J. Chirac and D. de Villepin with the current riots.

    Unfortunately, this seems to work since N. Sarkozy is skillful in convincing many French citizens traumatized by the riots that he could control the situation if only the President J. Chirac and the Prime Minister D. de Villepin let him use all the repressive methods he wishes.

    Another possible reason why a neo-con agent like N. Sarkozy such inflated the current riots in France with his provocations is that his puppet masters the central bankers see one of their biggest enemy in the antiglobalist French populations. This is after all the people who rejected so clearly the totalitarian and ultra-liberal Constitution of the EU. Obviously, such a people must be convinced in priority that a totalitarian European Union is good for them. And what better way for that than to provoke first a formidable social cataclysm and then offer the protection of the totalitarianism?

    Expect a future provocation of malcontented black rage in America inflamed by the Katrina debacle … to be used as a tool for the same purposes.

  15. comment number 15 by: Malaclypse

    Hi Silly Sally,

    Thank you for your response. It’s interesting to note that your response here has shown up on the home page of Club Conspiracy, permalinked here, so I’ve included these links so others can see it in context.

    First I’d like to preface my response by saying that I do appreciate hearing different points of view, particularly ones that differ from party-line-liberal and party-line-conservative ones which tend to be more smokescreen than substantive.

    That said, it would seem to me that in order to evaluate the arguments you make in your piece, we would first need to accept the existence of a central conspiracy of Zionist “central bankers” who hold all the world’s power and generally are the ones pulling all the strings.

    My problem isn’t really that this is a conspiracy theory per se, but rather that as conspiracy theories go, the Zionist Occupation Government (ZOG) doesn’t particularly seem to hold together well.

    As for the kinds of conspiracy theories I don’t dismiss quite so easily, I would quote Robert Anton Wilson:

    The Multi-Conspiracy Model, which I heard from Timothy Leary and later from the District Attorney of, I think, Santa Barbara [is one I don’t dismiss so easily.] This theory holds that any town, once it gets beyond being a one-horse town out of the Westerns—any town that has a bank and a grocery and a lot of real estate and a lot of people, even before it becomes a big city—there are always a minimum of 24 gangs fighting over who’s going to dominate the town and own most of the real estate and make most of the profits. So they’re all conspiring against one another.
    When you get up to the size of a whole state, there are 24 bigger conspiracies, or 30 maybe. When you get up to the nations, there are God knows how many of them. They’re all conspiring and they’re all willing to break the law whenever it’s in their interest. They’re all very deceptive.
    Roberto Calvi, who was one of the bankers in one of the biggest conspiracies, the P2 conspiracy in Italy, often said, “Read ‘The Godfather.’ That shows you how the world really works.” In other words, all power groups act fundamentally like the Mafia. And the Mafia is not a monolithic conspiracy. It is a conspiracy or secret society that hangs together part of the time and makes war on itself part of the time.

    Coming back to the issue of the riots in France, it would seem that there are certainly various people who have pulled various strings that have influenced the situation and its aftermath, all for various aims.

    My gut sense would dictate, however, that these aims are of various people who may belong to various organizations, those aims are not so neatly organized as being part of a singular ZOG conspiracy.

    Not that I’m saying there aren’t powerful Zionists out there. Just that I don’t think that they are more brilliantly intelligent than you and I by a few dozen orders of magnitude (which, to make such a conspiracy as this go off with the level of success and forethought you ascribe to them, they would most certainly have to be.)

    Rather I suspect that various policy makers, underground movement leaders, and shadowy conspiracies will go on trying to influence matters to suit their own ends, just as those who ascribe all evil to the ZOG will go around trying to assess the situation to justify their own worldview, for their own ends.

    That said, it could be that we are all just looking upon these new world developments and filing these new facts away in our minds in such a way that it props up each of our individual belief systems and assures us that this proves we already knew exactly what was going on long ago, rather than having to think about such things in a new way.

  16. comment number 16 by: Silly Sally


    I had been busy and just returned to your blog.

    I am impressed, and like your intelligent response and perspective. In other words, it appears there are some things to learn at your blog.

    Anyways, yes that was a cut and paste… I read conspiracy literature for fun and enjoy the descriptions about how the world supposedly works.

    I, however, do not delude myself by clinging to a special conspiracy theory and try to conform my observations to it…well, yes I do… but I try to check this tendency; so, in other words, I resonate with your balanced perspective you just articulated.

    I look forward to dropping by for some more reads at your blog.

    Silly Sally

  17. comment number 17 by: brandy

    Intergration is not the key, multiculturalism is. Respect of the indigenous culture and society is important but so is are the traditions and aspects of anothers culture. I live in Canada, my parents are from the Caribbean, and i am a proud Canadian and Caribbean roots. My country my not be perfect but immigrants are encouraged to not only learn about Canadian culture but also to celebrate and teach others about thier culture. That what makes a country. Straigth France is az racist country. At least in North America we can speak openly ablout race. France pretends it doesn’t exist yets discriminates on the basis of it. The French government needs to recognize the RACIST and eurocentric implications of its’ intergration model in order to achieve so sort of social calm.