Searching for terrorist arms caches in France
The interior ministry said 168 searches had taken place across the country in the wake of the Paris terror attacks…
Searches in Lille, Strasbourg, Lyon, Grenoble, Marseille and Toulouse resulted in the rocket launcher, flak jackets, 15 hand guns and eight other “weapons of war” being seized, according to Le Figaro.
Mr Cazaneuve said that a total of 31 weapons had been seized so far, with 104 suspected jihadists under house arrest and 23 people taken into custody overnight…
Mr Cazeneuve said: “This is just the beginning… The response of the Republic will be total… The terrorists will never destroy the Republic, because it is the Republic that will destroy them.”…
The raids were carried out under a series of powers that have been put in place by French President Francois Hollande since the massacre which left 129 dead.
Interesting on many levels. One is that it appears to have at least some elements of the Israeli approach I mentioned in the post about the Spengler article. If it continues, it means the French do have the will to do something, and although it doesn’t seem comprehensive enough, it’s still quite early in the game.
But of course, the suspension of the usual checks on government intrusion into people’s homes, under the rubric of “emergency powers,” can be dangerous in and of itself. Its proper use rests on having a government that has the people’s interests in mind and won’t abuse the privilege, particularly to thwart and frame its domestic opponents. That, unfortunately, is often not the case. And I doubt it would be the case if something similar happened here, especially while Obama is president.
France is undergoing a true crisis, and these raids are probably long overdue. But crisis yields opportunity—for tyranny, if a government and its leaders are so inclined.
[ADDENDUM: These are encouraging words, as well. The French Minister announces they will start “the dissolution of mosques where hate is preached.” That sounds as though it refers to the most radical of mosques. This is not against free speech or freedom of religion; it’s always been understood that if speech or a religion are actively involved in murders and the attempted overthrow of the state, what’s involved is no longer mere speech and it’s no longer religious freedom.]
The French invented the guillotine and it might be a good idea to bring it back for Islamic terrorists.
A necessary response, given the absurd laxity that has been French policy for years. I can’t help but think of all the negative judgment toward Israel all these years. A different story altogether when it’s your country and your people.
Ask russia, but they arent sharing their caches (that are confirmed to be in many countries and protected with “Lightning”).
here is the funny thing. as a leftist what borders are for!!!
they will give every answer except the actual old fashioned reason we seem to forgot.
borders are so you can stop an enemy before they enter your country and attack your people – everything else is ancillary and secondary and may hide the reason if the reason isnt expressed in a long time – we may . even think the reason is economic not conflict based. but if it wasnt conflict based then there wouldnt be any, you dont have a border with another neighborhood or shopping district, but you do as to other countries.
too big for one big happy… size is a quality unto itself
“But of course, the suspension of the usual checks on government intrusion into people’s homes, under the rubric of “emergency powers,” can be dangerous in and of itself. Its proper use rests on having a government that has the people’s interests in mind and won’t abuse the privilege, particularly to thwart and frame its domestic opponents. That, unfortunately, is often not the case. ”
Thus far the French have been more sensitive in dealing with Jihadists than there were with the OAS.
Outlawing the “preaching of hatred” is indeed an attack on freedom of speech, and I expect it to work out as well as it did in Weimar Germany. My personal experience is that it quickly devolves to outlawing any speech the outlawers hate, where the most intent outlawers are the amongst the worst people. In this case, it will quickly become a crackdown on any criticism of Islam. We’ve already seen this in France — c.f. the case of Philippe Karsenty.
Instead, there should be a crackdown on giving material aid to criminal/terrorist organizations.
Also, in the absence of hate-speech laws, hopefully more and more people will report on what is going on in individual mosques, and what is preached there. Let’s bring transparency to what these people are all about.
A weapon of war could be described as an angry young Muslim living on welfare with no job who hates croissants and Brigette Bardot.
How many of them do you think they could find if they looked really hard?
LTEC:
The point at which the “preaching of hatred” needs to be checked is when there is an organization advocating murder and sending people to be trained in it, obtaining weapons, and working to overthrow the nation and establish a theocracy.
If that can’t be checked, then all free nations are doomed. Mere hate speech, however, is allowed in this country, and should be allowed. Europe’s laws against hate speech are dangerous. We’ll see in which direction France goes, and in which direction we go.
You just know a light bulb went off in Obama’s head when he heard the French were searching homes for weapons. “Hmmmm, emergency powers; What a great idea!!!”
