Apparently he was upset about a refund.
The man was arrested outside the store, and charged,
Ouch! Hope this guy won the French Lottery…He’s going to need it to pay for all that!
Apparently he was upset about a refund.
The man was arrested outside the store, and charged,
Ouch! Hope this guy won the French Lottery…He’s going to need it to pay for all that!
In an attempt to curb anorexia and models dieting to the point of severe health consequences – the Government of France has enacted a law requiring that all Models in the Fashion Industry meet a minimum BMI which is considered healthy. Probably doesn’t mean that fashion models will start looking like average healthy women, but it should stop some of the grotesque abuse.
A French health-reform bill that has been colloquially termed a “skinny-model ban” was introduced at the National Assembly in March and was passed into law on Friday. The new law calls for models who want to work in France to present a doctor’s note attesting to their overall health and proving a BMI of 18 or over. (In the BMI system, 18.5 is the cutoff between underweight and a healthy weight.) Agencies and brands who break this law could be looking at a six-month prison sentence of 75,000 euro fine. Another proviso notes that advertising images that have been digitally altered — whether that means making the models appear smaller or larger — must contain the words “retouched photograph,” or risk a fine of at least 37,500 euros.
There is some precedent for this kind of government action, at least abroad. Italy, Israel, and Spain have all passed similar “skinny model” legislation, Denmark is considering doing so, and the U.K.’s Advertising Standards Authority has cracked down on images of what it deems to be too-thin models, notably in a recent Saint Laurent ad.
Women’s Wear Daily spoke to members of the French fashion industry about their thoughts on the bill, and it sounds like complaints abound. The head of France’s model agency union, Isabelle Saint-Félix, told the paper that she felt the law unjustly penalized French modeling agencies, and could even result in fashion shows or shoots being relocated outside the country. “Modeling agencies respond to the demand of advertisers, designers and photographers,” she told the paper. “One asks models to fit in a dress — not the opposite.” She added that members of the industry had not been consulted when the law was being drafted. Stylist Simon Gensowski seemed to concur, saying, “Rather than body-shaming women with eating disorders, it would have been wise to reconsider current sample sizes.” Whether or not you take issue with the law, this coming Paris Fashion Week is shaping up to be an interesting one.
Maili is a country in West Africa, where the legendary city of Timbuktu is located. It is a landlocked country which was formerly a French colony. This morning, at least 2 Al Qaeda Terrorists attacked the Radisson Hotel in Bamako, the capital city, and at one point held 170 hostages. Mali Special Forces, assisted by UN Troops have stormed the hotel, and it now appears that at least 27 people were executed by the attackers. Al Qaeda has claimed responsibility for the attack.
This appears to be a “me too” attack by Al Qaeda such as not to lose status against ISIS with their attack in Paris last week.
More than 100 people were reportedly taken hostage and at least three killed Friday by gunmen at a Radisson hotel in the city of Bamako, the capital of Mali, in another apparent jihadi attack directed at France. French troops were involved in operations against Islamic radicals in Mali, a former French colony, as recently as last year. A number of hostages have reportedly been freed by Malian forces, but the entire hotel has not yet been secured. From CNN:
Security forces have begun a counter-assault on a Malian hotel where gunmen took more than 100 hostages Friday morning, French President Francois Hollande told reporters in Paris on Friday afternoon.
The situation began around 7 a.m. at the Radisson Blu Hotel in Mali’s capital, Bamako, when two or three attackers stormed the hotel, firing guns and initially taking about 170 people hostage, officials said … By noon, the country’s state broadcaster, ORTM, reported that at least 80 of the hostages had been freed.
Hollande happens to have mentioned French counterterrorism activities in Mali in a public statement Thursday; in 2013 and 2014 French forces helped retake areas in the country’s north that had been seized by al Qaida–allied Islamic militants. Reuterssays that the gunmen who attacked the Radisson shouted “Allahu Akbar” as they stormed the hotel and that some guests who were able to recite verses of the Koran were allowed to go free.
Latest update off the wire –
The UN peacekeepers saw 12 corpses in the basement of the hotel and another 15 on the second floor, the UN official told Reuters on condition of anonymity. He added that the UN troops were still helping Malian authorities search the hotel.
And this from Jason Burke of the Guardian (UK)
If al-Mourabitoun, an al-Qaida-linked group, is indeed responsible for the Bamako siege it is a stunning example of how the deep rivalry between al-Qaida, founded in 1987 or 1988, and IS, founded in 2014, is responsible for a wave of violence across much of the Islamic world and, as we found out, last week, beyond.
