New intifada in Paris

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nemesis6

Newbie
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
2,172
Reaction score
0
PARIS - Dozens of youths clashed with police and set fire to buildings in a Paris suburb on Sunday after two teenagers were killed in a crash with a police car.

The pair were riding on a stolen motorcycle when the accident happened on Sunday in the town of Villiers-le-Bel, north of Paris, a police union source said.

France?s worst urban unrest in 40 years broke out in the northeastern Paris suburb of Clichy-Sous-Bois in November 2005, after two teenagers died electrocuted in an electricity sub-station after apparently fleeing police.

The circumstances in this case, however, were different.


?It was not a chase but apparently a traffic accident,? a police source said.

The town?s police station caught fire and that of the neighbouring town, Arnouville-les-Gonesse, was ransacked, the local authority said. A Villiers garage was set ablaze and fires were put out before they could spread in a neighbouring garage and a petrol station in the same town.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20071126/twl-uk-france-violence-bd5ae06.html
This was the 25th. Note the bold part which highlights ignorance/stupid statements.

26th now -
VILLIERS-LE-BEL, France (Reuters) - At least 40 French police were hurt late on Monday in running battles with scores of rioters in a suburb north of Paris where two youths died after a crash involving a police car.

During a second night of disturbances in Villiers-le-Bel and nearby areas, a local government official said one policeman was shot in the shoulder by some kind of firearm but was only slightly wounded.

A garbage truck and a police vehicle were among at least 36 vehicles torched late at night in the Val d?Oise area that includes Villiers and nearby districts also hit by the unrest, police and local officials said.

A Reuters witness said police were pelted with stones, petrol bombs and large firecrackers that exploded over their heads during hours of cat-and-mouse skirmishes with rioters. Police replied with tear gas, rubber bullets and paint guns designed to identify troublemakers. Spent cartridges and rocks thrown by rioters littered the streets.

Injured officers were given treatment in a local fire station used by police as a base. One, his face bloodied, had his arm in a sling. Officials said 40 officers were slightly hurt, though three officers needed hospital treatment.

Local mayor Didier Vaillant, who had earlier called for calm, said airguns had been fired at police. ?It looks like it?s going to be a long night,? he said.
http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/ne...642622_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-FRANCE-VIOLENCE-COL.XML

ALLAH'U AKBAR!

Yeah, they call them "youths", but we know what they are: Muslim immigrants. Last time this happened, Al Waleed Bin Talal payed to have news outlets not use the M word and not properly cover the events. Now, apparently, he won't even have to.
 
Give me a accurate source all of them are muslims and then I'll believe you.
 
Quite an alarmist title, Nemesis, it hardly qualifies as an intifada.

While absolutely don't support the violence and think those involved should be punished, the French people and government needs to reflect what causes these protests. There's a segregation in the French society, and indeed in many other countries as well, that make youths act this way. Attacks like these isn't an indicator of a healthy society.
 
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20071126/twl-uk-france-violence-bd5ae06.html
This was the 25th. Note the bold part which highlights ignorance/stupid statements.

26th now -

http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/ne...642622_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-FRANCE-VIOLENCE-COL.XML

ALLAH'U AKBAR!

Yeah, they call them "youths", but we know what they are: Muslim immigrants. Last time this happened, Al Waleed Bin Talal payed to have news outlets not use the M word and not properly cover the events. Now, apparently, he won't even have to.


intifada?

you're a nutjob with an agenda ..a handful of teenagers burning stuff to you means "Islamist baby-eaters ransack french countryside, slaughter women and children and rape livestock, oh the ****ing humanity wont someone please think of the childrens"

you're just as much a hate monger as those that accuse jews of everything from the high price of oil to the media ..if it were jews you were singling out you would have been banned a long time ago ..this double standard really sucks and you should be made into an example if not banned at least told to stfu
 
Well, the thing that prompted the last campaign where the exact same thing happened, just with Arab Muslims, was that police chased some criminals. The criminals ran into a power station and electrocuted themselves. This is basically a re-run with a different pretext. Yeah, a bit alarmist, but still, it's a big problem in Europe.

Rapstah, that's going to be a little hard, because just like when the first "campaign" started, French media did all in their power not to report the ethnicities of those involved. It was only later that we heard about the "Allahu akbar!" shouts as they threw stones, etc, at the police. It's basically a case of immigrants get killed by police, and vandalism ensues because for some reason they view it as racism. It's that simple. Same thing happened in the Netherlands a few weeks ago - "youths" broke into a police station and attacked officers. They were shot, and the next evening, it was time for "car-be-cues".