For what it’s worth the organized crime gangs of drug dealers and car thieves in the largely North and West African banliues have been armed with weapons of war for decades. Certainly going back to the Balkan conflicts.
They steal cars, and all over those banliues they alter the VIN numbers and ship them to criminals in the Balkans, who ship them AKs and rocket launchers in return. You may have heard of Montenegrin gun runner the Germans apprehended smuggling small arms, grenades, and TNT on his way to Paris, days before the attacks.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/619575/Paris-terror-attack-Muslim-man-weapons-supply-jihadis
Naturally a majority of those North and West Africans are Muslims. But that’s almost incidental as while they may be nominal Muslims they are really devout criminals. Terrorist groups have the same relationship with them as they do with drug cartels in South America, Central America, and Mexico. It’s a commercial marriage of convenience.
An interesting thing happens sometimes, though. Fervent Muslims who set out on the path of Jihad learn to like the earthly pleasures the drug trade brings; money, girls, cars, houses. While some criminals decide to get right with Allah and join the jihad. This happens in both hemispheres.
Just saying, a lot of those weapons caches belong to ordinary criminals. It’s good the French are collecting them, but one thing to keep in mind is that we can talk about gun laws all we want. But a lot of people never bothered to comply,and gun laws won’t keep people from smuggling new guns in. Europe is awash in illegal guns. Not even that rank amateur on the Paris train a few months back had any trouble buying a couple.
French law, ironically, has never been big on individual rights.
as i pointed out borders are about keeping as many enemies out as possible. its what made the Trojan horse necessary, its what made the battering ram a instant success, catapults, hadrians wall, the great wall of china, ad all examples of having to keep people from other places out of your own space, and not just let in anyone or too many (which lowers standards or processing costs too much, as well as allowing more fakes).
society is a series of locked zones whether we like it or not. the bank door is locked with a safe in side that. the border is supposed to be locked the way the gates existed in old walls. even natural zones of mountains or deserts or oceans created walls of sorts. (some so high speciation occurred)
as you move in any area you have most being locked away from your reach. ranches have the gates at the end of the road, locks on the doors. big business buildings are divided up by rental space that is further divided up by various use and none have keys to everything.
to think that one can divide it up and make it homogeneous is to not pay attention to the weather chart where the earth is so big, air has high and low pressure areas and never homogenizes.
the cell phone and electronics small world concept is just that, a concept, and seems true, but its not really. just ask anyone who has been to a few countries and the world is so damn big they dont homogenize.
heck. you have china town, little Italy, and tons of places nyc is divided into, certainly not homogeneous.
their idea of selecting one of these arbitrary divisions which are some of the most serious walls of divisions, and that the two will melt into each other like crayons on a radiator, is not reality. besides, even the crayons colors wont mix unless something stirs that pot, and unlike crayons, stirring a pot of mixed up people is more like wacking a hornets nest than mixing colored wax
@Steve 57
“Naturally a majority of those North and West Africans are Muslims. But that’s almost incidental as while they may be nominal Muslims they are really devout criminals.”
That’s a Westerner’s take. Even being a nominal Muslim provides you with a lot of contacts, help, refuge, extended family, “tribe”, etc. no matter where in the world you travel. Muslims don’t call each other brother and sister for nothing. This is something atomized Westerner’s don’t seem to get. A Muslim may outwardly appear “Westernized”, but know that they can always fall back on and count on being part of the Ummah in a split second. Instant protection. It’s a huge part of their religion.
I consider Islam to be fundamentally and irredeemably flawed. I would like the French to ban it altogether. I would like the US to do the same.
That may be illiberal of me, but the Constitution isn’t a suicide pact.
yeah… they never ever let any spies in, they ask them, are you a spy, and if they say yes, they dont let them in. so they never let any get by…
it’s hard to judge what, if any, changes there are on checks and balances. Their justice system and rules of evidence are truly alien to ours. I have no frames of reference when I try to follow how it works… its all what what? The judge asked for a warrant? What?
Those nasty mean Frenchies, seizing military weapons and putting the jihadis under “house arrest.”
And here in the good old USA some media outlets have prefaced “terrorist” with “suspected.”
Sheesh.
To atone for the colonial past, and their conduct in Algeria specifically, the French allowed any francophone in their former colonies to set up house in France. We know a woman who came to France in 1960 as a young girl with her family. She now lives in La Rochelle and is irreligious and thoroughly identifies with French culture.
