France, incl. terrorism & counter-terrorism (catch all)

[omarali50]

Re Clint Watts article. He says
The success of the Tsarnaev brothers and now the Kouachi brothers demonstrates that such a spectacular attack may not be needed to seem spectacular to the media. Both in Boston and now Paris, smaller scale, more conventional attacks informed by Inspire thinking have achieved at low cost what al Qaeda has failed to do in almost a decade. How many al Qaeda, Islamic State, or independent plots will now follow the Tsarnaev-Kouachi model, and what will the implications be for law enforcement?

I was thinking "what would i say if i put on my optimistic hat and ignore ALL misgivings". Just as an experiment, here it is:

I think the already installed Jihadist and conspiracy memes in Muslim population in Europe make some more attacks inevitable, but if there is a firm response and if important Muslim states become fully committed to stopping this (based on carrots, but mostly sticks, human nature being what it is) then the peak will pass relatively quickly. Support within the wider Western Muslim community is falling, not rising (and will fall with increasing rapidity if current trends hold). Muslims are not from outer space. They are human beings responding to received wisdom and learning from experience. Some communities have such a mass of Islamists (in some cases, encouraged and supported by host nation policies in the past; England I am looking at you) that it will take a while to change things, but the majority is not willing to risk life, limb and job prospects for the sake of the caliphate. If Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Arabs no longer pay for Jihadism (and their official policy is already shifting, private individuals will follow in due time) and if Pakistan no longer offers sanctuary, where will the networks be based? Somalia, Yemen, IS, Libya, Eastern Afghanistan, all these are not connected to the global grid like Pakistan or the Gulf states are. Turkey will be a mess for a while (almost certainly their Jihad experience has not peaked yet), but it is still a strong state and will eventually have to crack down.
The longer term looks hopeful.
Optimistic hat firmly in place
Big question while writing this optimistic paragraph: I have no clue how badly ghettoised the Muslim communities in continental Europe actually are. I dont think England is as bad as sometimes painted. But I have no clue about the continent. Suppose they have no prospects and are just going to burn till gone? (I hope not).

[omarali50]

What is it about the modern liberal elite that makes it susceptible to these memes? (“the West is responsible for these killings” or “the cartoonists were racist rightwing fascists who got what they deserved”, “people who are defending free speech are Whitesplaining and dont get the true awful condition of Western civilization”)
Could it be something stuctural that will reassert itself after the first shock of the Hebdo episode has passed?
And another tangential point: I think we should distinguish between two kinds of PC-leftists. Those who are ignorant or foolish or blinded by political correctness (Fisk?) and those who are deliberately cherry-picking or exaggerating or even lying in order to advance the cause of world revolution (“all is fair in love and war”).
I am reproducing a description of these two groups I wrote on another friend’s blog post (http://leftfootforward.org/2015/01/w...paris-attacks/), if I am completely on the wrong track, set me right!

1. A small percentage of the “I am not Charlie Hebdo” crowd still believe they are part of some vanguard revolutionary army, fighting (mostly clandestinely, and shadowed therefore by the secret police of the empire) to overthrow the world capitalist system as part of a planet-wide resistance movement led by the Soviet Union and the comintern (or, even better, by the fourth international or the fifth or an even purer and cleaner sixth). I guess Tariq Ali would fall into this group. In his own mind he is like Victor Lazlo, slipping in and out of outposts of the empire with the Gestapo one step behind him. Therefore in his case (and that of others living out a similar movie-based fantasy) one does not have to posit ignorance. Calculation is more likely; the world revolution must use this event (and EVERY event) to further the revolutionary cause and if that requires making up stories and nasty insinuations about dead cartoonists (and linking them to the actually right-wing Jylland Posten and implying that they would insult Mohammed, but never Moses, as Tariq slimily did on “Democracy Now”) is par for the course.

2. A much larger group (Fisk among them) is simply partaking in the ancient pleasure of feeling simultaneously superior and guilty. Superior by implying that “we” (the West) are the only people capable of DOING things, while childlike simple people (aka “the oppressed”, which list conveniently includes Hafez Assad and even Mao) react helplessly and chaotically to our schemes and conquests. Guilty at the crimes committed in “our name”. Then EVEN MORE SUPERIOR in the feeling that we few, we happy few, are able to see through this charade and pass our wisdom on to the toiling brain-damaged masses who look up to us as moral and intellectual giants.

Something like that.

