Things are not nice in Nice

[Namutree]

 

When are these people going to look into the mirror and see that their little social engineering experiment has failed? 

I'm guessing... Never. 

[Meshugger]

84 dead now. 

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

 

When are these people going to look into the mirror and see that their little social engineering experiment has failed? 

I'm guessing... Never. 

 

 

Never in good time I guess.

[BruceVC]

How many terrorist attacks on Hollande's watch now? Even with the perpetual state of emergency?

 

As long as this is framed as an issue of criminality instead of cultural incompatibility the solutions will always be retroactive and ineffective. Army on the streets, lol. Who are they going to shoot? Are they downgraded into policemen now or what?

 

When are these people going to look into the mirror and see that their little social engineering experiment has failed? 

No I don't support the view this is a example of " cultural incompatibility " 

 

 

France does indeed face unique issues around integration of parts of its Muslim community but there are many other EU countries that have  been very effective at integration 

[Agiel]

Might I direct you all to what Tom Nichols coined as "the Lost Boys"? (Article was originally written in response to the Orlando shooting, but given that the Nice perpetrator was reportedly a French citizen, do not colour me surprised if it turns out that the following fits his profile to a T):

 

For Lost Boys Like Micah Johnson, Any Ideology Is An Excuse To Kill

Maybe Micah Johnson, like Charleston murderer Dylann Roof and Orlando terrorist Omar Mateen, was a screwed-up weirdo who went looking for a cause to support his desire to kill.

 

Let’s take the Dallas shooter at his word: he hated white people. But is that all there is? Lots of blacks, whites, Asians, Hispanics, and Native Americans hate each other. They don’t all open fire on each other with powerful weapons. Maybe there’s something else at work here.

 

The current narrative is that Micah Johnson, as a young African-American man, was enraged by police brutality against African-Americans. An Army veteran and a “quiet” young person—these shooters are never described as “loud”—he was finally pushed over the edge either by the police shootings in Minnesota and Louisiana (if you’re sympathetic to the most militant black nationalist line) or the irresponsible rhetoric of groups like Black Lives Matter (if you’re an adherent of the view that BLM is essentially a terrorist organization).

 

There’s another possibility, one largely ignored because it doesn’t fit either narrative: maybe Johnson, like Charleston murderer Dylann Roof and Orlando terrorist Omar Mateen, was a screwed-up weirdo with a ton of anger who went looking for a cause to support his desire to kill.

 

Always Something of a Misfit

 

Superficially, it looks like Johnson turned to violence after returning from Afghanistan, a fact that seamlessly plays into a perfect narrative of racial injustice: black veteran returns to Texas from a war zone—“he managed to bring his war back home,” as the New York Times put it—where he finds black men are in more danger in America than in Afghanistan, so picks up a rifle in defense of his community.

 

Except that’s not quite what happened. Johnson never saw combat, and he didn’t “return” so much as he was “sent home.” For stealing panties.

As the Daily Beast reported, Johnson was shipped back to his reserve unit just ahead of a restraining order and a less-than-honorable discharge from the Army.

 

 

 

As reported by one of his bunkmates in Afghanistan, Johnson suffered a particular shame.

‘We all knew he was a pervert cuz he got caught stealing girls’ panties,’ the bunkmate later said in a Facebook post.

Johnson’s military lawyer, Bradford Glendening, says that a female corporal mentioned Victoria’s Secret underthings when she filed a sexual harassment complaint against his client.

The lawyer further reports that the corporal was worried enough to seek an order of protection against Johnson and to recommend that he receive mental health treatment.

 

Somehow, Johnson escaped punishment: he got an honorable discharge, which surprised even his lawyer. “Someone really screwed up,” Glendening said. “But to my client’s benefit.”

 

Johnson, as it turns out, was always something of a misfit, much like his would-be White Power and ISIS counterparts Roof and Mateen. Like other “loners”—a word that popped up within a day of the shootings—he was fascinated by military hardware and macho endeavors, including enrolling at the “Academy of Combat Warrior Arts” near Dallas.

 

Not that there’s anything wrong with that. It’s perfectly normal for a young man with “anger issues” to enroll in an academy that trains young men in combat tactics, rather than wasting his time with boring things like jobs or girlfriends. (When he wasn’t honing his urban guerilla skills, he shot hoops literally for eight hours a day.)

