Saturday, November 14, 2015
The Rape of Paris
by Tom Kando
On November 13, terrorists murdered one hundred and twenty nine innocent victims in Paris. There were several simultaneous attacks across the city, but the bulk of the deaths occurred at a rock concert. There, many of the victims had first been held hostage. The siege ended and eight attackers died, either as suicides or shot by the police.
Paris. The Charlie Hebdo bloodbath is barely ten-months old, and now this. I am a Parisian. I grew up there. I went to French elementary and secondary schools. I have been back to Paris a hundred times. It is not possible to love a city more than Paris.
Now what? At first, we say: we must DO something. We must stand up to terrorism. We must fight back. Sure.
I don’t know what this means. Being angry is fine with me. I AM angry. After Charlie Hebdo, I deplored the fact that most Europeans were insufficiently outraged (see Charlie Hebdo and Europe’s Inability to Get Angry). This bloodbath will strengthen nativist European forces such as Marine Le Pen’s National Front in France, Viktor Orbán’s Conservative Party in Hungary, Geert Wilders’ Party of Freedom in the Netherlands and others on the Right. We will hear, more loudly than before, that there is a war going on against the West, waged by radical Islam.
Hmmm... While it IS true that radical Islam is a real problem, this formulation is not helpful, because it doesn’t even begin to answer the question: What is to be done?
Another knee-jerk reaction is equally obvious: The West must uplift and “equalize” the multitudes of unemployed, poor, discriminated immigrants and children of immigrants, many of them young men (always the most violence-prone demographic group), many of them Muslims, many of them radicalized, some of them lured by ISIS. These angry people live in squalid projects and shanty towns on the outskirts of Paris, Marseille and other large cities. These people must be incorporated into the economies of France and other Western countries. They must get an education, jobs, non-discriminatory treatment, the whole nine yards. This goes without saying.
As to ISIS, the mullahs, people such as al-Baghdadi and the other Middle Easterners who inspire such bloodbaths: These are middle-aged men who, from their safe havens, send young men and children, including thirteen-year old girls, strapped with bombs as suicide bombers, to kill dozens or hundreds of people at a time, preferably in schools, market places and concert halls, preferably to kill women, babies and other non-combatants. There are no words to express such evil. There is no imaginable appropriate punishment for this.
The time is approaching when I will conclude that ALL religion is a disease. I still hesitate, but...I’ll say this, at least: Fundamentalist religion is definitely a disease. It is currently most virulent in Islam, as Christianity’s worst sins are largely in the past.
Now that I am done emoting, let me look at this more sociologically. Let me provide some “perspective:”
1. Paris is still safer than Sacramento, Boston, or other American cities. France and the rest of Western Europe are still safer than the US:
US murder rate: 5 per 100,000
French murder rate: 1.3
Sacramento murder rate: 6
Boston murder rate: 8
Paris murder rate: 2
Amsterdam murder rate: 4.4
2. Why always Paris? I taught courses on Violence and Terrorism at Cal State for many years. Paris was already a favorite target during the 1980s. However, back then, the violence came from various Marxist revolutionary groups such as Action Directe, the German Red Army Faction, the Italian Red Brigades and assorted other “red this and red that” groups. Apart from the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the terrorists were largely European, funded by the Soviets and other Eastern Europeans.
By no means has Paris been the only target over the years: Rome, Vienna, Amsterdam, Berlin, Moscow (2002, 170 dead) Madrid (2004, 191 dead), London (2005, 52 dead) Mumbai (2006, 209 dead; 2008, 174 dead) have all had their share, and lest we forget, New York still holds the world record - 2001, almost 3,000 dead.
But Paris remains one of the favorite targets. To terrorists, the three most desirable targets are probably Paris, New York and London. They embody the enemy and its culture, Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite, democracy, the West, the global capitalist system. Bombing Beijing or Tokyo would make less sense. New York is a bit far (although it wasn’t too far for Al Qaeda).
Paris is a special place. It attracts EVERYONE - the loons, the artists, the refugees, everyone. It is the unofficial capital of Europe - of the world, some might say. When you terrorize Paris, you terrorize the world. Only London and New York (as Osama Ben Laden cunningly knew) offer a similar return on the terrorist’s investment.
Additionally, France used to “own” half of Africa, and a huge number of immigrants has moved to France from its former colonies since World War Two. When I went to high school in a suburb of Paris, many of my class mates were Algerian. Muslims make up 10% of the French population. The country has several thousand young radicalized Muslims who have joined ISIS. You could call this “the revenge of the former colonies.”
By now, France is fairly mixed. I even have some distant Moroccan relatives (the husband of the granddaughter of my stepfather’s sister, if you can figure out who that is).
But the country has more severe assimilation problems than, say, Germany, Scandinavia or the Netherlands, even though the latter are also admitting millions of Middle Eastern and other Third World immigrants/refugees. Perhaps the anger will soon explode there as well.
In sum, there are reasons why Paris (and France) are among the most active flashpoints in the violent Jihad against the West.
