Paris Burning: How Empires End

Human Events Online ^ | 11/7/05 | Patrick J. Buchanan

[B Knotts]

The Romans conquered the barbarians—and the barbarians conquered Rome.

So it goes with empires. And comes now the penultimate chapter in the history of the empires of the West.

This is the larger meaning of the ritual murder of Theo Van Gogh in Holland, the subway bombings in London, the train bombings in Madrid, the Paris riots spreading across France. The perpetrators of these crimes in the capitals of Europe are the children of immigrants who were once the colonial subjects of the European empires.

At this writing, the riots are entering their 12th night and have spread to Rouen, Lille, Marseille, Toulouse, Dijon, Bordeaux, Strasbourg, Cannes, Nice. Thousands of cars and buses have been torched and several nursery schools fire-bombed. One fleeing and terrified woman was doused with gasoline and set ablaze.

The rioters are of Arab and African descent, and Muslim. While almost all are French citizens, they are not part of the French people. For never have they been assimilated into French culture or society. And some wish to remain who and what they are. They live in France but are not French.

The rampage began October 27 when two Arab youths, fleeing what they mistakenly thought was a police pursuit, leapt onto power lines and were electrocuted. The two deaths ignited the riots.

[fallujah-nuker]

"If a farsighted Frenchman had warned of the dangers to his country of Islamic immigration 30 years ago, he would have been met with the same type of "argument" you use. Pat Buchanan is exactly right."

There was one, his name was Jean Raspail, he wrote "The Camp of the Saints."

[Alia]

Fascinating.

France is a large, rural country with a lot of wild game. Hunting is extremely popular. Guns are not rare in French homes, although they are rarer in the city.

I understand that about France geography and demographics. I would think however, in those locations where the terrorists are arsoning, the residents might not be of the "caliber" to meet the requirements for owning basic self-defense weaponry against these thugs. Or, do you think, there's an over-reliance upon French Police?

Also, it is not illegal to own the other types of weapons, such as a handgun. One must simply obtain a permit and register the gun. The hardest part for some to clear is that to get a permit own a non-hunting gun, one cannot have a criminal record.

Here, one cannot have a criminal record and own ANY gun. Of course, given the liberal courts, sometimes, it is hard to tell the guilty from the "set-up on bogus charges"...

Military weapons? No. Civilians do not need military weapons, machine guns, armor piercing bullets and the like. Those things are for killing the police and the army, and one does not have a right to kill the police and the army.

The same argument goes around in the US. But when thugs take over your city, and when city counsels and "human rights orgs" perpetually natter for softer kinder bullets for police forces to use against fully armed mobs and terrorists, the argument for such gunrights indeeds swings in the "pro" column for the citizen to own and have.

[Vicomte13]

I think that St. Pierre et Miquelon are not a Departement Outre Mer (DOM) (an overseas department, like Hawaii or Alaska) but a Territoire Outre Mer (TOM)(an overseas territory, like Guam or Puerto Rico).

There are 4 DOM: Guiane Francaise (French Guiana) in South America (this is where the European Space Agency rockets are launched into space), Guadeloupe, Martinique and La Reunion in the Indian Ocean.

There are many TOM: St. Pierre et Michelon, la Nouvelle Caldeonie, Mayotte, Wallis & Futuna, Polynesie (Tahiti).

[11Bush]

Civilians do not need military weapons, machine guns, armor piercing bullets and the like. Those things are for killing the police and the army, and one does not have a right to kill the police and the army.

Says who? The reason Americans have a RKBA is to counter the tyranny of government, you know, the police and army. I gather you are not an American, nor do you understan the Bill of Rights.

[T.L.Sink]

