The French never take a direct action about anything in life, they just muddle through. However, their failure to do the obvious is pushing muddling to the extreme.

Now you know what happens when the left is in charge of anti-terrorism efforts. To think Gore might have been elected president.

Paris can burn. I couldn't give one solitary shit. Can't stand those pompous French fucks.

If the government called out the military or instituted a curfew, it would mean they were not being tolerant of those poor rioters. And as some of our more Left-leaning contributors to this blog like to point out, tolerance is the most important virtue.

The British are feeling the pinch in relation to recent riots in France and have raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved'.

Soon though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross".

Londoners have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies all but ran out.

Terrorists have been re-categorised from "Tiresome" to a "Bloody Nuisance". The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was during the great fire of 1666.

Also, the French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide". The only two higher levels in France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate". The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively paralysing the country's military capability.

It's not only the Britlish and French that are on a heightened level of alert. Italy has increased the alert level from "shout loudly and excitedly" to "elaborate military posturing". Two more levels remain, "ineffective combat operations" and "change sides".

The Germans also increased their alert state from "disdainful arrogance" to "dress in uniform and sing marching songs". They have two higher levels: "invade a neighbour" and "lose".

Chirac's all over it. He has called a security meeting!

The French riots are incredibly interesting: How organized are they? And how will they be resolved?

Could riots like this - organized to some unknown extent, and aided by cellphones/internet - occur in the U.S.(see Watts-1965; L.A. 1992ish)?

I think the answer revolves around
1) how well the U.S. inculcates the idea of free will in its citizens,
2) how well the U.S. economy generates opportunity for its citizens
3) whether or not the Second Amendment remains in force
4) the perceived stability and power of the state.

The U.S. has seen brief riots be extended by criminals in pursuit of looting opportunity; but you have to go back to the Civil War, or maybe the Watts riot, to see a violent, extended riot in pursuit of economic opportunity and power.

Assuming Watts was about economic opportunity, social conditions have changed, and we won't see its equal in the future. There's too much economic opportunity in this country, and there's too many people, in every community, who can see it. Another economic opportunity riot will not happen.

Its possible we could (pace Canada and Europe) slowly allow our laws to become Sharia-friendlier, and then be rioted by people who do not believe in their own free will to resist our infidel-dominated societal influences. This is happening to us internationally. In an effort to stave off such a thing domestically, I vigorously support conservative ideology. In this, failure is not an option, and WE SHALL PREVAIL. So I'm saying this type riot, also, will not happen in the U.S. as I know it.

However, lets pretend a French type riot did try to break out in the U.S: Could and would it spread? The answer is no. And the reason is the Second Amendment. When the Brady Bill people begin bowling for Columbine, remind them of the Paris riots. In America, the Second Amendment and the cussedly independent spirit of American citizens would stop such a riot dead in its tracks.

Finally, if we pretend such a riot could even happen in America, and we pretend gun control had castrated the opportunity for individual citizens to stop it, then: Could/would the American government be able to stop the riot? If President Bush or President Giuliani were in office: hell yes. If President Carter were in office: hell no. If a President Clinton were in office: hell maybe. Who knows?

Does the learned Annika actually believe that France is capable of clamping down on anything? Surely you jest! That would require the French to label certain behavior "right" and "wrong" or "indesirable."

And France is much too enlightened for such mean spirited "cowboy" rhetoric! *sigh*

One reason why the Army has not been called up is that over 20% of the army is Muslim. Are they worried about a mutiny in the ranks?

Speaking of muslims, has anybody in the MSM had the balls to call the rioters what they are? Or are they still trying to get away with calling the rioters "Africans." How fucking gutless and lame is the MSM.

Speaking of muslims, has anybody in the MSM had the balls to call the rioters what they are? Or are they still trying to get away with calling the rioters "Africans." How fucking gutless and lame is the MSM?

Yevgeni:

Excellent

The French have lost the will to survive as a nation. You read in history books about the destruction of nations and civilizations but you don't expect to actually live through it. Mark my words, France, Spain, and the Low countries will all be Islamic republics, or war torn battlefields like Yougoslavia, within twenty years.
Wish I was wrong.

Yevgeny, you remind me of the old joke, What is Heaven and what is Hell.
Heaven is a place where all of the chefs are French, all of the police are British, all of the mechainics are German, all of the lovers are Italian, and everything is run by the Swiss.
Hell is a place where all of the chefs are British, all of the police are German, all of the mechainics are French, all of the lovers are Swiss, and everything is run by the Italians.

As we swirl down the vortex of the end of Western Civilization, at least it's interesting.