Why does it have to be organised? If enough people are pissed off, all it takes is one or two examples of dissonance for others to join in.

I wouldn't require organisation to be needed.

Exactly. And remember that the rioting is centred around the poor minority ethnic groups, and not around the French Middle Classes (traditional revolutionary material) or the Affluent.

This has been a problem waiting to erupt for some time.. in fact, last time I was in France I remember my hosts telling me that in as many words. Immigration into France has been extremely heavy for a long time, particularly from North-African French colonies like Tunisia and Morocco. No society, with perhaps the exception of America, likes mass immigration... people get worried about the dilution of their cultural values, and that sort of thing - just read a good right wing English tabloid.
There won't be a 'revolution'... there'll just be a good load more violence, and then hopefully the French government will take a good look at the ethnic problem sitting their right under their noses and do something about it.

From the neighbour country (Spain).
3 generations ago, France granted nationality to all inmigrants from their colonies in africa. Granted them nationality, taught them french, and left them to die as they were second class french. You are not going to go to university if you're not taugh proper french, and you're not encouraged to study and to become real citizens, but you're sent to sad 3rd world suburbs to die of hunger surrounded by many more 2nd class french, without schools or services or anything.

In this group we include north africans, many muslims and many not muslims, but in general poor people. Most of them, the grandsons of inmigrants (3rd generation frenchs), so not exactly inmigrants.

Now, this has been brewing for a long time, and sudenly there was the spark that has ignited the bomb they had there, in this case those two boys being electrocuted. The interior minister (person in charge of internal affairs) is one of those of the hard line (Kill them all, slaves that should have stayed in africa) and he's been taking mesures that are very much against integration (and frankly, about freedom sometimes). People without resources ressort to the most extreme of their leaders (being those leaders religious or political or both), and so now they have been burning buses and cars.

Basically, people have got tired to be told they're french, they have all the duties of frenchs, but nobody grants them the rights and nobody considers them real frenchs (wich is something very deep into the french people, who tend to think they're the only real europeans when talking with other countries, but only the white branch of the population).

About socialism and "we feel we have the right to demand things" start another thread and I will talk about that from a socialist governed country. France has a socialist system, but the government is more right wing than left. The problem there is racism from white french to black french and the other way round, poverty, and hipocrisy.

Considering that, anyway, both sides have certain trouble with america, america going to help would mean a fast end to the conflict, that would switch to both sides together to send americans away

Hmmm, thats the exact opposite of the picture I got during 2003.

A map of the riots

A timeline

Images from the riots

I don't know much about this but some thoughts that circulate in my head include the fact that this seems very much caused by an organised by a group. Perhaps not directly caused but a spark and perhaps a fanning of the flame by a group?

Well with my own personal experience with "poor muslim immigrant revolts" Also known as intafadas, the thing that sparks the rioting isn't the reason the right started.

Its like saying that the American revolution started because people threw tea into the harbor.

I fear we'll have to blame my american ignorance - I know, not everything works elsewhere as it does here - but who's fault is it they do not go to schools, they don't study and become "real" citizens, as you say? I don't think the gov't has to hold ANYONE'S hand - if they have the will and desire to rise above their current social station, they need to get off their ass and do it. Bitching and moaning to the point where you're setting cars on fire only shows me that they are no better than the people whom are against them for no reason other than the fact they are "second class citizens", as well as whatever racial terms the French can drag up. Why? Because they're only proving their point.

I'm no overly strong campaigner for 'human rights' - if France wants to make these blacks second class citizens, that's their decision.

However, if France wants to say they've equal rights, they best damn give them.

I got ADD on my post. Oh well.

As I was saying, in 2003 the French goverment was making laws explictly for the muslim community to help "protect" them from racism.

On a side note, this was the same year that 3 synagogues got burned to the ground by muslim teanagers.

I believe the American revolution's beginning was marked by the event in which someone put a rock in a snowball and pegged one of the British soldiers - which prompted the other soldiers to respond with gunfire, in the incident referred to as the "Shot heard 'round the world".

Can I take this time to express my extreme disillusionment with religion? I have no problem with religion. At all. I don't believe, that's my business. But when people try shoving it down your throat, especially like this..

Well, Iunno. I don't want to sound like a racist/pig/american and say, "Ugh, if it wasn't for Islam, this would be so much less common" - but it tends to be true.

"this" being the synagogues burning.

Again, if it wasn't for the numerous people trying to start the war in the first place, and sending around papers and flyers explaining why America needed indepedance, then that shot would have ment nothing but a court trial.

Ugh I hate religion. I find it hard to word why but I do.

And I hate godless dictatorships. They kill more people.

George W. Bush went to war in Iraq because God told him to.

...

EDIT: Yeah American's not a dictatorship but MEH!

what's the quote by stalin or mussolini that states something like "democracy and dictatorships do the same thing, one just gets them done quicker"?

stalin and mussolini

Thats a new one.

I could have sworn he went to war with Iraq because the U.N inspectors kept being told to go away and nobody was going to enforce the U.N. resolution that was passed. But if the U.N. and British/French/Russian Intelligance are nicknamed G.O.D then I guess your right.


Edit: So is Amsterdamn doing anything in responce to these Riots? They had a big anti-muslim movement after that guy got assasinated.

It was on the news actually, the man himself said that God inspired him to invade Iraq. I think he actually said it was something slightly more physical than inspired but I'm not sure.

You obviously don't know much about religion then.

If you asked me honestly, I'd tell you that G-d tells me to play computer games. That however, is not the same as saying that The world was made and exists and would be destroyed if I did not play computer games.

To translate what George ment for the non-spiritual. He spent some time sitting and thinking and looking inside himself to see what feelings he had over the situation. He had a gut feeling that if he did not go to war with Iraq bad stuff would happen, and its best that he do something instead of nothing.

Edit: Any time people say that "God told them to do something" it means that they have a feeling inside that goes beyond what they first thought, and they have this vision of "everything clicking together" once they accomplish their goal.

Then why put his feelings down to God? I don't understand, by saying God told him to go is he just trying to justify his own belief that they should have gone to war? Just plying for approval? *hates this manner and usage of religion*

Because your looking at god as just some overarching chess player, while Bush is looking at god as a friend and guidance counselour, or father, or whatever his "relationship" is.

He is not "putting anything on G-d", He is explaining the confidence he has in the outcome.