![]() October 31, 2005Battle of WillsWhenever nefarious characters have heavy influence or control within a given population, they maintain their power by preying off of the weak. If, at some point, the leadership within the terrorized population decides they are fed up with this behavior, they have no choice but to brace themselves for conflict. For four nights now, there have been riots in the suburbs of Paris. Here is the story so far: Police clashed with angry youths in a Paris suburb for the fourth straight night, police sources said on Monday, with accusations over the use of teargas in a mosque set to exacerbate the situation further. In looking for a "root cause" to this mess, here are several reports from different sources: Crime policies behind tensions CNN: Sarkozy, whose law and order policies have been criticized by human rights groups, made his name by cutting crime figures during his first stint as interior minister from 2002 to 2004. BBC: Local people in Clichy have accused Mr Sarkozy of heightening tensions by using inflammatory language. Reuters UK gives us a little further look into the neighborhoods that are the center of these conflicts: Police sources said the situation seemed to have calmed down in Clichy-sous-Bois, a neighbourhood of high-rise public housing projects, but they urged caution. The situation in Paris is quite clear: there are young, angry and organized, mostly-Muslim men that are ruling their neighborhoods through violence and intimidation. These activities were tolerated, as they often are, for long periods of time as this behavior was localized. Sarkozy, a Presidential hopeful in 2007, has seen the opportunity to deal with not just localized crime, but a problem that is a microcosm of a pandemic that has been spreading across France and even Europe as a whole--the problem of large portions of unassimilated, poor Muslim populations maintaining their meager living off of state-funding, but also through crime. Sarkozy has opened Pandora's box, and opinions that his tough on crime policies are partly to blame for the riots is true. But conflict (in this case, violent conflict) is the inevitable result of dealing with ruthless armed gangs who maintain their control by preying on the weak within their sphere of influence. Sarkozy is leading the battle in just one part of the world where radical Islamism needs to be fought. This is no longer just about al-Qaeda or Sunnis or Shiites, this is a world-wide battle that is occurring where the world must demonstrate that it will no longer cow to threats and intimidation by those following an ideology that is being directly and forcefully confronted to live peacefully with its neighbors. Now is not the time to tread lightly, or sensitively. The more we "tolerate" acts of crime, intimidation and terror, the deeper these dubious characters will be able sink their teeth into our free world. Not only do they rely on their subjects' weakness, they need for the rest of the world to roll over, blame itself and continually apologize for problems caused by them. The free-world rose to the occassion in World War II, when they dug in their heels and successfully resisted Fascism and we finished the fight by standing up to communism for the next 50-years. Now, the free-world is being asked yet again to stand-up for itself against those that ultimately seek their demise. Just as the battle for Europe was far from decided after a successful, but bloody battle for the beaches of Normandy, our future in the fight against terror remains uncertain. One thing that is certain, however, is that there will be conflict and it will not go away through avoidance.
Comments
Reading this post brings to mind the criticisms levelled at Rudy Guliani for his get-tough policies on crime. But it was precisely those policies that engineered the astoundingly sharp and long-lasting reversal in New York City's crime rate that continues to this day. Even before his heroic performance on 9/11, most of his critics had been silenced. The fundamental purpose of any government -- or, should I say, any liberal democratic government -- is to provide physical security for all of its people. Law-abiding French Muslims have as much right to this protection as the richest Parisien. Those who oppose Sarkozy's crackdown are guilty of discrimination. The irony is that it is human rights groups that would deny the right to the equal protection of the law to a segment of France's population. Appeasement, in addition to not working, is morally wrong. Posted by: Marc Schulman at October 31, 2005 11:01 AMThese hooligans have a 2-to-1 rubbish bin-to-car ratio. It is clear they will not respond to offers of socialized cheese. From bad to worse. . . shame. Posted by: Dave at Garfield Ridge at November 3, 2005 12:48 PMPost a comment
![]() |
Search
Blogroll
Ace of Spades HQ
AllahPundit Andúnië American Digest Beautiful Atrocities The Belgravia Dispatch The Belmont Club Captain's Quarters the dissident frogman Tim Blair EURSOC from the still InstaPundit LILEKS (James) :: the Bleat little green footballs The Mudville Gazette protein wisdom Right Side of the Rainbow Roger L. Simon A Small Victory Michael J. Totten Transterrestrial Musings USS Clueless Vodkapundit Winds of Change
Archives
November 2007
October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004
Recent Entries
Continous Wonder Ramping Up
It Has Begun Thank You Spray Continuous Wonder Jack Army Back From Iraq Introducing Freddy Update on the New Site Stuff
|