Funny that, because we're not talking about Israeli extremists killing Palestinians, we're talking about the military. Again, I don't understand your logic. Look at the numbers, then come back and tell me who is committing genocide against who. Here they are:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict#Fatalities_1948.E2.80.93present

I also still contend that racially motivated murders on this scale don't constitute genocide by the standard definition of "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group". Israel are the ones inflicting systematic destruction of the Palestinian people. The counter attacks could be described as anything other than systematic.

I'd rather go in a Paris Hilton than in Paris Hilton.

Évry time I see a French pun, I always see that one.

I wish I could just hide away from the world while these discussions are going in. I think I'll buy a boat and Chartres a course for an uninhabited island and eat Melun.

Ahh, I miss the days when "holocaust" just meant "firestorm of devastation." It's such a cool word, I'm sad that it's essentially been taken out of our vocabulary for at least another century.

Good Old GAMES dot com

Orly?

All the time. So many times, I Cantal you how many times because I've lost count.

Why can't we all just get along? I think humanity needs to get together. A Réunion, if you will.

Again, we seem to have differing interpretations of what constitutes genocide. Perhaps being in Cambodia has skewed my standards when it comes to mass killings ;)

Well, if we would go for any mass killing as genocide, then I would say that the capitalism is the no.1 source of it, starting with the industrial revolution and the global warmth. Death toll: Millions so far by earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis etc., billions to expect in the future.

Read this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_definitions

I doubt the Toulouse shooter's intentions were quite so grandiose. At any rate, people kill each other for the stupidest of reasons all the time; the problem is hardly limited to radical Muslims.

If there's a real villain to the story, it's the French government. There will always be a small minority of genuinely crazy human predators, but the French government decrees that the honest and peaceful majority must be defenseless - that they must run from, hide from, or cower and plead with lawless predators who heed no reason but steel and shot.

There are countless places where guns are hard, if not impossible to come by, and yet crime is extremely low. If gun control laws are strict and there are huge problems with crime and murders, that's a society issue and not a result from the lack of guns for defence purposes. People shouldn't be resorting to firearms as some sort of "every man for himself" plan.

Did you see the total number of Palastinians and Israelis killed in their conflict since the 80's that I posted on the previous page? More Americans die every year from gun related crimes than that entire international conflict. Food for thought.

'Extremely low' doesn't mean much if you're one of the statistics. France doesn't, to my knowledge, have a big problem with violent crime, but there are seven people in France who do. Or, rather, did.

I carry a gun not because I have me-against-the-world delusions, but because a policeman won't fit in my pocket.