A handful of teenagers... Yeah, that's why they say it's "worse than 2005". Hm.
 
A handful of teenagers... Yeah, that's why they say it's "worse than 2005". Hm.

ya well you should probably read your own links ...Nemesis reading his own material? naaaahh

The 2005 disturbances were the worst civil unrest in France for 40 years


you were saying? enough Nemesis; we get it, you hate muslims regardless of sect, religious affiliation etc ..you're a bigot plain and simple and you should be banned or told to stfu
 
"From what our colleagues on the scene told us, the situation is a lot worse than in 2005. A line was passed last night with the appearance of firearms," he told RTL.

So who are we gonna believe? And please **** off with your generalizations. Pointing out that troublemakers are Arabs is not racism. This was the case in 2005, and for some strange, abstract reason, I believe it's the same now. By the way, now that we're trying to silence one another, you're a racist, too. Any critique of Muslims/Arabs and the Stern is ready to defend Al Islam. But Christianity? Oh that's a whole nother story. You are guilty of positive racism: Every time Islam or Arabs are criticized, Christianity needs to be, too. Well, in this case, you can't switch the focus to Christianity, so you try silencing me by calling me a racist. And you fail at it.
 
So who are we gonna believe?

in the same article it says:

The 2005 disturbances were the worst civil unrest in France for 40 years

who are YOU going to believe? well the one that fits your agenda naturally

And please **** off with your generalizations.

why dont you **** off with the generalisations becvause absolutely everything you say is a generalisation


Pointing out that troublemakers are Arabs is not racism.

and you're 100% sure they're all muslims? provide evidence or stfu

This was the case in 2005, and for some strange, abstract reason, I believe it's the same now.


oooooooooh I get it, YOU believe it to be true therefore it MUST be true .....stfu you tool

By the way, now that we're trying to silence one another, you're a racist, too.

glad to see you finally admit you're racist


Any critique of Muslims/Arabs and the Stern is ready to defend Al Islam. But Christianity? Oh that's a whole nother story. You are guilty of positive racism: Every time Islam or Arabs are criticized, Christianity needs to be, too.

I dont give a **** about islam, christians, jews, buddhists or ****ing jehovah's witnesses untill they GIVE me a reason to ..you just hate muslims for the sake of it, and you dont even discriminate between "good" and "bad" muslims, to you they're all the same ... ironic coming from somone who defends jews at every turn


so you try silencing me by calling me a racist. And you fail at it.

no, I'm quite successful at it: I got you to admit you're racist:


By the way, now that we're trying to silence one another, you're a racist, too.


I'm trying to silence you because I'm tired of your alarmist nonsense ..it's like you have a hissy fit every single time someone brown does something you deem to be wrong ..shut up it's annoying already



look, I dont like you, you're an alarmist goon who uses the misery of others to twist it into your agenda, you're disingenuous, a bigot and a fool ..the sooner we get rid of the likes of you (on both sides) the sooner we can come to some sort of peace and reconciliation
 
..you just hate muslims for the sake of it, and you dont even discriminate between "good" and "bad" muslims, to you they're all the same ... ironic coming from somone who defends jews at every turn

Hate them just for the sake of it? False.
Don't discriminate between bad and good ones? False.
Defend Jews at every turn? False, too. Again with the assumptious bullshit.

My threads are no different than your "Christians do X" threads or "poll shows republicans are stupid" threads.
 
Hmm, yeah, what's worse? A bigot or a terror supporter? See, I can do your kind of replies, too.

It's even the same place as the last time, it started under the same pretext, so it's a very safe bet it's the same people who did it last time. Connecting the dots.
 
Hate them just for the sake of it? False.
Don't discriminate between bad and good ones? False.
Defend Jews at every turn? False, too. Again with the assumptious bullshit.

My threads are no different than your "Christians do X" threads or "poll shows republicans are stupid" threads.


not my fault republicans are stupid ..and how is that singling out christianity? are you saying all republicans are christians? not a single jew/muslim/aethist amongst them? ......source please


you're paying lip service unless you can provide proof to counter what I've already brought to the table

oh and I differentiate between christians ..which is why I usually slip in "nutjobs" after "christian" ..you're one step away of simply refering them to "muslims"


Nemesis said:
Hmm, yeah, what's worse? A bigot or a terror supporter? See, I can do your kind of replies, too.

so you're saying you can only be one or the other? you really should be bitchslapped with the ban hammer
 
not my fault republicans are stupid ..and how is that singling out christianity? are you saying all republicans are christians? not a single jew/muslim/aethist amongst them? ......source please

