Did France deserve what it happens? Is this just the beginning?

[danieldemarko.livejournal.com]

After watching this movie produced by BBC and Shaista Aziz "A nation divided? A Charlie Hebdo aftermath", the first thing that came into my mind, was that France is not what you know from the social media and movies. Unfortunately not. France is a country strongly divided into one biggest french speaking, born in France and looking french group and another french speaking, born in France and looking completely different from what society must know. Here I would like to clarify something that one of the main problem to me is the understanding of the words "strong nationalism and chauvinism" while you have EU and globalization. It is like living in 18st centuries. As you can see on the movie, the problem with the nation is rooted back in the beginning of 20st century, when France was colonizer or even further more when France was colonial empire. As we know from the history Senegal, Morocco, Madagascar, Mauritius, Réunion and the Seychelles ( probably this is one of your dream place to go), Egypt, French Tunisia, Ivory Coast, French Sudan and many, many others countries. Do you know that the official secondary language in those countries is french? Who made this language official? Everyone knows why we need colonies, so I think it is useless to explain in my article.

Sorry, for my too long introduction but let we focus again on the movie of Shaista Aziz, whose by the way is born in UK with Pakistan origin. Years passed, some of the people from the foreign countries moved to France (most of them for financial reasons and we quite well know what was left in the countries, when France “free” ) in hope for better life. Theirs children are first generation frenchmen. The thing that astonish me most is that how many frenchmen are hypocriticals and how strongs are the national feelings of chauvinism in the capital of "libération". Do you find this disturbing? I find it very frightening, because France is one of the leaders in the world that teach the rest of it to "political and society freedom". She teaches us on moral!

Imagine for a second that you’re black, muslim and ect… 2nd generation immigrant in France, how long do you think you can live in such hostile social environment? Your family? Your kids? Year? Two? Ten years? It does not matter, really. The thing that matter is that someone of those immigrants someday will be exposed to radical Islamism in blank desperation and he could be the next suicide bombers, because the french society wants to banish him. From where? To go where? They are still not equal, even if you change your full name, your religion, clothes, behavior in order to have a minimal chance to succeed. Once a foreigner is always a foreigner, nevertheless you’re highly educated, well-motivated and ready to contribute to the prosperity of this country. I hope you can recall Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons about Muhammad Prophet? I do not mind of them, but I mind that Charlie Hebdo did not make the same laugh when 130 peoples were killed. Is France obliged to take care of those societies that are french language speaking because they ruin their countries? If this is true, how long shall it last?
Let we see the other point of view. Plenty of Muslims are coming to live in France? Why? First some of them have relations here, second France is very social country and that is well-known in whole Europe. Here in France we see conflict of religious cultures. To be honest with you, I think that the prosperity of the countries is related to the religion you blindly follow. What I know from Quran is that if you live ascetic lifestyle, you’ll be more closed to Muhammad Prophet. The second and most disturbing passage is killing of disbelievers. This includes me. The Quran must be revised in order to keep people safe, doesn’t matter where are you from and what religion you believe. I can understand what is to feel with people who are dressed all in black walking around like ninja. This is not normal in the 21st century. It is scaring. Probably you are asking yourself, why it is scaring. Could you recall one terrorist attack made by Christian suicide bomber in the last decades? I really couldn’t find any information. That’s why is scaring, because the normal dressing people are traumatized from suicide attacks.

Why most of the countries in which have economic drawbacks and less freedoms for the society are Muslims? Is that a coincidence? I do not think so. I’m almost convinced that it is related to the religion and ideology they profess. The same situation we have in France. The religion is the biggest enemy of the integration. Do you know globally the Muslim people are less educated from the rest people of the world? Is it to blame the religion? I think, so because Muslim clergy has been primarily trying to 'save the religion' in its own limited way for the last few centuries.

If you go in a foreign country for better life and prosperity, it is your obligation to become member of this new society, of course if it allows you and if it accepts without intrusion your culture and religion. If you do not agree with me, try to go without hijab in Saudi Arabia. Tolerance does not mean tolerating intolerance. But if you keep strictly to society rules and you are threat still as a second class person, this means that this society is sick and need to be cured with proper laws. We have seen such behavior in France, which can accept the homosexuals to adopt children (Which is very awful) but they can accept well-educated foreign person.

What is coming next?

I think it will come even harder for those people to be integrated not even in France but in whole Europe. Everything is so fake, even the our religion. Religion should unite people, not to divide them into first and second class. I hope we do not see any new more terrorist attacks not only in Europe, but in whole world. The change start with you, but it doesn’t start until you do. We need to help all Muslim world to kick out those radicalism together, otherwise we are doomed.

Comments

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

I hear ya crystal clear. Those other guys 'look scary' to ya.

Everyone knows why we need colonies, so I think it is useless to explain in my article.

Oh why, do tell. I'm sure this would be a fascinating story to hear.

[airiefairie.livejournal.com]

As has already been argued here recently, terrorism cannot be defeated and removed unless the core reasons for radicalisation are addressed in a meaningful way. Otherwise we would only be dealing with the symptoms of a much deeper problem.

Just a minor nitpick. I do not recall The Sudan every being a French colony. But like I said, it is a minor matter.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Technically, parts of it were French for 3 years. Before the Fashoda Incident (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fashoda_Incident) happened, that is.