I'd like to recommend to you and all FRepers one of the most insightful and prophetic books I've read -- and that's no hyperbole! The book is "Our Culture,What's Left of It" by Theodore Dalrymple, widely traveled author and psychiatrist. Included in the book is a section "When Islam Breaks Down", named by David Brooks of the N.Y.Times as the best journal article of 2004. And -- if you REALLY want to understand what is happening in France and why, his section "The Barbarians at the Gates of Paris" will convince any skeptics that Dr.Dalrymple is truly prophetic.He examines how a totally ineffectual police structure in conjunction with a devastating influx of Islamic immigrants (about six million, mostly from North Africa) has resulted in the potential for a socially explosive catastrophe. Well, as we speak, Dalrymple's prediction has become a reality. The Islamofascists (mostly second generation immigrants) have ignited what looks like jihadism gone wild. As Victor Davis Hanson indicated in a recent article these young people are not only unemployed, they're unemployable. They're not homeless or in dire povery. They're living off the socialist dole. Many don't want to assimilate -- they expect that French culture will adapt to an Islamic hegemony. Getting back to Dalrymple, he said that the French criminal justice system was so notoriously ineffective and PC that it was blaming the society and not the criminals. I'll just give one quote: "Now crime and general disorder are making inroads into places where, not long ago, they were unheard of." In short, French society has been so negligent of reality in so many ways that the present calamities should have been expected -- and are, in a very real sense, overdue. But please read Dalrymple. His insights come not just from his clinical experience but from real-life residence in many Islamic states. It's fascinating reading -- the kind that makes you eager to turn the page!

[kanawa]

"...during the period 1973 to 1995 the French were allowed three fully automatic assault rifles per shooter, a right only lost with the introduction of this last European law, and during this time not a single problem occurred with a legally owned fully automatic firearm."

I found that part interesting in light of your comment above...

"Civilians do not need military weapons, machine guns, armor piercing bullets and the like. Those things are for killing the police and the army, and one does not have a right to kill the police and the army."

I assume that's the government's rational, is it also your opinion?

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

Sorry for assuming that you'd be interested.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

"I think that St. Pierre et Miquelon are not a Departement Outre Mer (DOM) (an overseas department, like Hawaii or Alaska) but a Territoire Outre Mer (TOM)(an overseas territory, like Guam or Puerto Rico)."

I expect you're right about that -- you put it more clearly than I could have.

Whether they were a DOM or a TOM, they were a P.I.T.A. (pain ...) to Canada when the maritime economic zone was being negotiated with France.

[Vicomte13]

"I would think however, in those locations where the terrorists are arsoning, the residents might not be of the "caliber" to meet the requirements for owning basic self-defense weaponry against these thugs. Or, do you think, there's an over-reliance upon French Police?"

One can always own hunting weapons.
However, it is true that in the banlieux, probably many wouldn't qualify for gun ownership (other than hunting weapons). Is there over-reliance on the police? No. In the banlieux there are many who loathe the police, and not all are criminals. French police have a bad habit of beating up Arabs. They are not trusted.

Truth is, for the most part law and order is kept because most people just keep it. It is not because everybody is armed, or because everyone is supervised, but rather because most people are civilized. However in the banlieux there are also criminal gangs who enforce their own order. They are sometimes armed, but mostly don't need to be, other than with knives.

Proof of the basic degree of civilization that people have, even in the middle of a riot, is that all of those guns that everyone knows are hidden about in the HLM have not been turned on anyone, even the police for the most part, after 12 days of riots. The radical Islamists among the population who want to radicalize the situation may start shooting police and civilans in order to provoke a violent backlash.
That is my greatest fear at the moment. The Islamists are frustrated, because the Beur are just not killers or jihadists. They are pissed off youth, unemployed and angry for the most part, but they don't care much about Islam (or anything), and they don't want to kill anybody.
The Islamists need them to definitively REJECT French society and be willing to kill it and French people.
But the Beur aren't.

So, what to do?
If Muslim radicals start shooting the police and civilians, the reaction will probably not distinguish, and that could well radicalize some of the Beur, transforming street thugs into jihadists.

That could also backfire, however. It could cause the Beur to pull back inside and calm down, because they don't go for that sort of thing. That would leave the jihadis dangerously exposed and probably improve the overall circumstances of security in France...although the cars will still get burnt next time around if the fundamental problem of exclusion is not fixed.

[Vicomte13]

"Whether they were a DOM or a TOM, they were a P.I.T.A. (pain ...) to Canada when the maritime economic zone was being negotiated with France"

Mais, bien sur!
On parle ici de la France, et la France a des memes droits littorals pour ses iles que le Canada a pour les siennes.

[fallujah-nuker]

Excellent post.

[alarm rider]

Not fond of Patrick J., but there is some truth here.

France is gone, more correctly it has been gone for some time now.

The population of traditional Frenchmen and Women do not produce enough children to replace themselves.

They have gone soft with socialism and communism since the end of WWII.

The male population of traditional France has no sense of nationalism, ownership or honor. They have no right to real firearm ownership, no investment in anything except short work-weeks and long vacations.

There is no national will to cleanse France of immigrant populations, no popular uprisings, no anger or outrage on the part of the traditional French population and no clue as to how to solve these problems in a forceful manner.