3. Similarities and differences with the US: We have millions of immigrants, too, including the eleven million illegals whom Donald Trump would evict. We have an equally stratified and unfair society, with blacks occupying the lowest rung of the ethnic-economic ladder, and Latino immigrants a close second. But we do NOT have political and radical religious revolutionary warfare by the underclass. Trump is barking up the wrong tree. Our immigrants (legal and illegal, Hispanic and others, including yours truly) are an asset to America, not a threat.
4. The Problem, and Europe’s Future: It’s obvious that there has to be a combination of tough countermeasures AND policies aimed at economic and social uplifting of the third world underclass living in Western Europe.
“Keep them out?” How? Razor wires and mine fields all around Europe? The sort of thing that Hungary, my country of birth, recently started to do in its ugly way? Maybe not this way, but...
Somehow toughening the outer border controls of the Schengen area? Why not.
Weather this through, as Europe weathered through the 1980s terrorist wave? That’s part of it.
War? Where? Against whom? I have no idea what sort of “war” we are talking about. Western armies marching in? Nonsense. However:
ISIS does have to be destroyed. Amazingly, there is no cooperation towards this objective. Just a week earlier, Russia lost two hundred people to the same enemy. If the West managed to work with Stalin to defeat Hitler, why on earth can it not collaborate with Putin, a bully to be sure, but not even in the same league as papa Joe? Here, oddly, I agree with Donald Trump. Even the Iranian government has sent its condolences to France for the Paris massacre. A unified and worldwide front against the worst disease of our time seems like a no-brainer to me, as it did against fascism 75 years ago.
© Tom Kando 2015
leave comment here
16 comments:
The only 'solution' is for the Muslim community to step up to the plate and denounce these atrocious acts with such force, that the extremists will be shed like the putrid, smelly crust on a wound.
What if the Catholic church had never denounced witch hunting? We would still be burning innocent women. Why are we so willing to allow a religion to condone violence? Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte says that ‘Our enemy is ISIS. We are not at war with Islam’. What nonsense! Islam IS what we are at war with, until it reforms itself.
What happened is awful! I am still in shock. I will comment further later today or by early this week.
Gail
Excellent article. excellent insight. Thank you! Linda
Dealing with Islam and some of it’s most extreme exponents Salafism and the Islamic State requires strength; a believe in ones own cultural values and a will to stand up for it. Western society, a democratic community, with all it’s flaws, has a lot to fight for. Individual rights, freedom of speech, women’s rights, centuries of enlightenment, science etc. etc.
Unfortunately, Europe and in a lesser degree the US are not in a position of strength. Europe is weak, military budgets have been slashed and are far below NATO guidelines. Dutch soldiers for example during exercises, because of lack of ammunition, have to say ‘pang pang’ instead of actually firing their gun. Europe is totally unprepared to deal with a serious terrorist threat. The US, politically divided, is going through one of its cycles of isolationism with a president who was elected to get us out of conflict not into one.
About your statement that Paris is still safer than Sacramento, at least one local interviewed in the streets of Paris disagreed. He clearly stated 'Paris is no longer a safe city'.
Looking at the murder rate as one homogeneous statistical entity, does not show the reader a clear picture of the safety of individual cities. To equate random mass murder with individual crimes, gang shootings or maffia murders, does not inform.
I am not familiar with the Sacramento murder rate, but I am familiar with the situations in Boston and Amsterdam.
Boston is very much a safe city with the Marathon bombing the exception. Most of the Boston murders are Dorchester/Roxbury gang related shootings. In Amsterdam, a safe city for now, murders are mostly targeted Dutch mafia related murders.
To correctly equate safety, one has to compare Mumbai, Beirut, Jerusalem, Paris, etc. My guess is that Paris lists currently high on the list of unsafe cities.
Unfortunately, things will get a lot worse before the current political establishment decides to take any meaningful action.
Hey Tom thanks for putting this very nice piece together. I know it hits very close to home for you. What a horrific set of circumstances we are in these days. I hope Hillary Clinton can adjust and promise to do the right things given this new chapter.
Brilliant.
I thank Gail, Linda, Carol Anita and Don for their supportive comments.
To anonymous: You voice the crucial dilemma, and you are right: We (westerners who think of ourselves as progressive and open-minded) invariably BEGIN, after each new bloodbath caused by radical Islam, with the obligatory and politically correct “most Muslims are not terrorists,” “we are not at war with all of Islam,” etc...
Hillary Clinton did just that again last night in the presidential debate. The Europeans do this the most.
But what is also implied by anonymous is that what needs to happen is for Islam to evolve, as most branches of Christianity have. Hopefully this will happen. What other realistic solution is there? There are a billion Muslims in the world, and soon many more. They are not going to disappear. They can’t be nuked into oblivion...
As to Hans: Much food for thought there. Of course, fortitude is required. I can add another anecdote to document the ridiculousness of Dutch military preparedness: The Dutch army just sold its last remaining half dozen tanks.
Of course Western Civilization must be defended vigorously and militarily. Of course Western Civilization is the best that humanity has produced so far.
