Slashdot Mirror
Paris Terror Spurs Plan For Military Zones Around Nuclear Plants
mdsolar sends this report from Bloomberg:
Lawmakers in France want to create military zones around its 58 atomic reactors to boost security after this month's Paris terror attacks and almost two dozen mystery drone flights over nuclear plants that have baffled authorities.
"There's a legal void that needs to be plugged," said Claude de Ganay, the opposition member of the National Assembly spearheading legislation to be considered by parliament on Feb. 5. The proposals would classify atomic energy sites as "highly sensitive military zones" under the control of the Ministry of Defense, according to an outline provided by de Ganay.
"There's a legal void that needs to be plugged," said Claude de Ganay, the opposition member of the National Assembly spearheading legislation to be considered by parliament on Feb. 5. The proposals would classify atomic energy sites as "highly sensitive military zones" under the control of the Ministry of Defense, according to an outline provided by de Ganay.
There is no F******G war going on. 20 people where killed, 17 by terrorists. We have a problem with equality and participation and integration in Europe. However, we are not on war with a part of our own population. And while 17 dead people is horrible, we have more dead people in traffic related accidents 3250 per year or smoke or germs in hospitals everyday. So get that in perspective. Yes we have to address terrorism. We have to do this with police work and social work and a good integration strategy which does not put immigrants in ghettos and throw away the keys.
No it is not. However, most people are unable to distinguish between islamists, islamistic terrorists and normal muslims. While the first and second make and ideology out of their religion, the third (most muslims) do not. If you want to fight the problem then you have first to understand the problem. The problem is that people become fanatics and try to use force to push their ideology onto you. So why do people become fanatics? We had our share of fanatics in Europe in context of different ideologies. For example, the Red Army Fraction (RAF) in Germany and Basque terrorists. The RAF was fought with police methods and their support was diminished by starting a dialog with those people who sympathized with them. Resulting in an integration and dialog. If this dialog had been established in the beginning , the radicalization would not have taken place at all. Most of those terrorists where from religious (Christian) background and loved peace. However, they felt that the system was oppressive and must be overthrown. The felt helpless and radicalized. We know from research that similar processes cause radicalization of people into islamists. War is never a good solution, if you want to reduce violence.
You should learn to distinguish between Islam, the religion, and their followers called Muslims, and Islam, the ideology, and the Islamists. It is the same different as between normal Christians and those who burn people on crosses. If you are unable to differentiate then you are either frightened by Islam which means you should investigate that religion (not to convert necessarily, but to understand), or you are just a racist moron, then you should reflect on that and try to understand why you started with that strange believe.
Europes problems with equality, participation and integration are caused by a rapidly growing minority, who refuse the secular, humanist principles that modern Europe is founded on.
So yes, in a sense Europe is at war with its own citizens. Though it occasionally flares up into armed combat, It's primarily a war of principles and ideas.
Secularism vs. religion permeating government and every public and private space.
Equality of race and gender, vs. religiously mandated misogyny, and medieval standards of decency and sexuality.
Humanist principles vs. religious orthodoxy.
Strong beliefs will always overcome weak beliefs. Guess which side has the stronger beliefs? Here is a hint: its not the side whose govt. ignorantly but willingly set up the 791 "no-go" zones where Islamic law is the secular law for the sake of keeping the peace, which it did not get by the way. France and most of Europe should have awakened 40 years ago. Now all you hear is how great the religion of Islam is after every terrorist attack. Eventually they will stop calling them terrorist attacks and start calling them Islamic victories.
The real enemy of France is the government
It is the government of France which has allowed unabated invasion of the Moslems into the country
Most of those Moslem that immigrated to France are from former French colonies, what is to say that they are from countries that France invaded first.
Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
we should address the core issues which trigger people to become terrorists.
What if one of the "core issues" is a substantial difference in cultural values?
Immigrants show up with cultural values completely at odds with the dominant culture and move into self-isolated communities. The dominant culture rejects the immigrants' value system, which combined with the isolation of a separate community, seems to contribute to the sense of alienation and powerlessness. Some, rather than choosing assimilation, instead choose a kind of victim mindset, seeing the rejection of their values as a kind of active oppression and become ripe for radicalization.
None of this is to say that the dominant culture may have in fact engaged in some actual good old-fashioned discrimination, but labeling all of the dominant cultures rejection of the immigrant's culture seems wrong when things like separation of religion and state, women's equality or concepts like blasphemy are in play.
I just don't know how you "fix" conflicts like this.
A coal plant with ten years worth of coal stockpiled on site, plus a similarly sized ash pond, would be just as juicy a target.
Were you born this way, or did it take a lot of slashdotting to lose your mind so completely?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
As one example, suppressing women seems to cut off half your source of economic power, intellectual innovation and inhibits social values that even traditionally patriarchical cultures like Christianity seem to have embraced.
"seem to". Christianity is a whole lot less homogenized than Islam, which itself does have distinctions. Many Christian sects (I'm looking at you, Catholics) think women are fine as long as they do as they're told and don't step out of line. But some are still outright oppressing them, like the Amish. Then again, their whole culture is about oppression. Their religion can't survive without it. And indeed, the Amish suppress their people, and their women especially.
Most so-called Christians aren't particularly religious, especially if you judge them by their actions — the only valid way to judge anyone. They pick and choose freely from their holy book and ignore all the parts they don't like. Their religion isn't mandatorily theocratic, and most of them don't have doctrine that requires them to try to convert people all of the time. But more importantly, the western world has already collectively considered making it the law, and rejected it. Now we're going to have to go through that process all over again with Islam. The sad part is, we've been through this already, and these primitive screwheads want us to go through it all again. But those few of us who remember history have little stomach for it. Crusades, Inquisition, we just don't want to mix our religion and our law, thank you very much. And yes, anyone who does is seriously primitive, like centuries out of date primitive, and so is their faith.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"