 

A Victim Avenger

 

None of this is to deny that when Johnson finally opened fire on Dallas law enforcement officers, his head was full of racist poison. The outsider who was obsessed by military weapons as early as high school, whose stepmother was white, whose time in the Army came to an end with a handful of stolen panties, found an ideology that made him the victim of a race war and placed him in the role of a powerful avenger.

 

This is what Roof and Mateen did as well, like so many other “lost boy” killers. Roof, for his part, said he was sick of black men raping white women. Like Johnson, his friends said he made the occasional racist remark, but no one thought he was serious about violence. Mateen, likely a closeted gay man, lashed out at the gay community after a history as a difficult boy stretching back to third grade and more recent events in which his temper scared those who knew him.

 

In every case, we must study the professed motives of the shooters and hold those responsible who made the propaganda who inspired them: white nationalists, black nationalists, Islamic extremists. At the same time, we should not assume these young men are avatars of the ideologies they espouse. Rather, they are part of a new strain of violent losers, men driven by a combination of narcissism and insecurity and who latch on to heroic narratives in which they are the central figures in a morality play of justice and retribution.

 

Defending the white race, defending the black race, avenging Islam: all of them are the same story played out by the same type of man. In other cases (John Salvi attacking abortion clinics, Timothy McVeigh blowing up a federal building) the targets or the ideas may be different, but the actors and narrative are the same. The hero, spurned in his own community, takes matters into his own hands, and kills—usually in the most cowardly way possible.

 

Crazy Loners Shouldn’t Control Us

 

In every case, we zero in on the message, because normal human beings link actions with words. We also do this because the alternative is even more frightening than terrorism: we cannot seriously believe that an aimless life of too much weed, or a burning shame and anger about getting caught as a panty thief, can eventually produce the slaughter in Charleston and Dallas. It’s too random, too uncontrollable, and too close to home. Terrorism, in a way, is actually the more comforting explanation.

 

It’s true, of course, that hateful propaganda always targets the weakest and most insecure among us. It’s not meant to turn men and women of virtue into killing machines; it’s meant to sift through the lost and disturbed, and to instruct them in how to focus their vaporous fears and formless rage into a weapon.

 

It’s also true that groups of people with the same ideology create cells of terror and violence. These groups make plans and sustain networks, and must be pursued and broken up wherever they’re found. But to conflate radicalized losers with actual terrorist organizations is to risk spreading law enforcement and intelligence too thin: the battle against terrorism and the firefight with a disturbed loser who was part of nothing and who spoke to no one are not part of the same war.

 

Johnson’s ramblings are no more and no less important than Roof’s racial theories or Mateen’s pledge of allegiance to ISIS. These men, in retrospect, seemed likely to kill at some point. White supremacy, black nationalism, and Islamic extremism lit the fuse, but in the twenty-first century, there is no way to empty the trough of toxic Internet sludge on which these damaged boy-men feed. They wanted a reason to commit murder. They found one. The next killer will just as surely find his own.

 

The more pressing question is whether we will allow ourselves to be dragged into social warfare by these pathetic failures. Racism and terrorism are real problems, but are we going to let panty thieves and chronic stoners set the terms of the debate?

 

Rather, if we’re going to have another dreaded “much-needed national conversation,” it should not be about guns or racism, but about the human time bombs our culture is creating and nurturing among us. Unfortunately, that’s not only a discussion for another day, but one so uncomfortable to think about that we’re likely never to have it at all.

Edited July 15, 2016 by Agiel

[Drowsy Emperor]

While you can argue that they were just looking for a reason to kill, it would take a special form of willing ignorance to not recognize the fact that every major terrorist attack in Europe in the last few years was committed by muslims. Looking at it even more widely, millions killed in the name of some ideology or other in the second world war. Were they all mad dogs?

 

Or maybe it was the case that they simply believed in it and the logical consequence of those beliefs was a state of war or conflict? When someone says today that fascism and democracy or fascism and communism were incompatible and war and slaughter were all but inevitable - no one bats an eyelid.  But when you say that islam and democracy are incompatible people get their panties in a bunch trying to explain how its not Islam but a few bad apples.

 

To turn this absurd narrative on its head, maybe Fascism wasn't so bad. Maybe it was misunderstood due to a few bad apples?

