France General

[IndeedPete 1036]

There's absolutely nothing ISIS fighter would envy you for. He is simply not aware of.

 

That might actually be true. :) And it also happens to be one reason why free knowledge projects like wikipedia are so God damn important for the whole world.

[St. Jimmy 272]

sorry, but i still read that they slit his throat. CNN says: "Hamel had his throat slit in the attack, said Agnes Thibault Lecuivre, spokeswoman for Paris' anti-terrorism prosecutor."http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/26/europe/france-normandy-church-hostage/index.htmlIf you have better sources please post

Seems like the sources in the news did say only slit, so the Finnish article maker likely doesn't know what Finnish word 'mestaus' (decapitation) actually means...

[dontknowhow 33]

Well, they still can kill people.

They frighten people because they can kill whenever they want, wherever they want and with any weapon.

Yes, and also because of the way they kill. Cruel, barbaric, and obviously with a lot of press. Minimum effort, maximum result.

Let's not forget that the beheadings in Syria are also scaring a lot of people.

 

So yeah, I win everyday by just enjoying my life and the freedoms I have.

but maybe an approach that would prevent them from killing might help too :)

 

They have no material body (no, their 50k-250k troops do not count).

yes they do, because that's what to many people is a symbol. Wipe them out, show to the world what losers they really are, and suddenly all this enthusiasm for the jihad wanes, as apparently it already is.

Does it solve the problem? No, of course not. You remove ISIS and someone else will come, like ISIS came after Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda after Abu Abbas and Abu Nidal, and Abu Abbas and Abu Nidal after Black September. The truth is that there is a whole cultural war to fight. And I already said a few times that it would help enormously if we could cut their cash flow, just getting rid of our dependency on oil and gas. Let these billionaires supporting ISIS understand what it means to actually work.

But we can't expect to really solve the problem if we keep going like this.

 

Seems like the sources in the news did say only slit, so the Finnish article maker likely doesn't know what Finnish word 'mestaus' (decapitation) actually means...

:)

[Wiki 1558]

Maybe we can't win, but we can definitely lose.

 

Look at it:

abdeslam, who was involved in Paris and Brussels strikes is now in isolation in jail - watched 24/7.

He has a personnal sport room for God sake!

 

and his attorney has made a claim about surveillance as a "privacy violation".

 

This is so fucked up.

 

Against people with no law, no morality, etc... we can't win but we will definitely lose if we respect and grant them the same rights as any other human being.

 

This is just like "ok, you are a terrorist, you killed people, etc... but now, you will have your personnal cell and sport room, you are allowed not to say anything about the rest of your network and nothing wwill be attempted to your person, your rights or whatsoever."

[IndeedPete 1036]

 

but maybe an approach that would prevent them from killing might help too :)

 

 

Splitting hair, aren't we? Of course we cannot sit and wait, and let them kill more people. I was just remarking that they can shove their religious bullshit up their asses. I won't change my general life style because of some knife-wielding psychos.

 

Maybe we can't win, but we can definitely lose.

 

Look at it:

abdeslam, who was involved in Paris and Brussels strikes is now in isolation in jail - watched 24/7.

He has a personnal sport room for God sake!

 

and his attorney has made a claim about surveillance as a "privacy violation".

 

This is so fucked up.

 

Against people with no law, no morality, etc... we can't win but we will definitely lose if we respect and grant them the same rights as any other human being.

 

This is just like "ok, you are a terrorist, you killed people, etc... but now, you will have your personnal cell and sport room, you are allowed not to say anything about the rest of your network and nothing wwill be attempted to your person, your rights or whatsoever."

 

You do realise that this little fact, that even the biggest piece of shit is still treated like a human being, is pretty much the only thing that separates you from them? Do you think there would be less hate and attacks if you, say, tortured that man and put his head on a spike in front of the Eiffel Tower?

[Wiki 1558]

You do realise that this little fact, that even the biggest piece of shit is still treated like a human being, is pretty much the only thing that separates you from them? Do you think there would be less hate and attacks if you, say, tortured that man and put his head on a spike in front of the Eiffel Tower?

 

No, that's ain't the point.

 

But to use this example, maybe not treating him as a prince.

A cell, 2 meals a day and that's it. It would be sufficient enough, don't you think?

A private sport room for fuck sake!

 

Plus, there are many examples in history that going hard does work.

 

Vandenberghe and his black tigers, Massu during the battle of Alger, the Operation Phoenix in Nâm, etc...

 

I don't ask for brainless actions, but useful ones.

 

Nowadays, you can't use an evidence if it's been obtained in "illegal" ways.

Come on! WTF??!

 

"He's guilty! Here is the proof!

-Ok, how did you get it?

-Well... phone spying...

-Were you allowed to do so?

-No, but...

-Illegal. The guy can walk"

Seriously?

 

 

There is a difference between what is fair, legal and necessary.

Now, we only rely on what's legal.

Time to move to what is fair, and if needed, to what is necessary.

 

To use the abdeslam case again:

the guy participated to Paris. He's been arrested in Brussels BEFORE the strike there and did knew something about it.

