FRENCH MILITARY AT PARIS DURING THE ATTACK
The attacks occurred at various places in Paris and the Seine-Saint-Denis.
At the Stade de France, from which people were going out after a football match, people were shot with assault weapons and two kamikazes exploded.
In the Bataclan, the Eagles of Death Metal were giving a live for roughly 1.500 spectators. 70 of them at least have been shot dead with automatic rifles. The three terrorists responsible for this have been assaulted and shot 00:45.
Some of these terrorists have also shot some bars, restaurants, terrasses and places along the way.
At this time, the poll counts 120, unknown regarding the wounded and 5 terrorists down, the three form the live and the kamikazes. But the night isn’t over.
The President have consulted his ministers and decided to close the borders and to cancel his trip to the G20 in order to stay in the country. The leaders from every politic parties (from far left to far right) have stated that they all united, the current political campaigns toward the regional presidencies are paused for the moment.
Regarding the closed borders, it means that inner and outer transports are down from now. No trains and flights, even the regional ones. More information tomorrow.
Regarding the situation in Paris, it’s calm. No attacks have been reported since the alert.
Regarding what will happen now, we can only wait to see how the government will react.
We still don’t know who did these attacks and who planned them. It can be Daesh, since we’re at war with them, or for accepting the Syrians, it can also be people who hope that the French will hold the Syrian responsible for that (because they did it or because Daesh was mad about it), we don’t know yet and are still waiting for anyone one to endorse it.
I know, various governments around the world will make statements about that case. Which will and how will give use more information. If it’s actually an early Christmas gift from Daesh, given the fact that our (France and the other participants, mostly Westerners) engagement in Middle-East has been called a Crusade very recently, we look forward to see Saudi Arabia’s reaction.
The President is quite often mocked for his placid allure, especially in contrast with the very nervous former one, but when some issues need fast answers, he’s known to respond right and swift, as we noticed in January, and otherwise regarding social or economical issues.
The Historical View on France
France is historically connected to the region daesch operates in. Its history of colonization means that many people in areas where daesch is active speak French, and think of France when they think of ‘the west’. France is mentally ‘closer’.
This historical connection also means there are lots of people from those regions living in (around, actually – we’ll come to that) Paris.
France has a problem with racists. There are lots of them, and they occupy seats of power. A tradition of free speech combined with tacit support for their ideas means that people in power often say things that sit right on the edge of hate speech.
France likes to hold the illusion that ‘all French are French’, and thus doesn’t collect data on minorities, so has no idea how many there are, or what their situation is, officially. Unofficially, for many of them, it’s bad. Really bad.
Public housing over the decades has led to a serious ghettoisation of minorities in locations far from the city center, and far from jobs. Transit design has magnified these problems.
Youths in these areas, then, have no future – unemployment is staggering. And the public discourse is often racist. Policing in these areas is also racist. The riots a decade ago were an example of how close to the boiling point this all is.
Daesch has been effectively recruiting these youths for some time. This is well known. Estimates I saw today suggest 500 trained guerrilas are now living in France (though the accuracy of this is obviously suspect).
So take a radical organization that thrives on public attacks, add youths who don’t see a future for themselves, add a historical connection and racist politicians that makes targeting easier, add a soupçon of ease of transport of arms (as we’ve seen with the refugee crisis, people can drive a truck full of anything into Europe without too much difficulty) and you end up with these horrible attacks.
French View on Muslims.
The country’s radical secularism clashes with many Muslims’ desire to publicly display their faith With news that the chief suspects in the massacre on Wednesday at the offices of the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdoare French citizens, a new mystery emerges: how could the land of liberty, equality and fraternity have produced men hell-bent on destroying all three? While the attack may evoke comparisons to earlier tragedies in New York, London, or Madrid, France’s relationship with its Muslim citizens is particular — and particularly fraught. What sets France on a particular collision course with Islamic practices is the country’s radical brand of secularism — and this ideology’s impact on French Muslim life.
With more than 5 million Muslims, France may have Western Europe’s largest Muslim community, but its relationship with Islam has been tenser than, say, Britain’s or Germany’s. An older generation of French Muslims has been alienated by memories of the Algerian War in the 1950s, when local groups battled for independence from more than a century of French rule, with its heavy-handed disdain for local customs. Their children and grandchildren frequently feel excluded from mainstream society because of their Arabic names or the color of their skin.
Such feelings may be shared by other European Muslims, but French Muslims face not just social hurdles, but an officially-enshrined hostility to public displays of faith. Having fought its revolution, in part, to keep priests from meddling in state affairs, France has a passion for keeping church and state separate. “Secularism,” states france.fr, France’s official information website, “is a French invention.” Where the French cherish the neutrality of the public realm, free from any religious symbolism, mainstream Muslim culture embraces public declarations of religiosity through the veil or the call to prayer. France’s cherished codes of secularism clash with the public nature of the practice of Islam, a faith that in Muslim-majority countries is stamped on public life, from politics to laws to the wearing of beards and veils, or breaking for prayers in the middle of the work-day.
France prefers its faiths kept private: its 1905 law on the separation of church and state was the legal basis for the much-contested 2004 ban on veils, crosses and yarmulkes in schools. The veil debate pitted Muslim women’s desire for self-expression against the core French values of equality and universalism, noted Princeton political scientist Joan Wallach Scott in her book The Politics of the Veil. Supporters of the ban, wrote Scott, believed veils chipped away at the French ideal of “the oneness, the sameness of all individuals,” under the Tricoleur.
For many Muslims, it’s the official insistence on oneness and sameness that rankles. In 2008, a French court denied a Moroccan woman French citizenship on the grounds that her veil and her submissiveness to her husband were “assimilation defects.” Though the New York Times reported “almost unequivocal support for the ruling across the political spectrum,” one Muslim leader told the paper he worried the decision set a precedent for arbitrary decisions of what constitues a radical Muslim lifestyle. In 2010, the French Senate banned public wearing of face-coverings, including the Muslim face-veil, the niqab. And in 2013, the government launched what it called a Charter for Secularity in School, a set of guidelines on 15 key points of secularism to be posted in classrooms as an attempt to keep religion out of school. The then-government education minister, Vincent Peillon, insisted it was an attempt “to get everyone together,” but it had the opposite effect, with Muslim leaders claiming it stigmatized their community.