Edited July 15, 2016 by Drowsy Emperor

[Meshugger]

To think that this was posted just a few days ago: 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3685561/France-verge-civil-war-sparked-mass-sexual-assault-women-migrants-intelligence-chief-warns.html

 

I wonder when it all boils over if this keeps on continuing. No one needs to be reminded on what happens when the French start to feel a bit revolutionary. 

Edited July 15, 2016 by Meshugger

[Drowsy Emperor]

I hope the right doesn't do anything stupid in France. The current administration is already doing its best to dig its own grave. Any street confrontations would just work to their advantage.

Edited July 15, 2016 by Drowsy Emperor

[213374U]

Good read, Agiel. Thanks.

 

While you can argue that they were just looking for a reason to kill, it would take a special form of willing ignorance to not recognize the fact that every major terrorist attack in the last few years was committed by muslims. Looking at it even more widely, millions killed in the name of some ideology or other in the second world war. Were they all mad dogs?
 
Or maybe it was the case that they simply believed in it and the logical consequence of those beliefs was a state of war or conflict? When someone says today that fascism and democracy or fascism and communism were incompatible and war and slaughter were all but inevitable - no one bats an eyelid.  But when you say that islam and democracy are incompatible people get their panties in a bunch trying to explain how its not Islam but a few bad apples.
 
To turn this absurd narrative on its head, maybe Fascism wasn't so bad. Maybe it was misunderstood due to a few bad apples?

"Every major terrorist attack in the last few years was committed by Muslims" -- you mean except those that weren't, or those you handwave away, right?

 

I'm sorry, but facts just don't back you here. And they don't back you regarding the "cultural incompatibility" of Muslims at large either, because of the undisputable fact that the overwhelming majority of Muslims living in the west are peaceful, law-abiding citizens. We're talking about millions of people, but you insist in using statistical outliers to illustrate a general principle. That's... not very rigorous, to put it mildly.

 

@Meshugger: "civil war" warnings are preposterous, but I wouldn't completely discount a wave of violence à la St. Bartholomew. Divide and conquer.

[theBalthazar]

Its THE war. An invisible war.

 

I'm french and I think its the job for service secret / intelligence service (found an evidence and eliminate the target ...direclty)

 

Its not very democratic, but its the only solution for this cruel ennemy.

 

to hold hand in front of camera is not enough now mister president Hollande...

Edited July 15, 2016 by theBalthazar

[Meshugger]

@Meshugger: "civil war" warnings are preposterous, but I wouldn't completely discount a wave of violence à la St. Bartholomew. Divide and conquer.

 

I do not know what the intelligence chief knows, but i do know that a period of violence perpetuated by one group on the populance as a whole will result to an even greater wave of violence if the fears are not curtailed in an effective way.  

[Gorth]

France does indeed face unique issues around integration of parts of its Muslim community but there are many other EU countries that have  been very effective at integration

Now you've made me genuinely curious... who are these many other EU countries? We can rule out France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, Denmark, just guessing now, a lot of the eastern European EU countries, Spain, Greece, Sweden. No idea what things are like in Italy, Portugal or Austria (or the Swiss for that matter) are doing. In the UK, it's a mixed bag, more a problem between cultural divides than ethnic divides (those groups who adopted the UK way of life seems to be thriving well enough).

 

Edit to add: What you have in several of the countries I listed above is host countries trapped between a rock and a hard place. Immigrants who seems militantly adverse to adjusting to their new host country's values and the host country having to chose between either rejecting immigrants (being branded as all kinds of inhuman), force immigrants to embrace new values (effectively giving up core parts of old values/cultures and being labelled cultural fascists), try to turn a blind eye in the name of political correctness and watch blood run in the streets.

[theBalthazar]

I do not know what the intelligence chief knows, but i do know that a period of violence perpetuated by one group on the populance as a whole will result to an even greater wave of violence if the fears are not curtailed in an effective way.  

 

 

the gentle method dont work ! The ennemy is inside...

 

The "stay together" of the "democracy" method is not enough visibly...

 

EDIT : for the muslim. Its complicated. There are muslim actually carried by the positive faith (elevation of the soul and look appeased to the others).

 

And... some delinquent converted to radical islam. (Social fault line)

Edited July 15, 2016 by theBalthazar

[Meshugger]

 

I do not know what the intelligence chief knows, but i do know that a period of violence perpetuated by one group on the populance as a whole will result to an even greater wave of violence if the fears are not curtailed in an effective way.  

 

 

the gentle method dont work ! The ennemy is inside...