IS broke away from al-Qaida and its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and the leader of al-Qaida, Ayman al-Zawahiri, detest each other.
The world of militancy is is riven with splits and doctrinal differences, personal animosities and grudges. There is also fierce competition for recruits, donations and attention.
Security services have long been aware of how violence can escalate when groups divide or fragment and the factions battle for supremacy, each trying to outdo the other. This may well be what has driven the timing of this new operation, the first high-profile such attack by al-Qaida for some time. The group is trying to steal back some of the limelight and dominate the news agenda again, as it once did so often and so effectively.
What appears clear is that the Paris attacks have intensified and accelerated a chaotic, dynamic reordering of alliances and capabilities within the broader landscape of Islamic militancy, meaning that an already hugely complex threat is increasingly difficult for security services to read.
One of the reasons Republicans avoid the issue of what to do against ISIS – other than to sabre rattle for the easily mislead low intelligence base, and Democrats have a hard time enunciating a strategy is that the only way to actually end the ISIS threat involves a number of politically unpalatable choices. And I don’t mean toesies on the ground type stupid.
ISIS, like Al Qaeda is a creation of the wahabi sect. Said sect is financially supported and provided cover throughout the Middle East by (gasp) our “friend and ally” Saudi Arabia.
There are two basic ways to end Middle East Terrorism:
#1 is executed by raising the level of terror, regardless of civilian casualties to the level nobody in the Middle East will ever want to consider attacking the West again. Red Army/Roman obliteration of enough folks, everyone else is too busy hiding under a rock to cause any more trouble. Think WWII and Dresden or Hiroshima type destruction. Make it clear that in any further terrorist attack the home cities, or cities in which they trained will be leveled. It may take Hitler/Stalin level carnage to get the message through.
#2 is to go after the source. Ergo, pick a Holy Day, and declare a drone free day simultaneously bombing each and every Mosque and Madrassa in the Middle East where Wahabi Witch Doctors spew their hate. Within 24 hrs, completely shut down all Saudi (and Turkey) international holdings, whether gold, property, or money, and deport all Saudi Citizens from the US (and Europe). Cut the entire financial string. Seize all ships, businesses, and other assets. Pick the hometowns of the current ISIS and Al Qaeda Leaders, Send a few dozen B-52’s and obliterate it – whether they are there or not. Declare null and void all treaties, toss Turkey out of NATO, and declare them Pariah States until such time as the Governments take substantive action to end the support of, and financing the proselytization of Wahhabism worldwide, and material or other support for ISIS and Al Qaeda.
Of course such will likely cause the collapse of the tottering House of Saud…And possibly an internal revolution in Turkey. Let them fight each other, with the understanding that should the fundamentalist crazies win – the only thing they have done is to provide hard targets.
And lastly…Learn to live with ourselves afterward.
At this point, there are important components to events which are not clear: Were the plans for the downing of the Russian airliner in Sinai, last week’smultiple suicide attacks in Beirut and the bombings in Paris, conceived within the Islamic State leadership and the operations executed according to the wishes and directions of the ISIS leadership in Raqqa or Mosul?
President François Hollande implied a connection to Raqqa, but gives no evidence. But if this indeed is so, and let us presume it is, it signals a major shift in strategy by ISIS. The consequences imply that the West may no longer be able to fend off acknowledging the Wahhabist origins of movements such as ISIS and Al Qaeda, nor ignore their umbilical connection to Saudi Arabia, which has succored them — even as the House of Saud now fears that its monstrous progeny is intent on “cleansing”Arabia of the Al Saud themselves, and returning it the pristine Wahhabism on which Saudi Arabia originally was founded — the “one, true Islam” that ISIS insists upon.
In the wake of 9/11, the fact that 15 of the 19 attackers were Saudi citizens was airbrushed out from the landscape in favor of claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction — which Washington wished the world would focus on more. It will not be so easy to ignore the historic dimension now.
America may have to take a deep breath and fundamentally reconsider the nature of its alliances with the likes of Turkey and Saudi Arabia, which both openly proclaimedtheir intent, in Syria today, to go on aiding the gamut of these Caliphate forces (ISIS, Al Qaeda and Ahrar al-Sham). Recall that ordinary Syrians have been living Paris’ Friday terror on a daily basis, for five years now. It is hard to see how the West can continue its ambiguous game of footsie with such forces, in the wake of what may have happened in Sinai, in Beirut and Paris.