Any takers who can fix these thoughts or flesh them out?

[AdamG]

19,000 French civilian websites are under attack by hackers, according to France's head of cyberdefense. The scope of attacks is unprecedented, Rear Admiral Arnaud Coustillire said at a press conference Thursday.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/15/tech...ked/index.html

[davidbfpo]

A long report 'How did the Paris terrorists get hold of their weapons', with the sub-title:

Said and Cherif Kouachi and Amedy Coulibaly had amassed a €25,000 arsenal, including Kalashnikovs, rocket launchers, grenades and tear gas cannisters. How did they get hold of their weapons, and where did they come from?

Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...r-weapons.html

[davidbfpo]

omarali50 asked a few days ago for some responses, so here goes. I cite him in part, specifically on two aspects:

Some communities have such a mass of Islamists (in some cases, encouraged and supported by host nation policies in the past; England I am looking at you) that it will take a while to change things, but the majority is not willing to risk life, limb and job prospects for the sake of the caliphate.

The number of Islamists is far from a 'mass' in England. For varied reasons, including the Islamists welcoming most media coverage; in public their numbers are often quite small and even in private rarely in large numbers. I exclude some annual conferences that critics say are non-violent extremists, which usually happen in London's East End.

From my own extended interaction in one English city, with a significant Muslim faith community (around 20%), the vast majority have always rejected the Islamist message and know whatever their problems the city offers a far better hoem for them and their families than elsewhere. This has manifested itself with visiting Islamists facing direct action when setting up stalls etc - "You are not welcome here". One well known Muslim is known to have had a radical period, but is widely held to have stopped inner-city, communal rioting a few years ago.

Yes there are Islamists, many of them well known locally and often best avoided. Their access to mosques for example is very, very limited and generally they are excluded from youth events for example. Whether their numbers have expanded is a moot point. One observer noted now three years ago attitudes to the violent jihad changed first after 9/11, then 7/7.

As for the responsibility of the nation-state and government in your words 'encouraged and supported' that is partly true. The 'Londonistan' claims notably, over a "blind eye" to preaching and more. I have heard a senior civil servant claim this came about because of low-level policy decisions, not government policy - which is to say the least 'economical with the truth'.

There is also the far wider debate over multi-culturalism, political correctness and other phrases - whether they gave the Islamists a "free run".

Big question while writing this optimistic paragraph: I have no clue how badly ghettoised the Muslim communities in continental Europe actually are. I dont think England is as bad as sometimes painted.

The Muslim communities in England are that communities. Some share their faith, which is visible at a number of mosques. Long established communities like the Yemeni and the (old) Somali have settled in coastal cities, with a level of integration. Some communities have a large minority that are professionals, very few of them remain where the majority live in old industrial towns and the inner cities.

In such places it is easy to label the areas as ghettoes, as the are the majority community, both visibly on the street and in private. Schools are the best indicator and as the 'Trojan Horse' allegations found a small number of schools in Birmingham had a 95% plus pupils of the Muslim faith.

Labour and social mobility can be very limited. Some of this is due to employment, the economy and family / individual choice to remain at home with the familiar.

None of these places are 'no go' areas. Research has found repeatedly those places and their residents want good policing. Yes sometimes policing needs to be more sensitive when it does something new, e.g. Project Champion.

[AdamG]

Derka Derka Brace for Impact

Separately, a Western intelligence source told CNN national correspondent Deborah Feyerick that the threat appears to involve as many as 20 sleeper cells of between 120 and 180 people ready to strike in France, Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/01/16/wo...ism-questions/

[omarali50]

I just put together a post about blasphemy, blasphemy laws, Pakistan and Charlie Hebdo that gives a lot of background. Since it is a long post, I am reproducing an excerpt and the last section here, you can see the rest to get the context..and the hyperlinks (which did not transfer with cut and paste but explain a lot stuff):