 

The "stay together" of the "democracy" method is not enough visibly...

 

EDIT : for the muslim. Its complicated. There are muslim actually carried by the positive faith (elevation of the soul and look appeased to the others).

 

And... some delinquent converted to radical islam. (Social fault line)

 

 

The spiritual begats the material, i agree. 

 

Throw out any Saudi funded organization and close all wahabbi mosques as a threat to security. Undermine anything Sunni and fund anything Sufi. As a long term goal, offer easy transfer to arab countries with where they can find themselves at peace. It worked for Israel to invite the Jews, it will surely work for Islam in the rest of the middle east. 

[Oerwinde]

 

France does indeed face unique issues around integration of parts of its Muslim community but there are many other EU countries that have  been very effective at integration

Now you've made me genuinely curious... who are these many other EU countries? We can rule out France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, Denmark, just guessing now, a lot of the eastern European EU countries, Spain, Greece, Sweden. No idea what things are like in Italy, Portugal or Austria (or the Swiss for that matter) are doing. In the UK, it's a mixed bag, more a problem between cultural divides than ethnic divides (those groups who adopted the UK way of life seems to be thriving well enough).

 

Edit to add: What you have in several of the countries I listed above is host countries trapped between a rock and a hard place. Immigrants who seems militantly adverse to adjusting to their new host country's values and the host country having to chose between either rejecting immigrants (being branded as all kinds of inhuman), force immigrants to embrace new values (effectively giving up core parts of old values/cultures and being labelled cultural fascists), try to turn a blind eye in the name of political correctness and watch blood run in the streets.

 

 

Don't know about the rest of Italy, but I heard the mafia is executing migrants in the streets because they are trying to form rival criminal organizations. The mayor of Palermo declared it a middle eastern city in Europe and "thats a good thing"

 

I really don't understand this self-hate thing going on in Europe. People celebrating becoming a minority in their own country. I think the historical term for them is "collaborators", and they aren't usually looked at kindly by history.

[Guard Dog]

Guys France does face unique challengers and additional risks from Islamic extremism because of there perceived failures to integrate  French speaking Muslims from the former colonies of Tunisia and Algeria 

 

There are real ghettos in France where disillusioned and disenfranchised Muslims live who dont feel they are part of the French community. These ghettos are hotbeds of Islamic extremism, I would argue France faces the biggest risk of attack from extremism than most other Western countries

 

My support and thoughts go out to the French people  

The problem is when Muslims self-segregate which it seems they do there from what I'm reading, assimilation isn't going to happen. They have to want it and it seems they don't. It's becoming a problem here in the US in the refugee communities. The Islamic refugees are forming isolated and insular groups that choose not to participate in the society they live in. You can't force someone to assimilate. Unless of course you are Borg. 

[Drowsy Emperor]

Good read, Agiel. Thanks.

 

While you can argue that they were just looking for a reason to kill, it would take a special form of willing ignorance to not recognize the fact that every major terrorist attack in the last few years was committed by muslims. Looking at it even more widely, millions killed in the name of some ideology or other in the second world war. Were they all mad dogs?

 

Or maybe it was the case that they simply believed in it and the logical consequence of those beliefs was a state of war or conflict? When someone says today that fascism and democracy or fascism and communism were incompatible and war and slaughter were all but inevitable - no one bats an eyelid.  But when you say that islam and democracy are incompatible people get their panties in a bunch trying to explain how its not Islam but a few bad apples.

 

To turn this absurd narrative on its head, maybe Fascism wasn't so bad. Maybe it was misunderstood due to a few bad apples?

"Every major terrorist attack in the last few years was committed by Muslims" -- you mean except those that weren't, or those you handwave away, right?

 

I'm sorry, but facts just don't back you here. And they don't back you regarding the "cultural incompatibility" of Muslims at large either, because of the undisputable fact that the overwhelming majority of Muslims living in the west are peaceful, law-abiding citizens. We're talking about millions of people, but you insist in using statistical outliers to illustrate a general principle. That's... not very rigorous, to put it mildly.

 

@Meshugger: "civil war" warnings are preposterous, but I wouldn't completely discount a wave of violence à la St. Bartholomew. Divide and conquer.

 

Are we really going to equate Breivik's solo show with the coordinated strikes on Bataclan that presumably involved a network of people working towards a common goal? 

 

Again with this head in the sand thing? Aren't there millions of basically every nation living across countries in Europe, and among those millions is it not the Muslims that are the sole common denominator to which almost every recent terrorist act is traced? 