So, what can have prompted this major strategic shift by ISIS? Well, there has always been one major point of dissent between Al Qaeda and ISIS: Al Qaeda’s leadership hassaid, openly, that it believes that ISIS had erred by proclaiming the Caliphate, the Islamic State. The ISIS proclamation was premature and the conditions were not propitious, Al Qaeda’s leaders stated.
Al Qaeda military operations focus on the “vexation and exhaustion” of America and its Western allies, which would eventually lead to an overextension of Western forces in many ways: morally, militarily, politically and economically. A reflection of this different approach to ISIS has been Al Qaeda’s willingness to work and cooperate with other insurgent forces in Syria; whereas ISIS rejects cooperation, demanding instead absolute allegiance and obedience.
ISIS opted for the absolute: an all out push to establish God’s “Principality” (a Caliphate), here and now, on physical territory, with borders, administration, Sharia law and a system of justice. The big difference between the two movements in effect, is “territoriality.” Al Qaeda is global, ephemeral and virtual, whereas ISIS is territorial.
But what if ISIS fears to lose this territoriality? Strange things are happening in Syria. Villages that have been held by ISIS for two years are falling to government forces in hours. Everywhere small gains are being made by the Syrian army or its allies, across contested areas. It is too early to say that ISIS is collapsing — but a part of it may be.
And if ISIS begins to lose its distinguishing feature — that it is a territorial power in Syria and Iraq — then perhaps its leadership might conclude that Ayman al-Zawahiri was right: Al Qaeda was right, and ISIS, if it faces losing its territoriality, must adopt Al Qaeda strategies (Al Qaeda has already called for a united stand with ISIS against the Russian and Iranian interventions in Syria).
But what, on the other hand, if this is not a strategic decision by the ISIS leadership, but rather that the bomb on the Russian aircraft and the suicide bombings in Beirut and Paris were spontaneous, copycat attacks by local elements and not conceived, ordered and operationally initiated in Raqqa or Mosul?
In this case, Europe has a different problem — but one no less serious. In some ways, the public evidence does not lean towards a Raqqa-led initiative. It leans the other way. From what we know to date, all of those involved in the Paris attacks were European citizens. In short, it was a case of European on European war. It is not clear that any of the perpetrators were returnees from the conflict in Syria (the authenticity of the Syrian passport found at the scene has been questioned).
And if there was no direct order from the ISIS command, there is prima facie in Europe, a shadow Al Qaeda-like structure taking shape: the attacks in Paris were well-planned, prepared and executed. The claims of responsibility are not definitive: there have been examples where Islamic leaderships have accepted responsibility andclaimed an attack even when they did not order it — and whereby claiming it, severely damaged the movement.
Robert Fisk has noted:
Omar Ismail Mostafai, one of the suicide killers in Paris, was of Algerian origin — and so, too, may be other named suspects. Said and Cherif Kouachi, the brothers who murdered the Charlie Hebdo journalists, were also of Algerian parentage. They came from the five million-plus Algerian community in France, for many of whom the Algerian war never ended, and who live today in the slums of Saint-Denis and other Algerian banlieues of Paris.
If this is so then not just France, but other European states, too, will need to take a deep breath and wonder how their policies have metamorphosed, from ostensible multiculturalism, into a “soft apartheid” in which Europe’s Muslim citizens feel the discrimination and contempt of many of their fellow citizens… Read the rest here…
Translated … “They have the weapons. F$%k Them! We have the Champagne!”
The horrific and despicable attacks in Paris, France will dominate the news cycle for at least a week to come. However for most Americans living in America, and especially for minority Americans, the threat of being harmed by International terrorism is about the same as getting hit by a meteorite from the sky while walking down the street. The threat of being the victim of Domestic Terrorism, either violent – or nonviolent through word, symbolic attack, or state sponsored through the Law Enforcement is an everyday reality.
A “Hate Crime” is an act of Domestic Terrorism by different euphemism. The last week’s series of death threats against black kids at U-Mo, Howard, Mich, Bowie U, and now George Mason illustrates just how common race or ethnic based Domestic Terrorism is. Not even discussing the murders at a Church in Charleston. More people in the US have been killed by Domestic terrorists since 9-11 than jihadis.
Part of the reason for that is, despite the success by ISIS in recruiting a few disaffected Americans to their murderous case – Islamic Fanaticism has no real outlet in America. There is no newspaper spouting “Kill the Infidels” daily in articles across it’s front page, no cyber madrasas teaching the religion of hate, no web sites teaching how to blow up your neighbors for the Islamic fanatic cause… And no television or cable channel(s) dedicated to the views of violent Islamic Fanatics.
But there is for the racist white wing.
In a still developing situation, the city of Paris, France, is under attack by terrorists armed with guns and explosives. Many dozens of people have been killed. A still undetermined number of people have been wounded. The terrorists took dozens of hostages in a concert hall. French police and military forces have been deployed. There is mayhem and blood in the streets of Paris.
President Obama has correctly described this day’s horrific events as “an attack on all of humanity and the universal values we share.”
Terrorism is politically motivated violence against a vulnerable population that is designed to intimidate, sow fear, create panic and alter public policy.
Terrorism is serious business that kills people, breaks bodies and alters lives.
It is not a game.
In the United States, the right-wing media and movement conservatives have for decades consistently used eliminationist and other violent rhetoric to describe liberals, progressives and other people with whom they disagree. As was seen in the recent attacks on a Charleston-area black church, and other violence by right-wing anti-government militias, such rhetoric does not float in the ether of the public discourse, harmless and unacknowledged. No, it does in fact lead to action.
In recent months, the right-wing media has used language such as “terrorism” and “violent,” or that the latter is “targeting police for murder” to describe the Black Lives Matter movement. Such bombastic and ugly screeds–which are wholly unfounded, with no basis in empirical reality–have also been used by right-wing opinion leaders to describe the African-American students who are fighting against racism at Yale and the University of Missouri.
There are many examples of this type of incendiary rhetoric from conservatives and their sympathizers.
A few examples.
Bill O’Reilly has declared “war” on Black Lives Matter and in doing so described them as a type of contemporary Ku Klux Klan (KKK). At its height of popularity in the United States during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the KKK was America’s largest terrorist organization. It was responsible for the murders of thousands of African-Americans. In contrast to the KKK, Black Lives Matter is a group dedicated to protecting the human rights of all people against state-sponsored violence and police thuggery and murder.
Ben Carson, in his designated role as a black conservative whose primary purpose is to disparage black Americans and to excuse-make for white racism, recently told Fox News’ Megyn Kelly that the black and brown students who are advocating for their full rights and respect at Yale University are ushering in “anarchy” and “this is just raw emotion and people just being manipulated, I think in many of these cases, by outside forces who wish to create disturbances.”
Likewise, Fox News has repeatedly described the student protesters at Yale and Missouri using the same language. O’Reilly has even gone so far as to suggest that Black Lives Matter and the students who are protesting racist treatment are part of a cabal that is engaging in “fascist” behavior and “running wild” against white people. Trumping his allusions to “fascism,” on his October 22, 2015 episode of his TV show, Bill O’Reilly even made the absurd claim that Black Lives Matter is akin to the “Nazis.”
These are implicit threats and overtures to violence as racial authoritarian fascists are a clear and present danger to democracy and freedom. Thus, they must be eliminated by any means necessary.
Other critics of the student activists at Yale University and Missouri such as The Atlantic’s Conor Friedersdorf have even made the absurd claim that so-called “safe spaces” are being “weaponized” by student activists in order to deny free speech.
Terrorism has been practiced in the United States. It was used by a Herrenvolk white settler society built upon the genocide of First Nations peoples and the enslavement of African-Americans to control, intimidate, and murder non-whites. The decades of Jim and Jane Crow white supremacy were also a form of State-sponsored terrorism as well. Political violence continues in the present where in too many of America’s communities, police and other security forces kill with impunity, force the black and brown poor into a state of “custodial citizenship”, and act in a thuggish and illegal way towards the country’s most vulnerable citizens.
Black Lives Matter stands against such violence. The student protesters at Yale and Missouri who are fighting for fairness and justice stand against violence. Liberals and progressives as a matter of principle, a belief in the Common Good, and a humane society stand against violence.
Despite what the right-wing media, Bill O’Reilly, and the opinion leaders in the White Right routinely bloviate, those groups and individuals are not terrorists.
Real terrorists have killed people in the streets of Paris. The right-wing media needs to take note of that fact and moderate their rhetoric and abusive language accordingly.
Given the American right-wing’s casual habit of using violent language to describe their foes, and to gin up fear and anxiety among the movement conservative base, the Fox News’ right-wing echo chamber and its elites should be ashamed given the death and destruction that terrorism actually reaps in practice.
Sometimes a picture can say more words than we can express.
This from the artist Banksy –
This from a guys named Bruno Tertrais
A remembrance of a tribute by the French people to our victims of 9-11
The French Embassy in Berlin
The Empire State Building in NYC
The Sydney Australia Opera House-
The Senate Building in Mexico
Hashtag – Pray for Paris –