 

"Sir, this guy has some rights. We can't deny them. If he doesn't want to talk, well, he can keep his mouth shut".

Few days later ---> strikes in Brussels.

And the civilized world let that happen by allowing him to claim his rights.

 

That is the truth.

[IndeedPete 1036]

Where did you get that with the "private sports room"? Could it be that he is just allowed to do sports alone in an otherwise shared room because of his isolation? Which is by the way one of the cruelest things we can do in our justice system. Keeping people in isolation can have some pretty devastating effects on the human psyche. Not that I have any pity with that guy, just saying. If we wasn't crazy before, he will be soon considering that he'll spend about 2/3 of his life behind bars. What an idiot...

 

Anyway, this has nothing to do with going hard. If we abandon values like human rights, especially the bloody French have fought for in the past centuries, we'll go down to the same level of these backwards extremists. And then they have actually affected our societies which is pretty much what they're after. How would harsher punishments do anything anyway? A person whose mind is so derailed that it is capable of ignoring its own will to stay alive, which is the most powerful drive of any being, just to murder for some religion is not impressed by any punishment, irrelevant how hard it is.

 

I'm not entirely sure how the Belgian police could have known that they caught someone who plans to engage in terroristic activities. And should they torture every suspect they arrest just in case? That would do more harm to society than any terrorist with an AK could.

 

And who decides what is necessary and fair? And was there even illegal evidence against any of the attackers? (I actually don't know.) I'm also not particularly happy with our authorities' work (like why people with rejected asylum applications are still allowed in the country) but I don't want to go and throw out all principles they're built on right away.

[Wiki 1558]

Yes, I totally understand your point of view and agree on some points.

However, when the rights and the law are not only useless but also tie our hands, then it needs change.

Concerning the sport room, it is true. Someone told it and it pissed the counselor off as a "case privacy violation".

Fair, legal and necessary?

In WWI, what was legal was taking jews to the police.

What was fair was blowing up the railroads.

Nowadays:

Legal: capture a citizen terrorist abroad for him to stand trial

Fair: not sending a missile on his location to avoid collateral damages

Necessary: strike the house with a missile to prevent him from exploding in a market or a school or whatever.

Legal: arrest someone who wanted to go for jihad - prevented twice from doing so, and release him a few months after.

Necessary : prison to the end of his lfe.

[IndeedPete 1036]

The thing is, that it would already help if the existing law was actually applied. Some of the guys from Cologne, that twat from Nice, the axe-jockey - they all had, AFAIK, no explicite right to stay in the country. I know it's hard but we have this legal possibility of deportation for a reason. It was just not executed. Boggles my mind.

 

Sounds a bit expensive to create sports rooms for individual prisoners. Anyway, this guy will (hopefully) never see the outside world again. That's enough for me.

[Wiki 1558]

This guy will be released some day, I can assure you so.

Locking up someone to the end of his life is "an outrage to the human rights"

[nodunit 397]

How is the population handling their decision I wonder, I'm genuinely curious if the people are fine with them being treated in the same way as their own authorities would them (finally) or if they are outraged by it.

Human rights are great and all that but if anything it makes these people laugh at us. I'm normally fine with innocent until proven guilty but it becomes difficult to defend in a case where someone was seen by many comitting a heinous crime much less a massacre, and even worse when they already have a record. Of course there are dark sides to this such as witch hunts, falsified evidence to get persons killed and so on.

But I'm not gonna lie, the idea that a criminal is being fed, bathed, clothed, given shelter, and a free workout regiment while being in prison seems a lot less than just when law abiding citizens going without because they can't afford it

It doesn't really seem all that fair that you can get the same sentence for comitting a small crime than you can for multiple murders...heck just look at charles manson, after all he did and the guy still gets to be given most of the basic needs much less live.

Fact is we're seeing crimes disspratortionate to what we normally deal, and perhaps in light of that such cases should be moved to the front of the que to get them done and over with, because lets not forget a prison meeting is also what helped formed ISIS.

[Wiki 1558]

"You can be a terrorist and kill dozens of people, the worst you will suffer is a jail time during which we will take care of everything for your well-being."

What a fucking joke

[ProfTournesol 956]

 

Plus, there are many examples in history that going hard does work.

 

Vandenberghe and his black tigers, Massu during the battle of Alger, the Operation Phoenix in Nâm, etc...

 

I don't ask for brainless actions, but useful ones.

Precisely, extreme brutality, such as what French army did in Alger's battle, can help you to win a battle but will make you lose the war in the end. We militarly won the Algerian war but lost it on the political level.

This time, it happens on our soil. We must be very aware of what IS wants. The best success for them would be to create a civil war on our soil, because that's how they grow. The USA put the mess in the whole middle East and stupidly dismissed the Iraki army in 2003, causing the birth of IS. We put the mess in Lybia, then IS and Aqmi found a safe haven in the whole area.

That said, the governement has failed to understand how dangerous the situation is, now the IS is on the verge of being defeated in Syria and Irak, and when surviving French IS fighters will come back home...