[airiefairie.livejournal.com]

Fair enough. The minor point still stays. =)

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

The Quran must be revised in order to keep people safe

This reminds me of a relatively recent move by Gen. Sisi (sic?) in Egypt who summoned the religious leaders of the Islamic world, and lectured them about the necessity of modernizing Islam.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

A military junta dictator lectures clerics about reforming themselves. The irony here is staggering.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

We have seen such behavior in France, which can accept the homosexuals to adopt children (Which is very awful)

You know, the question is at the tip of my tongue... fingers... but on second thoughts, I wouldn't even begin to go there.

Could you recall one terrorist attack made by Christian suicide bomber in the last decades? I really couldn’t find any information.

Like you said in the neighboring post, Google is your friend (http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/10-worst-terror-attacks-extreme-christians-and-far-right-white-men).

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Oh, Christians using their beliefs as a pretext for slaughtering other people? That's un-possible!

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

Has never happened throughout history. Not ever.

[oportet.livejournal.com]

That's ten of the worst?

One through nine (Up until McVeigh, who wasn't a Christian, but other than that being the entire point, not a big deal) - the body count is 11 - and from those, seems like 4 were influenced by a prominent christian figure (using the word prominent loosely).

Christians can be hateful, annoying, and violent - no one is disputing that - but it's hard to compare the two at this point.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

An erroneous statement was made that needed correcting. If you're willing to shift the goalposts and start comparing body-counts, be my guest. But that's already a different conversation.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

You can't seriously absolve the Christian religion of its own atrocities, no matter if they've been less murderous lately (as opposed to being bloodier earlier in history). It's a matter of principle. A religion either is fruitful ground for justifying oppression and violence - or it isn't. And if both history and current observation is any guide, neither of the two major religions is immune to that.

[nairiporter.livejournal.com]

I will just reiterate what I said yesterday. Any attempt to find a religious and a military solution to a social problem is doomed to fail.

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

which can accept the homosexuals to adopt children (Which is very awful)

Hey, there's one thing you and the Islamist radicals are of the same opinion on.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry, but your linked video is encoded and won't open.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Hm, upon a couple of refresh attempts, it seems to be working okay now.

[danieldemarko.livejournal.com]

Sorry for the video, I do know what was the problem. As I'm reading the comments, I wonder if someone already has seen it and knows the plot? Or it doesn't matter, "I must be first."

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

I did start watching it, and from what I saw, it feels like this documentary is not at all impartial, portraying Muslims as victims. It became clear from the first minute of the piece that Shaista Aziz has an axe to grind. The non-Muslims that she interviews are almost exclusively from the right or ultra-right political sector. How can this give an accurate picture of the debate in modern France? Of the people she does interview, she doesn't even make an attempt to take a balanced position, but instead spends her time jabbing her fingers at, and speaking over, her interviewees like some kind of female Muslim version of Sean Hannity. Why did she not interview any well-integrated French Muslims of which there are millions? All in all, quite a one-sided piece that doesn't even attempt to pretend to be balanced.

Is that the best you've got?

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

At first the program started in a promising way. But then it descended into the same old PC stuff that you could typically expect from the BBC. Even the subtitles were altered to satisfy the new PC standards (fundamentalists instead of Islamists, etc). And of course, the Muslims were presented as 100% victims. There was absolutely no introspection, no questioning of one's own behavior. For example, the presenter went into a government building with her headscarf on, which is explicitly prohibited by French law; imagine what would happen if someone reciprocated in a Muslim country.

What this journalist fails to acknowledge is that it takes two to tango. As much as anti-Muslim prejudice is a fact, it's also true that there would never be any progress as long as Muslims refuse to step out of their 'Us vs Them' mentality. If they want respect and understanding, it's their call to prove that they are fit to face a free and open society. It's not like they haven't been provided with plenty of opportunity. In a nutshell, a disappointing piece of pseudo-journalism.

(frozen) (no subject)

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

I have to admit, I'm impressed with the level that Google Translate has reached these days.

(frozen) (no subject)

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

I'm sure they could fix the "the homosexuals" bug easily but I'm glad they haven't. It's like a signature.

(frozen) (no subject)

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

FWIW, this is better than a wall of Cyrillic popping up on my feed.

And, if the was really translated with Google, that is pretty friggin impressive.

(frozen) (no subject)

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

Mocking people for their language skills is unacceptable. Chances are that you know zilch of their language, so it's advisable that you all back off.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

Fair point above. I apologize for my previous comment.

[dreamville-bg.livejournal.com]

The post title couldn't help but bring allusions to the Stockholm syndrom in my mind. Frankly, watching (at least the first part of) the video didn't help much in that regard, either.

Perhaps

[danieldemarko.livejournal.com]

you need to watch the second part. Why I have the feelings that you even don't want to see other point of view. It’s been pointed out that racial intolerance often leads to religious intolerance and this can often lead to death

RE: Perhaps

[dreamville-bg.livejournal.com]

What about sexual intolerance? Or any kind of intolerance.

"Why I have the feelings that you even don't want to see other point of view."

I don't know, you tell me. It was you who said same-sex couples adopting children is, and I quote, "very awful".

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

I honestly tried to watch as much as I could, but all the spin just became way too unbearable at some point, so I had to stop.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

which can accept the homosexuals to adopt children (Which is very awful)

No it isn't. Gay people make great parents.