 

At this point its just intellectual dishonesty to claim that the problem isn't with Islam. The fact that the masses are living in peace doesn't mean they like France or Germany (in fact a lot of the ones I see show open disdain for the countries they live in) or that integration was remotely successful. Peace is a negatively defined term. It just means absence of conflict at the moment, it doesn't imply that the situation is good or on a trajectory to getting better. 

 

Let me ask you a question. Do you think, given the current trends, that the internal problems with integration will increase or reverse? 

Edited July 15, 2016 by Drowsy Emperor

[teknoman2]

the whole thing stems from the idea that multiculturalism is a good thing.

a land needs a certain level of uniformity in order to be peaceful. if you have large chunks of the population following very different life philosophies, then conflict is inevitable.

the italian culture is similar enough to the greek so that someone from either country can live in the other without having or causing problems. the culture of germany, while much more focused on discipline compared them, is still similar enough to both of the above to allow people to live together without conflict, as they can still bridge the gaps by making a few mutual compromises. however the culture of pakistan is way too different from any european country so a large enough number of pakistani in one place within a european country will cause problems as there is no common ground to use as a basis for reaching an understanding

[BruceVC]

 

Guys France does face unique challengers and additional risks from Islamic extremism because of there perceived failures to integrate  French speaking Muslims from the former colonies of Tunisia and Algeria 

 

There are real ghettos in France where disillusioned and disenfranchised Muslims live who dont feel they are part of the French community. These ghettos are hotbeds of Islamic extremism, I would argue France faces the biggest risk of attack from extremism than most other Western countries

 

My support and thoughts go out to the French people  

The problem is when Muslims self-segregate which it seems they do there from what I'm reading, assimilation isn't going to happen. They have to want it and it seems they don't. It's becoming a problem here in the US in the refugee communities. The Islamic refugees are forming isolated and insular groups that choose not to participate in the society they live in. You can't force someone to assimilate. Unless of course you are Borg. 

 

So France is one of the worst examples of successful integration, the reasons are complex and its  not all the fault of the French. So yes the French Muslim community also needs to accept its share or responsibility

 

But you dont want the USA to end up like France with real examples of Muslim segregation. But in the USA I cant see this happening, its unlikely? 

[213374U]

Are we really going to equate Breivik's solo show with the coordinated strikes on Bataclan that presumably involved a network of people working towards a common goal? 

 

Again with this head in the sand thing? Aren't there millions of basically every nation living across countries in Europe, and among those millions is it not the Muslims that are the sole common denominator to which almost every recent terrorist act is traced? 

 

At this point its just intellectual dishonesty to claim that the problem isn't with Islam. The fact that the masses are living in peace doesn't mean they like France or Germany (in fact a lot of the ones I see show open disdain for the countries they live in) or that integration was remotely successful. Peace is a negatively defined term. It just means absence of conflict at the moment, it doesn't imply that the situation is good or on a trajectory to getting better. 

 

Let me ask you a question. Do you think, given the current trends, that the internal problems with integration will increase or reverse?

You spoke of "major terrorist attack in the last few years". Breivik's fits the description, like it or not, but I'm sure that the terms "major", "last few years" or even "terrorist attack" could be redefined to exclude it. Fallacious, but effective. Rigour is never a prerequisite when making appeals to emotion, anyway.

 

Living peaceful, gainful lives and abiding by the law of the countries that host them is the definition of integration. You want them to do... what else, exactly? Where does it say that you have to "like" a country to live in it? I'm guessing they like it well enough since, well, they ****ing chose to go over there from whatever ****hole they were born in.

 

I'm going to guess you mean peaceful coexistence, when you speak of integration. No, that's only going to get worse. An ever-increasing wealth gap, quickly deteriorating prospects for an entire generation that never learned to deal with frustration in a healthy way, a largely manufactured gender discourse that has led to identity issues for a lot of young men, anti-immigration sentiments and rhetoric coming to a boiling point, authoritarianism on the rise, etc. It's a recipe for disaster. If you think "the problem" is with Islam, you have an extremely narrow perspective.

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

Are we really going to equate Breivik's solo show with the coordinated strikes on Bataclan that presumably involved a network of people working towards a common goal? 

 

Again with this head in the sand thing? Aren't there millions of basically every nation living across countries in Europe, and among those millions is it not the Muslims that are the sole common denominator to which almost every recent terrorist act is traced? 