As to crime statistics and all that: You are right that rates of murder vary from neighborhood to neighborhood within cities. SOME areas in Paris/Amsterdam/Sacramento/Boston are more dangerous than others.
But relying on anecdotes (“one local interview in Paris”) and personal experience is meaningless. Spectacular terrorist attacks create a mistaken perception: the vast majority of murders are committed by armed robbers, house burglars, estranged spouses, etc. “Common crime” probably accounts for ten times more deaths than terrorism does. The majority of murders are between people who know each other - spouses, relatives, friends, neighbors, school mates, colleagues, and in armed robberies. Statistics don’t lie (I included the Amsterdam anomaly in my post because it surprised me. You are right, much of this is in places like the Bijlmermeer). But the fact remains that my chances of being murdered are greater in Sacramento or in Boston than in Paris, and whether I am killed by my neighbor, or at the local AM-PM store or by ISIS makes little difference to me.
Time for France to find a new General Jacques Massu to lead the paras in giving certain parts of Paris the Algiers treatment!
Aside from anything else you could say about this horrific act, consider the cowardice of a terrorist coming into Europe as a refugee, taking advantage of millions of people trying to do the moral thing in the face of a biblical exodus.
To anonymous, about Massu:
I remember him well, and that turbulent period. We left Paris at the beginning of the Algerian war of independence (December 1954).
Massu was tough on the FLN (the Algerian rebels), but he (along with Raoul Salan) were also traitors, as they attempted a coup d'etat.
From our personal perspective in Paris, by far the greatest amount of violence was perpetrated by the "pieds noirs," the Frenchmen born in Algeria, who didn't want to let go of Algeria. Their "plastiqueurs" were blowing up restaurants and subway stations on a regular basis.
I suppose what you are focusing on is Massu's handling of the FLN rebels in Algeria. He was temporarily successful in repressing the rebellion, but couldn't prevent Algerian independence in the end.
Massu broke the back of the FLN in Algiers. They were never able to mount campaigns in the city again; their only success after 1957 was in the mountains. He remains a hero! The lack of French willpower caused the loss of Algeria, not the lack of capability of the army.
This is an interesting conversation.
The "lack of will power" argument, along with the "stab-in-the-back" theory (by an effete home front) has been applied to many defeats: Germany's in World War One, America's in Vietnam, France's in Indochina and her other colonies, even America's departure from Iraq and soon Afghanistan.
The question is always: How worthwhile is it to go on fighting? After the end of World War Two, it was time for the Europeans to leave their colonies. They all did, one way or another - Britain, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Portugal. France actually fought on longer and more stubbornly than most other countries.
In any event, all the European countries that were former colonial powers are way, way better off having gotten rid of their costly colonies. I lived in France during its colonial wars (Indochina and Algeria). It was a miserable country. Thereafter, it prospered. Colonies? Bah, good riddance.
All of these attacks have a thread back to Syria. Currently 12 states of the US are refusing to accept refugees and offer asylum in the U. S. This is unfortunate because these very refugees have been tormented by ISIS ;this is an awful mess . I think the difference between Paris and the US is that our geographic location is much further from the terrorist headquarters which makes the US more insulated from these atrocities; however this problem is huge and there needs to be a joint effort for different countries to globally work together to end these terror attacks. I am still very sad over the loss of life. Everyone that I know has visited Paris at least once. It is so common to sit in a pub or eat in a Paris restaurant or go to a theater event ;this is a wake up call that our world has changed and this reminds me of the 911 attacks.
Gail
I join Gail in her commiserations.
Still, we are nowhere any closer to a solution. Europe is in big trouble. Its problems are not only NOT going to go away; they are going to get worse - demographically, politically, militarily. As with cancer, drastic intervention MAY help, or it may be too late. It is beginning to look like a question of survival, the survival of Europe as we know it. Drastic intervention includes powerful and cunning police, military, and security measures. Also: Europe's wide-open immigration and border policies are not sustainable.
A survivor of the horrific massacre at the Rock ban concert in Paris says this on CNN , "We have to love through our differences, we have to love everybody , we have to Love, Love, Love." He goes on further to say, " I was hiding in a bathroom stall with three other people and the terrorists were right behind the door while I and three others waited for three and a half hours feeling sheer terror . The police swat team burst in and they put a gun to my head . are you that I was one of the hostages and that I and the others hiding in the restroom were innocent and we held our hands up high and the police led us out of the bloody massacre in the theater and I saw all of these dead bodies and blood splattered all over the wall and it was horrible .I am so happy to be alive and I feel guilty that I made it out alive when so many died here at the concert but I have such a deep and profound appreciation for life ." After I heard this survivors story , I instantly valued his message because after going through what he must have been through I am sure that he has a deeper appreciation of what it means to be alive.
Gail
Gail:
A gripping testimonial, by one lucky survivor.
Love? love everybody? love thy enemy? Turn the other cheek? I suppose that's Jesus' precept. Admirable. I'm afraid I am not good enough to be a true Christian. I don't love ISIS.
Post a Comment
Please limit your comment to 300 words at the most!