In short, killing blasphemers is considered a highly admirable deed by a very large number of people in Pakistan (and probably in several other Islamicate nations). While it is indeed true that misuse of the law has become common after General Zia’s time (an intended consequence, as one aim of such laws is to harass and browbeat all potential opposition), the law has deeper roots and liberals who believe that it is possible to make a distinction between true blasphemy and misuse of the law, may find that this line is not easy to draw. The second, and perhaps more potent reason the law will not be repealed is because the law was consciously meant to promote the Islamist project that the deep state (or a powerful section of the deep state) continues to desire in Pakistan. The blasphemy law is a ready-made weapon against all secular opposition to the military-mullah alliance (though some sections of the military now seem to have abandoned that alliance, hence the qualification “section of the deep state”). Secular parties are suspected of being soft on India and are considered a danger to the Kashmir Jihad and other projects dear to the heart of the deep state. At the same time, Islamist parties provide ideological support and manpower for those beloved causes. In this way, the officers of the deep state, even when they are not personally religious, recognize the need for an alliance with religious parties and against secular political forces (Musharraf was a good example). They may have been forced into an uneasy (temporary?) compromise with secular parties by circumstances beyond their control (aka America) but with American withdrawal coming soon, the deep state may not wish to alienate its mullah constituency too much. They will be needed again once the Yankees are gone. Hence too, no repeal at this time.

...Longer term, the outcome in Western countries is likely to be more blasphemy, not less (things will be more confused in the world's largest democracy). And it will not all be some principled defense of free speech. In terms of abstract principle, the French (and many other European countries) are not without their own hypocrisies. Many European countries have laws against "hate speech" , holocaust denial and even blasphemy that are a mockery of free speech (and that do not really promote the peace and harmony they are supposed to be promoting; see a must read article by Sam Schulman on this issue) They frequently do not apply these laws, or fail to convict when they do apply them (and punishments are very very mild), so the actual situation on the ground is not as bad as it is in many Islamicate or Marxicate countries, but it is certainly not ideal. The United States is, in terms of abstract principles, probably the best country in the world for freedom of expression. As in all human endeavors, there is some distance between the ideal and the practice even in these United States, but legal restrictions on freedom of expression are lower in the US than in any country I can think of (past or present). Thank Allah for the first amendment.
But while discussions of abstract principle have their place, they can also distract from far more obvious and simpler points. In this case, here is the situation: there are people of many religions in Europe, in Japan, in China, in the Americas (North AND South) and in all these religions (except Islam) it is now the norm to argue about the foundational myths and to make fun of them. Some people take them literally (in ALL religions), many people deeply respect them, but some find them totally unbelievable and others just make jokes about them. In this atmosphere, you have a Muslim population that is asking for very special treatment for their particular myths. They are saying (in effect) that not only will WE live under rules XYZ, we want EVERYONE to live under rules XYZ. But they (and their intellectually more sophisticated defenders in the Western liberal elite) also insist they are not different in principle from anyone else. They also have ongoing and historic disputes with many groups (including, for example, right wing anti-immigrant politicians, Zionists, Jews in general, Christian religious nutjobs, Serbs, etc etc). In this setting, how likely is it that everyone in Western societies will accept MUSLIM rules that even some Muslims find unbearably oppressive? ...I think it is not very likely.

btw, Charlie Hebdo itself has come out of this tragedy with flying colors. The accusation that they are some kind of racist right wing publication was a canard in any case, and their current issue proves it. You can read more about it here.

Anyway, here are my predictions:
1. More blasphemy in the West. Things will go back and forth, but the overall trend is that Islamicate taboos on satirizing Islam will gradually fall, as will taboos on discussing early Islamic history any differently from the histories of other religions or other ideologies. There will be more attacks, more Islamophobia (both real as well as imagined-SOAS-type Islamophobia) and more unpleasantness all around, but the overall trend will be towards more criticism and more satire and ever fewer taboos.
2. In the Islamicate core, blasphemy will remain a huge big deal and many more people may yet share the fate of Raif Badawi (or worse), but the internet will ensure that the discussions that will become common in the West will slowly make their way into the Islamicate core as well. But they will invite a backlash and in places (like Pakistan) things will get worse before they get better.

