[aldo_14]

Well, they were expressly motivated by the French government's treatment of those of Islamic religious leanings. Since the French have decided to ban most methods of expressing that affilition.

There was an article on it in Foreign Affairs this month (I happen to have a copy for a paper). The French government has really made a mess of handling their immigration issues, and the riot wasn't enough to wake them up; they went and made a bigger hash of it instead.

The French need a freedom of religion clause somewhere, for their own safety.

The riots were instigated by the deaths of 2 immigrant youths who reportedly died hiding  in an electricity station from police (performing ID checks; reportedly it was not unusual for immigrants to be detained for up to 4 hours without any charge for questioning).  That was the expressed motivation for the initial protests that eventually led to the rioting.

However, the general consensus as far as I have seen is that the cause of the riots was long term and historic social inequality for immigrant families living in slum council estates, including perceived police (and state) prejudice, unemployment and discrimination.  There has never been a suggestion (I have seen before) - beyond those who gain from making it, such as right wing commentators - that religion was any causal or motivating factor, and the chief of French Intelligence has stated there was no religious motivation to the riots in Le Monde (unless, of course, you mean discrimination against Muslims - or indeed Africans - in French society).

The French do have a freedom of religion law dating from 1905 that forbids discrimination and seperates church from state; this is the very reason for the famous headress ban.  It is also enshrined in the very first part of the French constitution; "France shall be an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic. It shall ensure the equality of all citizens before the law, without distinction of origin, race or religion. It shall respect all beliefs. It shall be organised on a decentralised basis."

[Colonol Dekker]

When are Europeans going to learn that you don't celebrate riots with riots?  Do holidays the American way--get madly drunk until you forget what the day was all about.  Silly continent.

Be a millwall fan,..... Combine the two

[NGTM-1R]

See, that's not a freedom of religion law; that's merely ensure the state does not acknowledge religion. It doesn't give you freedom to practice.

[aldo_14]

"It shall respect all beliefs"

[Colonol Dekker]

Except scientologists of course 

[aldo_14]

Except scientologists of course 

No-one respects scientologists - it's part of the UN Charter, right below the acceptance of Pat Sharpes mullet as the greatest hairdo of the 20th century.

[Colonol Dekker]

  Gawd i hope that was sarcasm...............

The Sharpsters mullet will one day rise again and take control of the planet, like Dave listers old sandwich....



Anyway, back to the .......ummm    French.........

[aldo_14]

French are jolly decent blokes.  Our allies and whatnot.

[Colonol Dekker]

  Tally ho......

[NGTM-1R]

"It shall respect all beliefs"

Well, then they need to follow their own laws. Seriously though, the French government has made a gigantic mess of things since the riots with their Islamic minority. It is not surprising to me at all there was more rioting, what is surprising is that it wasn't larger than the original.

[aldo_14]

You mean the immigrant minority?

[Bobboau]

no he doesn't.

[aldo_14]

no he doesn't.

Oh, so he doesn't mean the rioters?

[Bobboau]

yes, he means the Muslim rioters.

[aldo_14]

yes, he means the Muslim rioters.

Oh, you mean the black rioters?  Or the poor rioters?  Or the unemployed rioters?

Why use Muslim as a cachet?

[Bobboau]

because it's the most common string, and it's easier than typing poor north African and middle eastern immigrants.

[vyper]

Q.E.D Aldo's point.

[NGTM-1R]

Oh, so he doesn't mean the rioters?

Yes and no.

The French government chooses to label the riots as Islamic regardless, and hence has directed their ill-concieved measures against their Islamic minority.

Though arguably that is the same thing as their black minority. It is not the same as their poor, however.

[aldo_14]

Oh, so he doesn't mean the rioters?

Yes and no.

The French government chooses to label the riots as Islamic regardless, and hence has directed their ill-concieved measures against their Islamic minority.

Though arguably that is the same thing as their black minority. It is not the same as their poor, however.

Find me a link to that labelling, please; I've never ever seen a statement to that effect from anyone official within the French government.  I do know the French Imams issued a fatwah (decree) against the riots, though.

The rioters were, however, pretty much (if not completely) unemployed immigrant youths exclusively from the poorest areas of Paris, making 'poor riots' far more accurate as it describes both a common demographic factor and, crucially, an actual root cause.

Incidentally - what measures?

[vyper]

France + Muslims + Airports: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6108574.stm

I can see why it happened though. Young religious types, in a secular society, would feel very isolated and thus vulnerable to being radicalised.