Ok, all republicans are stupid. How is that bullshit different than what you accuse me of - Painting all Muslims with the same brush? Hypocracy at work. I haven't said that Republicans are Christians. Don't know where you get that from.

oh and I differentiate between christians ..which is why I usually slip in "nutjobs" after "christian" ..you're one step away of simply refering them to "muslims"

Usually... See, I "usually" do that, too, but sometimes like now, I omit it because I know that people can differentiate without my guidance. Apparently, some cannot. And still, I believe these are mainly "youths". During the 2005 riots, we didn't find out who the culprits mainly were untill the end. And I doubt we will hear anything of it in this case. But in this case, as I said - Same place, same pretext, same result = Very probable suspicion that it's the same culprits as last time. Common sense.
 
Ok, all republicans are stupid. How is that bullshit different than what you accuse me of - Painting all Muslims with the same brush? Hypocracy at work. I haven't said that Republicans are Christians. Don't know where you get that from.

how am I being hypocritical? I think they're stupid, it's an opinion based on what I see. Republicans are not a race, a creed, a relgion, you dont have to be any of those to belong to their group ..therefore your accusations are baseless: apples to oranges



Usually... See, I "usually" do that, too, but sometimes like now, I omit it because I know that people can differentiate without my guidance. Apparently, some cannot. And still, I believe these are mainly "youths".

yet for some reason you invented an intifada where people chanted "ALLAH'U AKBAR!" ...your motives were very easy to discern as you yourself made no attempt to hide it:


Nemesis said:
Yeah, they call them "youths", but we know what they are: Muslim immigrants.

you single them out for their race/religion; you're a bigot
 
yet for some reason you invented an intifada where people chanted "ALLAH'U AKBAR!"
Not invented. Happened in 2005.

you single them out for their race/religion; you're a bigot

I point it out first of all because for some reason, the media keeps it under wraps as they did during the 2005 riots, and second, because a large portion of these ghettoes are "North African", it's relevant to the story. That I choose to focus on the fact that some of them resort not only to vandalism, but to use Islam as a justification, well, that's my prerogative. And you can assume this is because I'm a racist, but it's not.
 
ok I know what "fils de pute" means ..it's close to spanish: "hijo de puta" ...what's Zahma?
 
Not invented. Happened in 2005.

wrong again ...the intifada is specific to the palestinian uprising of 1985, the riots in 2005 were just that: riots, it wasnt an uprising, it wasnt a rebellion despite your weak protestations to the contrary ..this is not the same ...and anyways I was refering to this latest event ..you called it an intifada, it is NOT by any means an intifada



I point it out first of all because for some reason, the media keeps it under wraps as they did during the 2005 riots,

kinda like how the germans blamed the jews for high inflation circa 1938?

and second, because a large portion of these ghettoes are "North African", it's relevant to the story.

so North African means without a doubt "muslim" ...bigot.

oh and you said "a large portion" ..what's the other portion? are they participating in the riots? how can you be sure they're not? did you take a headcount?

"all those that are muslims raise your hand" *brick hit nemesis in face*

That I choose to focus on the fact that some of them resort not only to vandalism, but to use Islam as a justification, well, that's my prerogative.

once you cross into racism, which you openly admit it's the moderators perogative

And you can assume this is because I'm a racist, but it's not.

explain how you came to the conclusion that the rioters "use Islam as a justification" ...source? evidence? ..it's hearsay fueled by bigotry
 
It would really help if you had a source saying they're Muslims.

I wouldn't be surprised if they were, but jumping to that conclusion is rash.
 
As I said - Such details aren't out, but in the context of 2005, this being the same place, etc, it's a safe bet they're the same people reacting to virtually the same thing that happened last time, because so far, the pictures haven't told another tale. "Oh but the pictures lie" Yeah, they're all taken by evil racists like myself. An interesting thing to note is that during the first riots in 2005, cameramen were actually forbidden to take pictures of it because it would "increase tension". This is where the whole Al Waleed Bin Talal thing comes into play.
 
ok I know what "fils de pute" means ..it's close to spanish: "hijo de puta" ...what's Zahma?

Zahma is arabo-french slang, it's like "yo" and yeah you got the other part right hehe. It's something those guys always say.

Edit: Nemesis I don't know where you got that info from but I was in Paris in 2005, there was plenty of pictures in the newspapers, and lots of footage on tv. Even interviews with rioters, masked of course, but interviews nonetheless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top