3. PostMarxist thinkers will split further, with some joining the critics of Islamicate taboos and other defending them in the cause of fighting Islamophobia. Many of them will continue to insist (not always without justification) that the "real issues" are economic or political, not religious, and that Islamophobia is real and the people on Fox News really do have more power than the Islamists still living in Western Muslim communities, but the circle within which religion is ALWAYS "not the real issue" will shrink, not expand. This is not of much interest to many people (since Post-Marxists don't actually run the world, in the "West" or the "East"), but is always of interest to some of us because of the friends and family we hang out with. It will not be a happy few years in this circle as things in the Islamicate core get worse, Islamophobia (the actual cases) gets worse and neither Zionists nor Palestinians get to win cleanly. I feel a bit sad about this.
4. "Reform Islam" (consciously or unconsciously modeled on Reform Judaism) as promoted by people like Reza Aslan or Karen Armstrong may eventually become a real thing, with some sort of coherent theological framework and it's own network of mosques and religous teachers, but we are nowhere close to it being a reality already. The notion that there is already some kind of "moderate Islam" that lies hidden under a recent Wahabi overlay and can be recovered by promoting Sufiism and the poetry of Maulana Rumi is highly exaggerated. Blasphemy and apostasy, for example, are capital crimes in ALL major sects of Islam and a few superficial books from Reza Aslan or Armstrong are not enough to change that. On the other hand, where there is damand, someone will eventually provide supply. These books are not completely useless. In the years to come, other, more subtle, more knowledgeable and more sophisticated thinkers will no doubt create such Islams (plural) in the Western world and in China. But not so easily in the Islamicate core. Things there will get worse before they get better. Dr Ali Minai has an excellent piece about some of the work that will have to be done.

[Firn]

It may be trivial, but 'Je suis Charlie' seems an especially fitting response as the name Charles comes from the Germanic root for 'free man'. I think the response by the French public was grand and a much stronger showing of European and Western ideals then some of the political responses. In some cases it seemed to me that the desire to show action to the public was greater then cool reasoning on behalf of the people.

[Bill Moore]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...news/22062179/

Paris mayor may sue Fox News over no-go-zones report

Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo told CNN Tuesday that she may sue Fox News because the network "insulted" the city with its coverage of "no-go zones" that are supposedly only for Muslim residents.

Such zones don't exist and Fox News has repeatedly apologized for the errors.

For those who are fortunate enough not to be tortured by U.S. entertainment media mislabeled as news, Fox News is one of our news programs notorious for its inaccurate reporting to push a political agenda. It is good to see them held accountable, but it isn't the only clownish news station.

The inaccurate reporting of the 4th estate isn't a minor issue, these reports shape public opinion, which in turn shapes political decisions. Recent incidents in the U.S. concerning police shootings of blacks has resulted in inaccurate news reporting. CNN reported excessively on one of these incidents (Ferguson) by speculating, creating perceptions that were proven to be false. This resulted in officers being judged by misinformed public opinion before the legal process could actually sort out the facts. Sad state of affairs, certainly not new, but one would think the public would hold the media more accountable when the mistakes clearly are not accidental.

[davidbfpo]

A useful contribution via WoTR by Lorenzo Vidrino, a European SME, which will be copied to the Paris attacks thread too: 'Wrong assumptions, integration, responsibility and counterterrorism in France':http://warontherocks.com/2015/01/wro.../?singlepage=1

This passage needs some explanation or sources, with my emphasis:

On the other side, the rhetoric (particularly in some quarters of the U.S. debate) about the French suburbs (banlieues) often populated by large minority communities) is largely exaggerated. It is undeniable that areas like Les Minguettes in Venissieux (Lyon) or Clichy sous Bois (outside of Paris) are not exactly St. Tropez or central Paris. But they are not the lawless and squalid “no-go” zones they are often made out to be. In fact, based on crime rates, health care, education, and public transportation, the banlieues are actually significantly better off than neglected cities and communities in the United States.

[SWJ Blog]

Urban Siege in Paris: A Spectrum of Armed Assault

Entry Excerpt:



--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

[davidbfpo]

A five man Army patrol in Nice attacked:

Two soldiers on patrol near a Jewish community centre in Nice were wounded in a knife attack on Tuesday as France maintains heightened security measures in the wake of the Paris terror attacks last month. The assailant, named as Moussa, was arrested but two people who may have been with him were believed to have fled, a police union official said.

The attacker was carrying two knives. He was arrested thanks to the intervention of two tram workers who happened to be passing, and another man....

Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...e-in-Nice.html

Considering France has a large number of police officers, including considerable numbers who are para-military (CRS & Gendarmerie), I was surprised to see:

More than 10,000 soldiers have since been deployed around the country to protect sensitive locations, including shopping areas, synagogues, mosques, community centres, airports and railway stations.

