« Marianne under attack | Main | One trained in Yemen? »

07 January 2015


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

alba etie

Correction its Dr Silverman


Abu Sinan,

Perhaps all the more reason that they (or comparable "satire" publications) should do so, if they really are that keen on "free speech."


In reply to jonst 08 January 2015 at 10:52 AM

Am I supposed to give a damn about the ignorant opinions of yet another American right-winger?

A nasty European reality you don't seem to want to mention is how American intervention in those wars led directly to the creation of a failed state.

And as you've raised the topic of breaking up states and turning them into cesspits of crime and corruption (Kosovo) your country's record is far from good.

Terrorism and civil war (I)- Irak.

Terrorism and civil war (II) - Libya.

Not content to with f*ck*ing up those two countries Your country is busily engaged in trying to do the same thing in Syria.

Terrorism and civil war (III) - Syria - a work currently in progress.

Then there's the miserable abject failure in Afghanistan or going back a bit the failed attempt at war mongering in Georgia and now we have American led warmongering in Ukraine.

I don't give a damn what you think, but I would like to thank you for so clearly demonstrating my point about how people like you engage in projection.


different clue

Adam L. Silverman,

I suspect the price-tagger attacks are also due to a price-tagger desire to extort Israeli government compliance with price-tagger wishes.


In reply to Abu Sinan 08 January 2015 at 09:54 AM

Not just in France, European countries with laws against holocaust denial:

Czech Republic


Medicine Man

Dr. Silverman,

If you put together some numbers on this, I would be interested in seeing them.


I suspect that the "Availability Heuristic" button gets pushed by Americans and their media too often, and that might be the source of the fear and consequent over reaction (from Wiki):

"When an infrequent event can be brought easily and vividly to mind, this heuristic overestimates its likelihood. For example, people overestimate their likelihood of dying in a dramatic event such as a tornado or terrorism. Dramatic, violent deaths are usually more highly publicised and therefore have a higher availability.[9] On the other hand, common but mundane events are hard to bring to mind, so their likelihoods tend to be underestimated. These include deaths from suicides, strokes, and diabetes. This heuristic is one of the reasons why people are more easily swayed by a single, vivid story than by a large body of statistical evidence".


The Beaver


Forget about that. Search for the Dieudonné, "Quenelle" and the french govt. It's an eye opener.
Another case in 2008 -sorry it is in French.
Like they say , it is deux poids deux mesures in France when you need the CRIF to be President.

The Beaver


Link : http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/IMG/pdf/jugement-licra-sine.pdf

The Beaver

@ Babak

You will get fired like Sine:


Anders Breivik has been on my mind too, in a response quite possibly to you on Pat's preceding article.



yes these are not entirely equivalent; though I doubt that actual residents of Ferguson are going to shoot someone for insulting Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. As to the the negative impact to Mozilla's bottom line that potential would be due to political protests from the left. These are the same pressures that just got Intel to commit hundreds of millions for hiring women and minorities (as if they haven't been doing that for decades). Though that could be related to the blow back from cutting advertising in the magazine "gamasutra" related to protests related to "gamegate" (or that coincidentally Jesse Jackson is jumping on the band wagon while he can). Which leaves one to wonder why no executive was fired for the implied sexual and racial discrimination over many, many years that created a work force 70+% white (or the implication that any of these employees were hired solely due to their race). But that takes us far afield from the subject of the post.

Thank you for the links, I will check the material. You are always insightful and I appreciate the opportunity provided.


Your, efforts, at a coherent reply speak volumes about you. You need a boogie man to explain all your fears away. Ok, we're your boogie man...responsible for all the evils of the world. "Irak" (sic), Libya, Syria, bear no burden...by your arguments, of the state they find themselves in. Nor do Afghans. Nor Georgians. Nor Ukrainians. Nor the people in Kosovo...your list goes on and on. And on. Your world view is a uncomplicated and unsophisticated, as a child's world view. Black and white, good and evil, all right, all wrong. A fool's vision. It is less an exercise of projection that it is an exercise in reading the scribbles of a finger painting infant. Have the last word...I am done with you.

different clue


I think the source of KSA and Erdogist displeasure with us at this time is our failure to become as fully supportive and engaged towards the livereaters as KSA and the Erdogists felt they could count on and still so desperately desire.