The trouble in France is that the children of those who arrived much later never assimilated and identify as muslims exclusively and have no connection to French culture. The French brought this upon themselves. It will require years to smoke out these barbarians if the French have the will to be thorough and the patience to see it through. I doubt it.
Some people thought that if they left the ME alone, that they wouldn’t have to fight guerilla wars in cities.
Heh, guess again. France was notable for their resistance to OIF, UN or no UN, due to various profit motivating schemes and other dumb luck ideas about how terrorism runs.
Irene said:
@Steve 57
“…That’s a Westerner’s take. Even being a nominal Muslim provides you with a lot of contacts, help, refuge, extended family, “tribe”, etc. no matter where in the world you travel. Muslims don’t call each other brother and sister for nothing. This is something atomized Westerner’s don’t seem to get…”
Uhh, no, it’s a comment on the culture of the North and West African banliues whether Muslim or not. I said the majority of the population of these banliues are Muslim, but not an overwhelming majority. Probably 40% are not. And it doesn’t make a great deal of difference. The defining features of the culture are the criminality and anti-Western extremism. They are a culture apart, and hate “official” French society for its racism, colonialism,imperialism, what have you. They are not the criminals selling drugs or running prostitution rings or stealing or torching cars but noble warriors and its the cops and the officialdom that are corrupt and no-good. It’s not true, but it’s part of the psychological ghetto they build for themselves to go with neighborhood ghetto the French built for them.
And of course the “official society can really care less about them as long as they only foul their own nests. Police rarely go into the zones sensible, or sensitive zones known collectively as La Zone. If the police do go in, it’s in force to bust heads like they’re doing now.
Most of the rest of the time the police leave the feral youth alone to rule the roost and the older generation who emigrated to France to work back in the 60s live in fear of their children and grandchildren like a scene out of A Clockwork Orange.
Yes, Muslim banliues have a few extra frills but not enough to make a huge difference. It gives them a few extra reasons to indulge in their Jew Hatred and lash out, but all of them can find plenty of rationales for that anyway. And it isn’t as if Islam has cornered the market on tribalism. That’s what gangland is, a collection of warring tribes. The ummah is just another gang, Which is why Islam does so well in prison. And it doesn’t matter where; in France, in the UK, in the US, whereever.
I could have sworn I typed .
@Steve 57
I don’t know what your point is. That Muslim criminals in the no-go zones around Paris wouldn’t do business with jihadists because they’re too busy drinking champagne and getting laid? Seriously, I was just pointing out that Muslims everywhere can count on support wherever they go – even if they appear to Westerners to be “nominally” Muslim.
The French Minister announces they will start “the dissolution of mosques where hate is preached.”
Good! I have long advocated going after the radical imams. They are the source of a lot of the radicalism. They and their families don’t do “martyrdom operations” – those are for the young canon fodder Muslims. Eliminating the Qutbist, Wahhabist, Salafist imams would create a chance for a “cafeteria” approach to the Quran to take place.
Our leaders need to be vocal about our intentions. We want to live in peace and tolerance with all peoples and nations. We bear ill will toward no one. But when we are being threatened and attacked by people who are Muslims, we have to defend ourselves. If the Muslim ummah cannot live in peace and tolerance with other people, then they must either change their beliefs or be ready to be unconditionally defeated by the non-Muslim world. That is the choice that they have. It is what is in front of us. Our leadership needs to speak out loud and clear on this issue.
Irene Says:
November 16th, 2015 at 10:05 pm
“@Steve 57
I don’t know what your point is. That Muslim criminals in the no-go zones around Paris wouldn’t do business with jihadists because they’re too busy drinking champagne and getting laid? Seriously, I was just pointing out that Muslims everywhere can count on support wherever they go — even if they appear to Westerners to be ‘nominally’ Muslim.”
No, my point is that they’ll do business with the jihadists but not not out some sense of pan-Muslim unity. They’ll do business with them for the same reason the criminal gangs in the non-Muslim banliues will do business with them, and the same reason the Mexican drug cartels will do business with them. Because they’re criminals, and they’re in it for the cash.
If ISIS wasn’t rolling in cash from the million dollars a day they’ve been making selling oil from the safe havens Barack Obama let them have, and also from the millions of dollars they make from ransoming hostages, they’d find a lot less support in La Zone and elsewhere in Europe.
Many thanks, this website is extremely beneficial.|