[davidbfpo]

A typically optimstic report, from the banlieu Trappes south-west of Paris:http://www.economist.com/news/europe...tions-and-some

It ends with a personal story which illustrates nothing is predictable:

Back in Trappes, Bachir Hajjoubi prepares to collect his children from school. The son of a Moroccan labourer, he has an administrative job in a glass-engraving works in Mesnil-le-Roi, an hour away by train, and coaches boys in football. “I love France,” he says. But he worries about youngsters who “become radicalised through rejection”. Was Mr Valls right to speak of apartheid? His words were “a bit strong, but also a bit true”. The paradox lies in the solution that Mr Hajjoubi has found for his own sons. He took them out of the local state primary and put them into a private Catholic school—where, with a big share of Muslim pupils, ethnic and religious diversity thrives.

[davidbfpo]

The NY Review of Books has a long article on the French state education system post the Charlie Hebdo murders, disregard the provocative title:http://www.nybooks.com/articles/arch...rance-on-fire/

Why on SWC? As the citation notes dissent in schools with Muslim majorities was not what the rest of France thought:

What genuinely shocked the public, and the political and intellectual classes that claim to speak for it, was the news that a noticeable number of students in what are euphemistically called here les quartiers (meaning poor and heavily Muslim neighborhoods) refused to recognize the moment of silence President Hollande had called for. And not only that. Some told their teachers that the victims got what they deserved because no one should be allowed to mock the Prophet; others celebrated the killers on social media, and circulated rumors that the entire crisis was manufactured by the government and/or Zionist agents.
The extent of these incidents is impossible to measure with precision. But newspapers were full of interviews with teachers in the quartiers who reported trouble and admitted their unpreparedness for the resistance and their anxiety about addressing it. The prudent education minister Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, who was born in Morocco, has said that there have been at least two hundred such incidents.

Nicely put state response:

France has ten thousand more soldiers patrolling the streets, she said, but it has a million teachers at its disposal.There are few other countries where public officials would have thought it necessary to introduce an education program as an antiterrorist measure. But the modern French have always treated education as the projection screen for their anxieties and uncertainties.

[omarali50]

Excellent.
Looks like someone did a great job. But Texans and Marines are going to be insufferable for the next few days

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34023361

[davidbfpo]

Well after all the initial reporting - it was not US Marines.

A USAF airman (injured so not in photos), an Oregon National Guardsman, a civilian American friend and a long-term British resident in France.

See:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34028261 and http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...in-gunman.html

[davidbfpo]

Three Americans and a Briton have been awarded France’s highest honour – the Légion d’honneur – for their roles in stopping a suspected terrorist attack on a train.

Link:http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...n-french-train

Yes, they got a local award from the Mayor of Arras, so the second fastest medals and certainly for such a medal as the Légion d’honneur.

[Firn]

Well there is no doubt at all that they saved many lives thanks to their quick thinking, personal bravery and decisive action. Honour where honour is due, and joy as well

Every story is unique it came to a very happy ending partly due the incompetence of the wanna-be-murderer but why did those men grap their only very slim chance to stop him in such magnificient manner? There are some interesting aspects:

1. Three of them were "childhood friends who had all attended California’s Freedom Christian School and often played military games together growing up."

2. Two of them were soldiers, maybe better American soldiers and one of them came just back from a combat tour.

3. Three were large, young and fit males.

There is no doubt that the cohesion of friendship of fit and strong men with a good deal of military training greatly facilitated their unity of action, but without their personal qualities like bravery among others those factors all would have been for naught.

[davidbfpo]

Clarity or smoke? The true version takes time to emerge:

By then it had emerged that the first person to react, who was shot as he tried to wrestle the AK from Ayoub El-Khazzani, was French-American. And someone else was already grappling with the gunman before this first – ie second – respondent got involved. But because both wished to remain anonymous the French were left in the position, not entirely unfamiliar, of expressing gratitude for foreign help. Then the number two was revealed as Mark Moogalian, whose French wife came forward to explain how he had been shot after rushing the gunman and how Spencer stuck a finger into an artery to stop him bleeding out. At the time of writing the identity of the person who first confronted the gunman remains unknown.

Link:http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...eally-so-clear

[TheCurmudgeon]

Still developing - any word on responsibility for the attacks?

France has declared a national state of emergency and has closed its borders after at least 40 people were killed in multiple shootings in Paris.

At least 15 people were killed near the Bataclan arts centre, where up to 60 people are being held hostage. Explosions and gunfire are reported.

Three people were killed in an attack near the Stade de France, with some reports suggesting a suicide blast.

Paris authorities have urged people to stay indoors.

Military personnel are being deployed across Paris.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34814203