So there is one example where the current state of decay is not entirely America's fault.

And as I remember, didn't France and Italy most of all agitate for American involvement in Libya because France and most of all Italy were afraid of a million refugees reaching France and Italy after a Qaddafist victory?

And Blair was very key in getting America into the Iraq war. Blair in particular got the war sold to those Americana who were skeptical of Bush's good judgement. If BLAIR!! was for it, maybe there was something to it.. . was the reluctant thinking.

Not saying America hasn't had a hand in all that destruction. But not the entirely only hand all by ourselves only and alone. (Now I will grant you . . Afghanistan is all ours. Our government very carefully and deliberately threw the victory away when it connived to deny Zahir Shah the ceremonial and symbolic resumption of his old kingship and his hoped-for follow-on Grand Jirga for the future. Installing Karzai was the wrong choice from which all further wrong choices flowed.)


A good point. And, there is no reasoning with the lizard brain level reaction it produces. I still remember reports of therapists pointing out to patients, traumatized by seeing the movie Jaws and refusing to swim, that the patients swam in freshwater lakes. As silly as that point seems, it still drives home the unreasoning nature of the herd mentality.

different clue

William R. Cumming,

Well . . . the anthrax attacks came after 9/11 and have never been overtly claimed by any perps, Muslim self-identified or other. So there's one.
(And I think by now you know who I think diddit on that one.)

Babak Makkinejad

I recall the case of a European-American who was a janitor - I think - working for a branch of NAACP.

It was discovered that the fellow was also a Grand Wizard of the Knights of KKK.

He was fired from his lowly job even though he had been faithfully discharging the duties and obligations of that position for years and without any incident.


Denial of Holocaust is illegal and punishable in Belgium, including the minimization of the number of victims.

MK Logan

Different Clue,

If I may embellish on your point and incorporate the disdain many Euro's feel towards the US a bit, there is something I think the French could learn from us, about how we have painfully come to deal with minority cultures.

Like the French do now with their recent middle eastern peoples, the US once boxed urban blacks into their own ghettos and mocked them freely. Perhaps how we have dealt with that is something the French could consider. We would have, and very nearly did have in the late 60's, a radical violent movement develop within those communities. The situations most certainly aren't identical, but they just as certainly rhyme.

Perhaps the US has more experience in incorporating minority cultures. It probably stems from a sense of inevitability that they are here to stay due to geography, to nip accusations of innate superiority in the bud.

William R. Cumming

Thanks Dr. Silverman!

William R. Cumming

How would you label the DC sniper?


This might be me overreacting, but whenever I see signs that say "Je sui Charlie," they seem to be saying "Wir sind Wilhelm Gustloff" or something akin to it. With the benefit of hindsight and all that happened during World War 2, sympathy for Nazi propagandist like Gustloff seems bizarre, but I can't help feeling that, had all the media technology been available in 1936, a lot of people would be throwing themselves about expressing sympathy and solidarity with him... The excessive outpouring of sympathy for Charlie Hebdo seemingly everywhere leaves a rather awful taste in my mouth.


How is it that neither jonst, nor you, have managed to address the issue I raised. Which is that in response to terrorist threats to freedom of speech Denmark did not go down the American route of ethnic hysteria and craven behaviour domestically, combined with vicíousness abroad? The point I was making was that our way is a far better example to follow than the American one.

jonst attempted to introduce a playground level distraction about how Europeans (all of us!) reacted to the civil war in what was then Yugoslavia and I responded. As you might expect he's now sitting in the corner in a huff.

Tell me, what is it about American right wingers that they're absolutely incapable either of debate or of coping with the slightest contradiction to their half-assed world view of what the rest of the world is like?

