Tuesday, January 27, 2015
To the New York Times, Greece's Far Right Remains the "Far Right" Whilst Its Victorious Far Left Is Reassuringly Changed to Simply the "Left"
Typical: In the New York Times' cover headline linking to the Liz Alderman story of the Greek government's new coalition members, the far right remains the "Far Right" while the far left is reassuringly renamed simply the "Left". FYI, regarding the animal photo, here is Erica Goode's story on unlikely animal friendships…
Monday, January 26, 2015
A Virgin Galactic rocket plane known as SpaceShipTwo crashed in the Cantill area of the California Mojave desert during a test flight,reports The Washington Times' Jeffrey Scott Shapiro,
leaving one pilot dead and another injured.Update: several hours after this story was posted, other news outlets still have no story on this, so we are starting to wonder if NP (and Jeffrey Scott Shapiro) wasn't (weren't) taken in by a hoax
… “Virgin Galactic’s partner Scaled Composites conducted a powered test flight of SpaceShipTwo earlier today,” the company website’s stated Friday. “During the test, the vehicle suffered a serious anomaly resulting in the loss of the vehicle. Our first concern is the status of the pilots, which is unknown at this time. We will work closely with the relevant authorities to determine the cause of the accident and provide updates as soon as we are able to do so.”
… Onlookers who spotted the craft crumble from the sky reportedly saw a sky-high explosion and later found debris scattered across the desert sand. The Kern County Fire Department that responded to the crash did not answer its communication line.
Sunday, January 25, 2015
Is there no one in Francois Hollande's entourage with the courage to say, sorry but this is a one way-autoroute to absurdity?
It is ironicquips Stephen Clarke
– politicians get to live their dream of ultimate power and it turns so quickly to nightmare. And the sad thing in [Francois Hollande]’s case is that, leaving all political allegiances aside, only one of the nightmares was really his fault. The problem was that this one mistake was all-embracing.
The question I’ve been asking myself all year, or rather most of the time since he was elected, is: how has he managed to surround himself with such a bad gang of advisors?
I thought this most recently when Le Président went to Kazakhstan in early December, and someone allowed him to be photographed wearing local costume, which doubtless looks great when you’re riding a Mongolian pony across the steppes, but less so when you’re a small Frenchman swamped in a fur hat and mountainous overcoat, and standing next to the Kazakhstani president who is looking comfortable in his sharp French-style suit? Which member of M. Hollande’s entourage said ” oh oui, a photo opportunity as an exhibit in a folklore museum, bonne idée”?
More importantly, why did no one say it was a terrible idea and steer him clear of trouble?
But by then, it was no longer a surprise. After all, the year started terribly with the magazine article revealing that France’s president had thought that it was a clever idea to borrow a love nest a few metres outside the presidential palace and drive there on the back of a scooter to meet his mistress – when he was already being criticised for installing a high-maintenance unmarried First Lady in his official residence? Honestly, is there no one in his entourage with the courage or the nous to say, sorry but this is a one way-autoroute to absurdity?
… speaking of the economy, what kind of Socialist president is so badly advised that he nominates a minister of commerce who is then forced to resign when accusations are made that he has been less than scrupulous about paying his income tax? This happened in September when Thomas Thevenoud stepped down – after only nine days in the job. Did no one check out his CV? Did no one say, we’re Socialists, so let’s spend five minutes seeing if the candidate has the right credentials? The answer is apparently non. All of which must make 2014 a year that M. Hollande might want to skip over when he writes his autobiography.
Saturday, January 24, 2015
After Sir Winston Churchill died on Jan 24 1965, his body lay in state for three days at Westminster Hallwrites the Daily Telegraph.
Mourners queued in wintry weather to pay their respects. It was only the second time that the Monarch had bestowed the honour of a state funeral on a Prime Minister – the first was William Gladstone in 1898.Here are some choice quotes of Churchill, who makes an appearance in Erik Svane and Thierry Capezzone's Daisy graphic novel • Is That Winston Speaking of the Iraq War of 2003?
• WInston Churchill on Socialism and the Cold War
Friday, January 23, 2015
Massaging the Message: In a complete inversion of reality, the Charlie Hebdo massacre story is morphing into a parable about how difficult it is to be a Muslim in the West
Benny Huang has been wondering how long it was going to take for "the talking heads on MSNBC to portray Muslims as the true victims of the Charlie Hebdo massacre."
In a complete inversion of reality, this story is morphing into a parable about how difficult it is to be a Muslim in Europe.
… MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell is deeply concerned about the terrorist attacks that rocked Paris earlier this month. Unfortunately, her misdirected concern seems to manifest itself in a lot of fretting over how the attacks will benefit the political Right.
“There are two other issues that need to be addressed,” said Mitchell. “One is anti-Muslim sentiment throughout Europe, anti-immigration sentiment, the rise of the right wing, and of course anti-Semitism.”
… Mitchell’s comments echoed sentiments expressed by Christopher Dickey, Newsweek’s bureau chief in Paris, who appeared on MSNBC’s The Cycle. “This is an issue that’s going to be used very effectively and cynically by the far-right politicians,” said Dickey, “not only of France but especially in the rest of Europe, places like Dresden, places like the Netherlands…” Translation: Europe’s insufferable right-wingers aren’t actually concerned with the seemingly endless acts of terrorism or even about their own culture being displaced by one that’s stuck in the seventh century. They merely “use” those issues, “very effectively and cynically.” It’s brown skin they hate.
… Andrea Mitchell and Christopher Dickey spend an inordinate amount of time worrying that the wrong people will reap electoral benefits from media coverage of the Paris attacks. It’s difficult to imagine Mitchell, Dickey, or any other reporter working for any other mainstream news outfit fretting that saturation coverage of the 2011 Tucson shooting would be used “effectively and cynically” by gun-grabbers on the far Left, probably because they can’t even conceive of anything called “the far Left.”
Incidentally, I once debated Christopher Dickey (the son of novelist James Dickey) on international television.
The dirty little secret of journalism is that reporters are very conscious of their substantial influence. They are not just hired eyes and ears conveying all they see and hear. Journalists know that news coverage can impact policy and world events. Consequently, they think of their constant massaging of the news as just plain old responsibility. Yet most journalists still pay lip service to the ideal of covering the news without fear or favor, something that simply can’t be achieved while constantly placing their collective thumb on the scale to ensure that one side of the debate can never win.
That’s not “responsibility;” it’s rigging the game. The role of journalists isn’t to wonder whom their stories will benefit. Their job is to report the news and let the chips fall where they may.
Mitchell and Dickey aren’t the only reporters who ask themselves “What will the Right do with this story?” A case in point can be found in Andrew Norfolk, the Times of London reporter who broke the Rotherham sex ring story in which a group of child rapists across Northern England victimized approximately 1,400 young girls. Authorities were aware of the sex ring for about eleven years of its sixteen year existence but refused to make arrests because the perpetrators were almost entirely Pakistani men and the victims were almost entirely white English girls.
Andrew Norfolk admitted feeling tempted to join the government in its conspiracy of silence. “I didn’t want the story to be true because it made me deeply uncomfortable,” said Norfolk. “The suggestion that men from a minority ethnic background were committing sex crimes against white children was always going to be the far right’s fantasy story come true. Innocent white victims, evil dark-skinned abusers. Liberal angst kicked instinctively into top gear.”
Thankfully he got over his liberal angst long enough to cover the story but his admitted reluctance to do his job raises questions about deeper problems in the journalistic community. How many other Rotherham-type stories never see the light of day because some reporter feels duty-bound not to give the Right any grist for their mill? We may never know.
Norfolk’s remarks are troubling for another reason—his implication that young girls being raped is the fulfillment of the far Right’s fantasy.
… France has its own censors, ever eager to filter the news out of some warped sense of responsibility. Jean-Claude Dassier, director general of the news outfit LCI—France’s version of CNN—admitted in 2005 that his network shielded viewers from seeing the true destruction wrought by angry Muslim rioters who were then besieging France. “Politics in France is heading to the right and I don’t want rightwing politicians back in second, or even first place because we showed burning cars on television,” he confided.
The only rational conclusion is that Dassier wants to keep the French public uninformed because they’d likely vote for Front National, France’s unapologetically nationalist party, if they knew what the heck was happening to their country. Better not to cover the news lest people figure out that the “bigots” have a point.
… I have no doubt that most journalists think very hard about what they broadcast and that’s the problem. They don’t give it to us straight. The constant impulse to shape the news to fit an agenda strips their reporting of any value. That omnipresent question “What would the Right do with this?” hangs over their coverage, influencing editorial decisions to the point that their end product can only be called propaganda.
Friday, January 16, 2015
I wasn’t exactly surprised by the attackconfesses the Telegraph's Stephen Clarke.