What is needed is manly, tough leadership. It is not there.

Face it now, France is gone. Who will follow?

[Vicomte13]

"I assume that's the government's rational, is it also your opinion?"

It is difficult.
What do I personally believe, meaning, if I were King, what would the law be?

If I were King, I would not want people to be able to easily shoot my soldiers, and so I would not allow weapons to be owned by the civilians that could penetrate the body armor of my armed forces.

But, if I were King, I would want the people to be able to enjoy all of the traditional pastimes of the hunt, which are so deeply engrained in French tradition. Therefore, I would allow people to have hunting weapons.

And finally, if I were King, I would not want to go to the great expense and difficulty of trying to police every crevice of the nation (and then, to do it badly), nor to try to register every gun. I think that the only practical way that weak men and women can defend themselves against stronger men is to have guns, so I would allow people to own handguns and to privately carry them in their cars and on their persons.

I would see if this worked as I think it would. If it did, I would expect crime to go down, people to be safer, and my own treasury to be increased because I need spend less money on policing the people.

If, on the other hand, crime increased, I would be inclined to reduce gun rights and require registration.

My starting position on each thing would be to do without regulation, to observe the result, and to impose only the regulation required to maintain the peace.

There are too many important things to worry about in the world than to lard up one's ranks of servants with expensive agents whose sole purpose is to annoy and harrass one's subjects, and thereby provoke resentment of the Crown and sow discord where none need exist.

A man's domicile is his proper estate, and I do not truly care what men do so long as they do not do it in the street and disturb the horses.

I expect that American social conservatives would find my view of tolerating the private vices of the people as being immoral and unacceptable.

But that is what would be, were I King.

Since I am not King, I am apathetic about gun laws in France. People only obey laws like that to the extent that they want to anyway, for obviously nobody can come into one's house to search, nor one's car. If you think you need to have a gun to protect yourself, you buy a gun. As in all things, the law is interesting, but it is only advisory and is not self-executing.

In America, I witness that the law is something of an idol which people believe they are morally, even religiously, obliged to follow (except, curiously, when reporting charitable and business deductions on their US IRS Income Tax Forms or driving the speed limit or drinking alcohol under the age of 21...another nattering nanny law that seems utterly at odds with the spirit of a free people...). And so gun laws are perhaps more offensive in Americans, because Americans are much more uptight about breaking the law if they decide they want to.

[fallujah-nuker]

Its like playing Russian Roulette each time a Moslem is allowed in.

[kanawa]

Face it now, France is gone

There may be more than a few Frenchman who would echo Mark Twain..

Les rapports de ma mort sont considérablement exagérés.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

Vous êtes correct.

France certainly had a right to defend its interests in the negotiations, which are now settled.

Also, to be fair, the residents of St.P&M are mainly honest, hard working fisherfolk.

I originally mentioned St. P & M, because I suspect that most people aren't aware that France is a North American country, as well as an European one. (Well, about 1/10 of a percent of the country is North American.)

[fallujah-nuker]

"I am half Mexican. Yet, my mom could not stand illegals.

And THAT has been my experience as the consensus view...NOT the La Raza fringe that Buchanan uses to smear all hispanics with a broad brush."

Actually a number of the OBL use the same argument right here, that the GOP needs to pander on illegal immigration to capture the Hispanic vote.

[alarm rider]

"Face it now, France is gone
There may be more than a few Frenchman who would echo Mark Twain..

Les rapports de ma mort sont considérablement exagérés."

As I understand it, you are saying that;

"The reports of my death considerably are exaggerated."

Well, it's only a matter of time until France appeases to the point where the rabble dictates the law. And this is mostly where it's heading now. If French men had any courage, then they would remove their government, then the rabble in their country. They have not the stones, the will or the courage to do any of that. So, they leave it to the likes of Jack and Dommie. Peace will come, but France will raise the white flag and give in to Islamic demands for muslin dictated law, much like what Canada is now contemplating.

12 days of this and still no real reaction? It's just that Jack and Dommie have just now found someone to surrender to, and are now in the process of doing just that.

[fallujah-nuker]

"...However, his attacks on "neo-cons" lately have this unpleasant coincidence of being targeted at Jewish pundits and politicians. If I start seeing Buchanan use the term neo-con to describe others, I'll reconsider."

Same thing happened here during the Miers debates when threads were posted about David Frum and others who opposed her nomination.