[dontknowhow 33]

Splitting hair, aren't we?

not so much, no. There is a very wide range of opinions about this problem, and I just thought it was appropriate to point it out.

 

However, when the rights and the law are not only useless but also tie our hands, then it needs change.

so change it, don't go into illegality.

[Wiki 1558]

Yeah, that's what i say.

However, if the people who make laws don't want / don't have the balls to do it, then...

Watch "Eye in the sky", you see what I mean.

[dontknowhow 33]

Yeah, that's what i say.

However, if the people who make laws don't want / don't have the balls to do it, then...

I know that the reality of democracy is not always aligned with the theory, but I think the possibility that many citizens are against changing it should be considered.

Cross the boundary with illegality and you don't know where you stop. Maybe one day someone will die beaten up by the police. Will that be collateral damage?

 

Watch "Eye in the sky", you see what I mean.

I'll do. Seems to be a good movie

 

How relevant is this news?

 

http://www.thelocal.fr/20160729/frances-muslims-urged-to-attend-mass-after-priest-killing

 

not much, judging from the echo on the press. But it's interesting.

[Wiki 1558]

Yeah, so that they can make recon for the next time...

[Rydygier 1286]

https://www.rt.com/news/354430-sainte-rita-church-demolition-paris/

 

Can someone explain me - really wasn't any wiser way to solve this? 

[ProfTournesol 956]

https://www.rt.com/news/354430-sainte-rita-church-demolition-paris/

 

Can someone explain me - really wasn't any wiser way to solve this? 

 

Easy. The catholic association ("Association of catholic and apostolic chapels") which was the owner of the Church has decided to sell it. Then it was squated by a handful of people (a mixture of far rightists, catholic traditionalists and animals lovers, cause this used to be the only one chapel that accepted animals during the mass). The justice urged the police to evacuate the chapel, and it was done. Of course, the timing was far from being the best, after what happened this month.

[Rydygier 1286]

The catholic association ("Association of catholic and apostolic chapels") which was the owner of the Church has decided to sell it. Then it was squated by a handful of people (a mixture of far rightists, catholic traditionalists and animals lovers, cause this used to be the only one chapel that accepted animals during the mass).

 

 

 

Roughly, as I understood the problem. 

 

Of course, the timing was far from being the best, after what happened this month.

 

 

Indeed, also - why exactly during a holy mass? Also - wasn't there any solution to find them, say another place? Etc. I mean - law application is one thing. Doing it wisely - is another. Law is for the people after all. Thus my question. Photos are pretty dramatic, making very bad impression. 

 

And:

 

The church has been mined and the demolition is ready to begin, but the protesters - some of them local councilors - refuse to leave.

 

 

Is that true? Building was mined despite people in the blast radius/inside? 

[ProfTournesol 956]

Indeed, also - why exactly during a holy mass? Also - wasn't there any solution to find them, say another place? Etc. I mean - law application is one thing. Doing it wisely - is another. Law is for the people after all. Thus my question. Photos are pretty dramatic, making very bad impression. 

 

And:

 

 

Is that true? Building was mined despite people in the blast radius/inside? 

 

The chapel wasn't recognized by Rome (it was Gallican Catholic rite), and was privately held, contrary to other Churches in France. Anyway the guy looking like a priest on the picture wasn't the priest of the Church (who was a black man), nobody seems to know who he is...

 

About the Chapel being mined, i never heard of that, it's very unlikely.

[Rydygier 1286]

OK, thanks for the info. Still, if it wasn't Catholic Church, how tu understand this:

 

“For the moment, no one has offered me anything else. We hold marriages, baptisms, all sorts of ceremonies regularly. We can’t leave just like this if no one offers us anything. Or we’ll celebrate services in the street,†Paris’s archbishop Monseigneur Dominique Philippe

 

 

Is Dominique Philippe the catholic archbishop recognized by Rome? He says "we", "me"...

 

EDIT: nevermind, I googled, and seem he is "Gallican Catholic".

[ProfTournesol 956]

He is arshibishop of the Gallican rite, which is independant from Rome. So yes, as those people aren't connected to the Catholic Roman Church, they have to find privately held places, which aren't easy to find i suppose. But that's their business.

[oxmox 73]

Oh well......

 

 

France's premier warns of new attacks, 15,000 people on police radar (Reuters, Sept. 11)

 

French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said on Sunday there would be new attacks in France but

proposals by former president Nicolas Sarkozy to boost security was not the right way to deal with threats.

 

The French capital was put on high alert last week when French officials said they dismantled a "terrorist cell"

that planned to attack a Paris railway station under the direction of Islamic State.

 

"This week at least two attacks were foiled," Manuel Valls said in an interview with Europe 1 radio and Itele television on Sunday.

Valls said there were 15,000 people on the radar of police and intelligent services who were in the process of being radicalized.

 

"There will be new attacks, there will be innocent victims... this is also my role to tell this truth to the French people," Valls said.

 

more....

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-security-idUSKCN11H0E1

[vilas 456]

police also stopped someone with suspected truck in front of Notre Damme cathedral, police said about truck full of explosive gas - yet was not said if it was bomb attempt