First of all, there have been plenty of shootings with AK47s in France recently. They seem to be as trendy as iPhones. They even have a slang name in French – “une kalache“. Most of them are apparently in the Marseille area, in the possession of drug gangs, but they also get sold on to the rest of France. A couple of years ago, only three or four kilometres from where I live, some Polish men were walking to a birthday party when they were stopped by two muggers, one of whom had a Kalashnikov. When the Poles refused to hand over their money, the gunman let rip, killing one victim and shooting his friend in the foot. The police caught them soon afterwards, after a man arrived at a nearby hospital complaining that he’d lost some of his toes in an accident. It sounds insane, but it’s true, and the surviving Poles were probably lucky that their mugger hadn’t had any weapons training.
The other reason why I was horrified, but not exactly surprised, by the Charlie Hebdo attack was that the magazine had been provoking some highly sensitive people. Of course I’m not saying that anyone deserved to be shot. I’m just saying that extreme provocation was the magazine’s raison d’être, and they knew that they were playing with fire. That was why the editor had a police bodyguard (who was also killed in the attack). Charlie Hebdo belongs to a tradition of French satire that pushes anti-establishment mockery to the edge, and beyond. Their cartoons could be viciously accurate, especially when deflating the egos of politicians, but they could also be just plain offensive. Often they had a point, but sometimes they seemed to forget the point and descend into gratuitous obscenity.
This was why the French were fond of Charlie Hebdo, even if hardly any of them actually read it until this week. Cabu, Wolinski and the veteran cartoonists were like old friends. The kind of friends you love but wouldn’t dare invite to your house because you know they’d take the pee out of your other guests, graffiti the walls, and explain to you why your whole life was a failure – while smiling charmingly. They were like Sheldon in The Big Bang Theory – social misfits who felt it was their duty to broadcast their home truths loud and clear, and who couldn’t understand if anyone was offended. The sad thing is that real life is not an American sitcom.
For all these reasons, I personally am not so sure that the cover of today’s edition of Charlie Hebdo is a good idea. Why cause new offence, when what France really needs is some determined peacemaking? …
Thursday, January 15, 2015
… in the wake of the horrific massacre at the offices of French satire magazine Charlie Hebdowrites Benny Huang, a defiant breeze has swept across Europe.
Londoners, Berliners, and Romans are reaching out in solidarity to the people of Paris in their time of grief and anger. “Je Suis Charlie” (I am Charlie) they proclaim, an affirmation of their common European heritage of free speech and openness.
Yet I can’t help but wonder if the mourners aren’t a day late and a euro short in their defense of a value that has slowly but persistently eroded over a period of decades. It would be wonderful if the sentiment expressed at these vigils were a genuine revival of the spirit of 1848 but it hardly seems possible to “defend” a principle that in all likelihood no longer exists.
Free speech is dead in Europe and while it is certainly tempting to blame the immigrants, as intolerant as they may be, it would also be folly. The real culprits are the cowardly, hedonistic, post-Christian, post-industrial native born white majority.
The three bestial al-Qaeda terrorists who murdered twelve people at Charlie Hebdo HQ might seem like menacing enemies of free speech but they’re actually bush league amateurs when it comes to gagging people. The real pros are sitting behind desks in the various capitals of Europe. Nearly every European nation extends some guarantee of free speech to its citizens, and nearly every one of them flagrantly violates that guarantee.
… The authorities in Britain arrest people who harbor banned ideas, and believe me, I’ve got a lot of them. Clegg’s prescient countryman, Eric Blair (George Orwell) predicted this phenomenon nearly seventy years ago and gave it a name—thoughtcrime.
Thought criminals should take notice that they will find no shelter in today’s United Kingdom. Little more than a week before the cartoon jihadists spilled French blood, police in Scotland tweeted the following threat: “Please be aware that we will continue to monitor comments on social media & any offensive comments will be investigated.” Offensive to whom, exactly? They don’t say. But in a free society it shouldn’t matter a lick. Offensive comments are exactly the kind of comments that free speech is designed to protect. Innocuous comments don’t require protection.
… On the Continent, outspoken MP Geert Wilders faces criminal prosecution under “hate speech” laws for comments he made about immigration. At a rally in the Hague he asked a crowd “Do you want more or fewer Moroccans?” to which they chanted, “Fewer! Fewer! Fewer!” Mindless xenophobia? I don’t think so, though it’s also irrelevant. Free speech protects mindless xenophobia.
Nor is everyone feeling the spirit of freedom after the Charlie Hebdo massacre. Swedish MP Veronica Palm contacted the police to report that another MP of an opposing party, Bjoern Soeder, might have violated Swedish law with a comment he posted on Facebook concerning the terrorist attack in Paris. “’The Religion of Peace’ shows its face,” he said, clearly indicating with his use of derisive quotes that he doubts Islam’s pacifistic nature, as many people do. His nemesis Veronica Palm declared: “This statement is offensive to a group of people and I want to see if it comes under laws against inciting racial hatred.” Ms. Palm apparently does not understand that Islam is not a race. Even if it were, free speech guarantees the right to make racist comments as well.Are we much better? Oh, a little bit, I suppose. Anyone who thinks that free speech is alive and well in America ought to experience the suffocating environment of academia. If you happen to be on a college campus and you still think America guarantees a healthy exchange of controversial ideas then you’re probably one of the drones who keeps the rest of us line. Good for you.
Europe, however, is a decade or two ahead of us in the downward slide toward mind control. Governmental censorship has infested the birthplaces of Voltaire and John Stuart Mill.
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
In the American liberal compass, the needle is always pointing to places like Denmarkwrites The New York Post's Kyle Smith (tack till Instapundit).
Everything they most fervently hope for here has already happened there.
So: Why does no one seem particularly interested in visiting Denmark? (“Honey, on our European trip, I want to see Tuscany, Paris, Berlin and . . . Jutland!”) Visitors say Danes are joyless to be around. Denmark suffers from high rates of alcoholism. In its use of antidepressants it ranks fourth in the world. (Its fellow Nordics the Icelanders are in front by a wide margin.) Some 5% of Danish men have had sex with an animal. Denmark’s productivity is in decline, its workers put in only 28 hours a week, and everybody you meet seems to have a government job. Oh, and as The Telegraph put it, it’s “the cancer capital of the world.”
So how happy can these drunk, depressed, lazy, tumor-ridden, pig-bonking bureaucrats really be?
Let’s look a little closer, asks Michael Booth, a Brit who has lived in Denmark for many years, in his new book, “The Almost Nearly Perfect People: Behind the Myth of the Scandinavian Utopia” (Picador).
Those sky-high happiness surveys, it turns out, are mostly bunk. Asking people “Are you happy?” means different things in different cultures. In Japan, for instance, answering “yes” seems like boasting, Booth points out. Whereas in Denmark, it’s considered “shameful to be unhappy,” newspaper editor Anne Knudsen says in the book.
Moreover, there is a group of people that believes the Danes are lying when they say they’re the happiest people on the planet. This group is known as “Danes.”
“Over the years I have asked many Danes about these happiness surveys — whether they really believe that they are the global happiness champions — and I have yet to meet a single one of them who seriously believes it’s true,” Booth writes. “They tend to approach the subject of their much-vaunted happiness like the victims of a practical joke waiting to discover who the perpetrator is.”
… Denmark is a land of 5.3 million homogenous people. Everyone talks the same, everyone looks the same, everyone thinks the same.
This is universally considered a feature — a glorious source of national pride in the land of humblebrag. Any rebels will be made to conform; tall poppies will be chopped down to average.
… One of the most country’s most widely known quirks is a satirist’s crafting of what’s still known as the Jante Law — the Ten Commandments of Buzzkill. “You shall not believe that you are someone,” goes one. “You shall not believe that you are as good as we are,” is another. Others included “You shall not believe that you are going to amount to anything,” “You shall not believe that you are more important than we are” and “You shall not laugh at us.”
… Macho isn’t a problem in Sweden. Dubbed the least masculine country on Earth by anthropologist Geert Hofstede, it’s the place where male soldiers are issued hairnets instead of being made to cut their hair.
… As for its supposedly sweet-natured national persona, in a poll in which Swedes were asked to describe themselves, the adjectives that led the pack were “envious, stiff, industrious, nature-loving, quiet, honest, dishonest and xenophobic.” In last place were these words: “masculine,” “sexy” and “artistic.”
Scandinavia, as a wag in The Economist once put it, is a great place to be born — but only if you are average. The dead-on satire of Scandinavian mores “Together” is a 2000 movie by Sweden’s Lukas Moodysson set in a multi-family commune in 1975, when the groovy Social Democratic ideal was utterly unquestioned in Sweden.
In the film’s signature scene, a sensitive-apron wearing man tells his niece and nephew as he is making breakfast, “You could say that we are like porridge. First we’re like small oat flakes — small, dry, fragile, alone. But then we’re cooked with the other oat flakes and become soft. We join so that one flake can’t be told apart from another. We’re almost dissolved. Together we become a big porridge that’s warm, tasty, and nutritious and yes, quite beautiful, too. So we are no longer small and isolated but we have become warm, soft and joined together. Part of something bigger than ourselves. Sometimes life feels like an enormous porridge, don’t you think?”
Then he spoons a great glutinous glob of tasteless starch unto the poor kids’ plates. That’s Scandinavia for you, folks: Bland, wholesome, individual-erasing mush. But, hey, at least we’re all united in being slowly digested by the system.
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
Muhammad will be back on the cover of the next edition of Charlie Hebdo,reports Fox News,
along with a message of forgiveness from surviving staffers at the French satirical magazine where 12 people were killed last week by a pair of Islamist brothers angered over the publication's penchant for showing images of the prophet.
The decimated, but uncowed magazine upped its usual print run of 60,000 copies to 3 million for the magazine, due out Wednesday but released to the French newspaper Liberation. Fierce bidding on eBay had editions commanding as much as $500 following the outpouring of support for Charlie Hebdo, whose four top cartoonists were among the dozen killed. Editor-in-chief Gérard Biard said in a Tuesday radio interview the decision to run a cartoon if Muhammad holding a a “Je Suis Charlie” sign with the caption "Tout est pardonne," or "All is forgiven," and said the message was not that Muhammad was offering forgiveness, as some initially assumed.
"It is we who forgive, not Muhammad,” he told France Info.
Like millions of others around the world, I’m horrified and grief-stricken by the sickening events that unfolded in Paris this weekwrites the Daily Telegraph's Mark Johnson,
that snuffed out the lives of 12 innocents in a brutal and murderous attack.
It’s difficult to comprehend the malignancy that orders the death of innocent people in the name of anything, let alone a religion. The French national motto ‘Liberty, Equality, Fraternity’ has been tested, but it will prevail.
As a nation now takes the time it needs to mourn the terrible loss of January 7, Charlie Hebdo – the name of the newspaper where the attacks were focused – is at the same time becoming world famous as a symbol of defiance against those who would seek to control freedom of expression.
Monday, January 12, 2015
[Disclaimer: not for young children, and definitely NSFW]RV:
I was listening to NPR [Thursday] morning and, on the top of the usual tripe, some idiot correspondent in Paris described Charlie Hebdo as a mix of Mad, Playboy, and The Daily Show.Update: More covers from ActuaBD (merci à OT)
If you're interested, I'll try to describe what it was, where it comes from, and why the death of the main, historical cartoonists is such a shock for 3 generations of French people.
This is my take on it, I don't pretend to be objective. I'm a Frenchman who grew up with these guys, and stuff they did played a big role in my childhood.
… First off, French humor in general is far more rude and crass than American humor. We're not nearly as prudish as Americans in general are, and culturally much more confrontational than Americans, who already are a very confrontational bunch by world's standards.
Evidently, it's impossible to give a proper comparison or point of reference in the American pop culture, especially being an immigrant that knows very little about American pop culture.
As it stood 2 days ago, the best humor equivalent I can think of would be some moments in the movie Team America, World Police: getting a point across in and crude way, uncaring of people's opinions and beliefs, and primarily for shits and giggles. Here's a very Charlie Hebdo moment in this movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cV_q-mVAAA
Charlie Hebdo used to be a pretty underground, extremely Gallic mag called Hara Kiri. This wiki page traces the transition from Hara Kiri to Charlie Hebdo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hara-Kiri_%28magazine%29
Hara Kiri's subtitle was "Le journal bête et méchant": litt. the stupid and mean magazine, but IMHO it's better translated as the For Shits and Giggles Magazine.
They were running extremely outrageous stuff, even by Gallic standards. If you're not at the office, here are some covers: https://www.google.com/search?q=hara+kiri+magazine&espv=2&biw=1110&bih=1042&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=zrquVLiYMsauggSG0oCwDw&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ
The founder and captain of this boat of fools was a particular character with the nom de plume Professeur Choron. The guy is kind of an armchair general GG Allin … [Professeur Choron (Georges Bernier)] was (he died in 2005) an extremely rude, nihilistic, alcoholic, in-your-face jerk, but he also was extremely well read and witty, and he saw through literally everybody's bullshit. He could bury anybody under a pile of his own shit in 2 sentences, discarding entirely the "class" and "social rank" of who he was addressing. He hated absolutely everybody: French, Italians, Jews, Arabs, Germans, Blacks, Americans, Russians, Chinese, any nationality, any race or creed, you name it; the whole damn world was a shitter to him, and he was the guy taking a massive dump in it while enjoying himself and making everybody laugh at the same time.
He's the guy who set the tone for Hara Kiri and later Charlie Hebdo. Hara Kiri used to be pretty underground, but everybody who was in their teens in the 60s knew it. My father had a subscription to this mag and kept them, and I used to steal them (he didn't want me to get a hold of them) when I was a teenager. They were so crass and rustled so many jimmies that they ended up being influential; much to their regret I would say, because they were merely working hard on the funniest way shit in your cornflakes, nothing more, nothing less.
It's probably hard to understand why such a thing would be so popular on that side of the pond, but keep in mind that the post-WW2 generations on the 2 sides of the ponds grew to to have extremely divergent mindsets. I won't venture into some victors vs humiliated losers pseudo-philosophical tripe, you get the point.
As cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo grew older, they got much softer too. But they really kept their extremely provocative attitude from Hara Kiri, something they took pride in, and everybody in France saluted them for, to the extent it became a source of national pride when these goat fuckers got their panties in a twist over a drawing.
Then there was Cabu, the main cartoonist at Charlie Hebdo. Cabu [Jean Cabut] was a pretty soft spoken, far left leaning Anarchist. This guy worked at Hara Kiri then Charlie Hebdo, but also other cartoon magazines like Fluide Glacial that many people my generation read. He also featured in kids TV show like Récré A2 that virtually my entire generation watched (there were 3 TV channels nation wide at the time) when coming back from school. I don't know any American equivalent since I didn't grow up here, but imagine a guy you used to watch and love every day for your entire childhood: he was THAT guy to an entire generation of French people.
Cabu was very far from Choron as it comes to personal behavior, but they did share a very strong taste for "provocation", for lack of a better term.
Charb [Stéphane Charbonnier] and Tignous [Bernard Verlhac] are also well know by the large readership of Fluide Glacial, a cartoon mag that made 2 generations of French people laugh their asses off, and counting.
Wolinksi has always been a commie, but he published so many cartoons and drew in so many commie publications that a lot of people knew and enjoyed him (there's no shortage of commies in France).
So there it is: these people were considered a national treasure, and they were a huge part of French popular culture for 3 generations of French people. Even though they were arguably controversial and proud of it, they were not considered such in France, since they became such an important part of the modern French culture. Don't get me wrong, I'm not idolizing them, after all I disagreed with Charlie's political views 99% of the time, but to the average Frenchman they were an actual part of our lives, including mine.
This is what we lost [Wednesday]. …
Wednesday, January 07, 2015
French police have identified the three Islamist gunmen who mounted Wednesday's terrorist attack at a Paris satirical magazine's officereports Fox News, killing four controversial cartoonists along with eight other people.
Two officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, named the suspects to
the Associated Press as Frenchmen Said Kouachi and Cherif Kouachi, in their early 30s, as well as 18-year-old Hamyd Mourad, whose nationality wasn't immediately clear.
One of the officials said they were linked to a Yemeni terrorist network.
All three remain at large.
… The gunmen moved with the skill and precision of highly-trained commandos, military experts told FoxNews.com.
See No Pasarán's archives on Charlie Hebdo, the martyred magazine which was firebombed already in 2011.
• "Go to the Devil, Charlie Hebdo!" "You Will Reap the Consequences"
• "Go to the Devil, Charlie Hebdo!" "You Will Reap the Consequences"
“We’ve avenged the honor of the prophet!” the killers shouted after they machine-gunned the Paris office of a satirical publication, killing at least 12
Three black-clad gunmen shouting "Allahu Akbar!" stormed the Paris offices of a satirical publication known for lampooning Islam Wednesday,reports Fox News,
killing 12, including its editor, three political cartoonists and a police officer whose cold-blooded murder at close range was captured on a disturbing video.Les dessinateurs (de gauche à droite) Cabu, Charb, Tignous, et Wolinski,
The masked, Kalashnikov-toting shooters moved with military precision, and then escaped following the 11:30 a.m. attack at Charlie Hebdo, the publication known for challenging Muslim terrorists with a 2011 caricature of Prophet Muhammed on its cover and which recently tweeted a cartoon of Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and were being sought.
“We’ve avenged the honor of the prophet!” the killers shouted, according to witnesses who spoke to Sky News. Other witnesses said the men shouted "Allahu Akbar," Arabic for "God is great." The gunmen spoke French without any accent, according to Le Monde.
tous décédés dans la fusillade de "Charlie Hebdo" © DR
That evening, tens of thousands of Frenchmen will gather in streets across France to mourn the deaths of the Charlie Hebdo artists and to declare that they are not afraid…
The French consumer really ought to feel grateful to the French service sector for actually serving them
… today is the first day of the winter soldes – the salesexclaims Stephen Clarke.
… any shop daring to start its soldes before 8am, even online, could have been hit with a hefty fine. The sales are defined in article D 310-15-2 of France’s code du commerce, and various government websites publish timetables giving the exact dates when they’re permitted to start and finish.
Strange, you might think, to be so strict. Surely the French government should be rebooting the economy, letting businesses do what they want to make money? We’ve recently been told that two major links in the French retail chain are about to break. Surcouf, a computer shop, and the Virgin Megastores are putting their electronic keys under their mousepads. You’d think that France would have encouraged them to slash prices and tempt in the customers before things got too bad. Mais non. You will begin your winter sales on (and I quote) “8 o’clock on the morning of the second Wednesday in January, except if it falls after the 12th, in which case the sales will begin on the first Wednesday of January.” It’s the same for the summer sales, except they’re on the last Wednesday of June. And they can only last for five weeks.
To us free-market Anglos, it sounds crazy. If I as a shopkeeper want to cut my profits and clear my shelves or racks before, say, going ski-ing or heading off on a stockbuying trip, why shouldn’t I?
The simple answer is: because you’re in France. But to get some more subtle detail on the subject, I turned to an expert, Pascale Hebel, head of the consumer department of the Crédoc, the Centre de Recherche pour l’Étude et l’Observations des Conditions de Vie.
“It’s all about protecting small businesses,” she told me. “The law stops big chain stores cutting prices whenever they want, and it also makes it illegal to sell anything at a loss, even during sales periods. That way, small businesses, who can’t afford to sell too cheaply, have a fair chance.”
This is similar to the French law that protects small bookshops – even the on-line giants can’t take more than 5% off the recommended retail price of a book, which explains why there are still so many independents (and, incidentally, why French books are so incredibly expensive – the French large paperback edition of my 1000 Years of Annoying the French costs 21 euros, compared to about £9 full price in the UK.)
… In short, in sounds like business as usual – the French consumer really ought to feel grateful to the French service sector for actually serving them.
Tuesday, January 06, 2015
You're in the Army Now: “While these insurgents are chopping people’s heads off and raping women, the idea they can take us to court because somebody shouted at them is ridiculous”
The latest military guidelines on interrogating terrorists and other prisoners are so stringent that it makes interrogation pointless, write Robert Mendick and Tim Ross in the Daily Telegraph (“Don’t yell at terrorist suspects, soldiers told”).
British soldiers have “lost their capability” to interrogate terrorist insurgents because of strict new rules on questioning that even ban shouting in captives’ ears, military chiefs have warned.
The rules — detailed in court papers obtained by The Telegraph — also prevent military intelligence officers from banging their fists on tables or walls, or using “insulting words” when interrogating a suspect.
… “The effect of the ambulance-chasing lawyers and the play-it-safe judges is that we have got to the point where we have lost our operational capability to do tactical questioning. That in itself brings risks to the lives of the people we deploy.
“These insurgents are not nice people. These are criminals. They behead people; they keep sex slaves. They are not normal people.”
Lord West, the former First Sea Lord and national security adviser, said: “We have gone too far in letting people take us to court.
“While these insurgents are chopping people’s heads off and raping women, the idea they can take us to court because somebody shouted at them is ridiculous.”
In an interview with The Telegraph, Michael Fallon, the Defence Secretary, voices his concern about the legal scrutiny on British troops. He says he is gravely concerned about the rising cost of legal cases “that turn out to be completely spurious”. He added: “What’s important for us is to understand the legal scrutiny that we are under all the time now, the cases that are being brought sometimes spuriously by law firms representing people who claim they were wrongly detained.