 

At this point its just intellectual dishonesty to claim that the problem isn't with Islam. The fact that the masses are living in peace doesn't mean they like France or Germany (in fact a lot of the ones I see show open disdain for the countries they live in) or that integration was remotely successful. Peace is a negatively defined term. It just means absence of conflict at the moment, it doesn't imply that the situation is good or on a trajectory to getting better. 

 

Let me ask you a question. Do you think, given the current trends, that the internal problems with integration will increase or reverse?

 

I'm going to guess you mean peaceful coexistence, when you speak of integration. No, that's only going to get worse. An ever-increasing wealth gap, quickly deteriorating prospects for an entire generation that never learned to deal with frustration in a healthy way, a largely manufactured gender discourse that has led to identity issues for a lot of young men, anti-immigration sentiments and rhetoric coming to a boiling point, authoritarianism on the rise, etc. It's a recipe for disaster. If you think "the problem" is with Islam, you have an extremely narrow perspective.

 

 

I think all of that are genuine problems but I'd also consider Islam one of them. Or to be precise, not Islam itself (as a religion/civilization existing in so many countries) but mass migration from Islamic countries as a "solution" to Europe's population problems. I think that's a disaster at best, a crime at worst.

 

I would call it a leftist thing, but even quasi right party figures such as Merkel embrace it so at this point I don't know how to describe it other than as a pan-European elite project.

 

IMO these people are so subservient to the corporate and market circles that they'd rather sacrifice their own nation by mass importing another civilization to keep wages low and the gears of the economy turning - than try to reform the system in such a way that the locals... you know... want (and can afford) to reproduce. Something is ****ing wrong in Europe and all these stopgap non-solutions will end in agony for everyone included.

Edited July 15, 2016 by Drowsy Emperor

[Fighter]

Clearly the real answer is to crack down even harder on hate speech. Germany making deals with the likes of Facebook is a good first step. This will surely prevent people from becoming more racist and more extreme.

 

And the Islamists? I'm sure the real problem is that it is no coincidence that he was a straight white man.

[Valsuelm]

His name was Mohamed.

 

Whodathunkit?

Edited July 15, 2016 by Valsuelm

[Guard Dog]

 

 

Guys France does face unique challengers and additional risks from Islamic extremism because of there perceived failures to integrate  French speaking Muslims from the former colonies of Tunisia and Algeria 

 

There are real ghettos in France where disillusioned and disenfranchised Muslims live who dont feel they are part of the French community. These ghettos are hotbeds of Islamic extremism, I would argue France faces the biggest risk of attack from extremism than most other Western countries

 

My support and thoughts go out to the French people  

The problem is when Muslims self-segregate which it seems they do there from what I'm reading, assimilation isn't going to happen. They have to want it and it seems they don't. It's becoming a problem here in the US in the refugee communities. The Islamic refugees are forming isolated and insular groups that choose not to participate in the society they live in. You can't force someone to assimilate. Unless of course you are Borg. 

 

So France is one of the worst examples of successful integration, the reasons are complex and its  not all the fault of the French. So yes the French Muslim community also needs to accept its share or responsibility

 

But you dont want the USA to end up like France with real examples of Muslim segregation. But in the USA I cant see this happening, its unlikely? 

 

Let me preface this by saying all I know about ho European countries are handling refugees is what I read in the Washington Post. Basically they are choosing where they have to live and what they are allowed to do for them. In the US that isn't how it works. They are being placed in communities and given assistance. I believe effort is taken not to place too many too close together. The children are assigned school, there are mosques and worship centers everywhere. After 1 year if they haven't broken any rules they get a "green card" which is permanent non-citizen residency. Then they can go anywhere they want and do anything they want. If they want to self-segregate that is when they can do it. And from what I've read in the news that appears to be happening. It's a breeding ground for trouble.

[obyknven]

Photo of Terrorist

 
Photo of ethnic ukrainian girl ( with Russian citiezenship, she is single victim from Russia ) killed in this attack.

 
Other  Russians has been outraged because of canceled firework show.

 

https://www.rt.com/news/351244-billionaire-ex-nice-attack-fireworks/

 

Actually Russians even giggling about this terror attack - few days ago 290 men killed in Bagdad - nobody even mentioned about this - much smaller terror attack in EU - so much butthurt in result.