Once you've done that perhaps you can tell me why suddenly you're talking about the Saudis and the AKP - or perhaps you could explain how exactly the Blair government's behaviour in aiding the rush to war by producing the "sexed up" September dossier is relevant to the issue at hand.

The issue I raised is not how other governments (including the then Danish one led by Anders Fogh Rasmussen) connived with your one in the American "War on Terror". The issue at hand is whether the French in response to a terrorist act on their soil should behave like Americans or whether they'd be better to behave like a country that does actually value liberty and free speech and go down the route of treating this as what it is - a major crime committed by criminals. Perhaps you'd now care to address that issue as jonst apparently lacks the equipment to do so.



In reply to MK Logan 08 January 2015 at 11:04 PM

Many European countries do not have the experience of being immigration destinations and have handled the attendant social issues either badly or very badly. Your description of how the French policy of boxing people into ghettos and subjecting them to social humiliation is a good one. Have you ever been to any of the banlieus? I have, grim, soulless, ugly, places utterly bereft any hope I'm not surprised they've been breeding grounds for extremism. How the Scandinavian countries have responded to immigration is better but still very very very far from being perfect.

In Colonel Lang's "Marianne" thread I quoted extensively from and linked to a long article about the Århus programme for reintegrating youths and young men who had travelled from Denmark to Syria to fight with the jihadists there. You'll find the article here: http://tinyurl.com/nyp63u2

It's very long but well worth your while reading. The point the article is making is that treating jihadism as an issue of criminality and of crime prevention is what works. So they deal with the crime if any but they also deal with the causes including the endemic low-level racism leading to the sense of having always been excluded that many of these young men feel.

When faced with a major terrorist crime - a crime whose origins lie in hatred and whose perpetrators hope to inpsire more hatred there are two ways of reacting. There's the American way which apart from being morally abhorrent is also exactly what the terrorists want. Or there's the way pointed to by programmes such as the Århus one, either you respond to such attacks by upholding those very values of liberty and free speech that the terrorists are attacking or you do what the terrorists want you to do. You Americans have overwhelmingly chosen to do what the terrorists want you to do.

Tell me do you remember the chorus from American right wingers at the time Anders Breivik's hate crimes first came to light of how this must have been done by muslims and the viciousness with which they demanded retribution? Do you remember how instead of vengance and retribution the Norwegians refused to play Breivik's game? Do you remeber how they treated him as what he was a criminal who had committed a hate crime aimed fomenting more hatred? Unlike the American reaction to terrorism the Norwegians refused to give up their values or their freedoms. Do you remember what the then Norwegian Prime Minister said about Breivik and his attempt to foment terror and hatred?

"We are still shocked by what has happened, but we will never give up our values, our response is more democracy, more openness, and more humanity."

The Norwegian reaction was not only the right thing to do it was the effective thing to do.

When the British in Northern Ireland refused to allow Republican and Loyalist convicted terrorists special 'political' status treating them instead as the criminals they were the British were not only doing the right thing they were doing the effective thing.

The Århus programme is not only the right thing to do it's the effective thing to do.

The Norwegian refusal to allow Breivik to succeed in his goal of fomenting hatred was not only the right thing to do it was the effective thing to do.

That's what I hope the French will follow - the European examples rather than the American one. I don't feel disdain for how your country has reacted to what should always have been treated as a law enforcement problem I feel contempt for it, first because it was wrong in and of itself.

Secondly because when a very famous American said that

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety".

He was right - and yes I'm aware of the fact that Franklin made his comment in the context of a supply bill, the principle nevertheless is a good one.

And finally because reckless savagery is always going to generate reckless savagery in response.

There's the civilised and effective way of responding to terrorism or there's what is now the standard American way of "The only thing these sand niggers understand is force and I'm about to introduce them to it."

How did that work out for you and your country? Did it increase or decrease the level of violence and terrorism in the world?

Let's hope that the French choose the right and effective thing to do rather than choosing to abandon civilised behaviour and values the way your country did, time and time and time again.

Not disdain. Contempt.



I think he did just that


The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad