The post Paris narrative continues…


The narrative of what we should do and feel and think post the terror attacks in France is unfolding every minute of the day. Like an onion or ream of paper there are many layers and each layer now has it’s champions and detractors. This is sad since what will come of this now is sure to be distanced significantly from where it should’ve arrived.

The leaders “leading” the march

The USA FAIL regards the march

“Standing with you”…for now

I’m not Charlie

The leaders “lead”


The above image is the birds eye view of how the leaders “lead”.

This is only true if you think the sole role of leaders is to pursue platitudes and empty symbolism that are fleeting. The truth be told the unity of the leaders in Paris was really a miss mash of opportunity and self serving efforts. Sure you walked on Sunday with Hollande and France but where are you now? Where were you before?

The imagery that was sent out to the world was powerful,but as I said, fleeting. The march has become a great example of the news cycle superficiality. Let’s talk about some of the leaders.

Angela Merkel of Germany: Merkel has her own domestic Muslim issues as well as all the tensions surrounding the ongoing crisis regard the Euro Zone. Germany is one of the three drivers of Europe and the EU and holds policies that are in conflict with France’s designs.

David Cameron of the UK: Mr Cameron absolutely had to cross the Channel for this juicy opportunity. Leader of a coalition government that will likely survive its myriad of domestic issues he had to show the flag at this very EU event. Cameron was afforded a stage to underline the UK’s need to monitor and control its Muslim issues. Ironically what is lost on many is how it is the EU,specifically its Human Rights Commission, that actively supports the radical Muslims souring the UK’s domestic harmony.

Ibrahim Boubacar Keita of Mali: Mali is the former French colony that experienced its own much larger scale extremist nightmare. Hollande launched Operation Serval and helped to stabilize the country beating back the extremists who were built up by former fighters from Libya. I don’t totally discount Keita’s sincerity but I don’t buy it totally either.

Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel: This is France people and Bibi isn’t high on the love list. Truth be told Bibi was actually uninvited but he crashed the party anyway. His motives were pure though,he is the leader and protector of world jewry.This was exhibited in his comments that French Jews should feel free to emigrate to Israel if they are fearful. Sadly the Jews of France are well within their rights to be concerned about their long term safety as anti-semitism is clearly on the uptick in France. Still Netanyahu’s indelicate manners were selfish and unhelpful.

Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority: As if to validate my statements above Abbas was a mere four people away from Netanyahu in the line up. Let’s be clear Abbas had ulterior motives in standing with France. It’s called the ICC and UN legitimization process.

Jane Hartley of the USA: “Who the hell is she”? Well she’s the Ambassador and attending the march is actually the kind of thing the Ambassador is meant to do. In the touchy feelie village world though this is seen as not being good enough. Well I say it was good enough for an event that killed twelve non US citizens. I also say that given the reality of the above image I think people can imagine what an Obama presence would’ve meant.By that I mean how much larger the spacing would’ve been secondary to security issues.

As for the leaders present there is something to be said about how legit they are when it comes to freedom of expression. Here are some of the marchers. The number is the rating on a scale where 180 is worst regards press freedom:

Algeria (121)

Represented by foreign Ramtane Lamamra

Mali (122)

Represented by president Ibrahim Boubacar Keita

Ukraine (127)

Represented by president Petro Porochenko

Tunisia (133)

Represented by prime minister Mehdi Jomaa

Palestinian Authority (138)

Represented by president Mahmoud Abbas

Jordan (141)

Represented by King Abdullah II and Queen Rania

Russia (148)

Represented by foreign minister Sergei Lavrov

Turkey (154)

Represented by prime minister Ahmet Davutoglu

Bahrain (163)

Represented by foreign minister Sheikh Khaled bin Ahmed Al Khalifa and Prince Abdullah Bin Hamad al-Khalifa

Say what you want about the USA but unlike the above we’d actually let you publish Charlie Hebod as well as real news critical of something.


justbegun.jpgThe US FAIL is a lie supported by spin and detached from reality. The POTUS no matter who or what party has a schedule and a security protocol that literally rules his life. Even if Obama was salivating to go to Paris,and I readily concede he was likely NOT,the security nightmare and tax payer expense that would’ve needed to be unleashed would’ve been counter-productive. So keeping with Obama’s critics,and let’s be very clear the criticism is all about Obama not US protocol,let’s go down their list. VP Joe Biden. Perhaps somewhat foolishly there is still a security footprint for the VP. I think the Administration could’ve risked it/him.Basically it could credibly end here especially since the Obama Administration is actually all about optics regardless of what they say. The thing is though isn’t there some wiggle room here about exactly what the march was about and the greater US standing? Although Islamic extremism is a global threat is a 12 dead event really worthy of Oval gestures of symbolism? As for FLOTUS I can’t believe people even seriously float that one out there. Completely inappropriate to think she (any she) is a logical symbol of US policy support. Eric Holder,a bookmark and a poor one. He was in Paris on matters that relate to the attack but not at the march. The US scores an F on symbolism but in my book gets at least a B on what it will actually do beyond photo ops. Remember folks the US is leading the fight against ISIL and AQ although Iran is actually proving to be most effective against ISIL. The US was condemned for conducting the style of surveillance France has used itself and will likely escalate now. Do you think the US will share what we have? Damn skippy we will!

Soon the French cheese will stand alone

no-un.JPGExcept for the US and perhaps UK. Otherwise the EU will continue to vote for the “rights” of extremists,the UN will continue to pass resolutions that support restraints on speech and countries the screamed against the attacks will lay passive to horrors running amongst them.

Are you Charlie? Bullshit!

One huge chunk of truth to come from the various distractions is that “I am Charlie” is a fucking lie. Even in the USA that bastion of free speech there is undeniable evidence that if any of the controversial Muhammad Charlie Hebdod issues hit the the hallowed halls of our renowned institutions of higher learning they would be banned. And I’m not sure only the issues aimed at Islam would be pilloried. Clearly issues demeaning other faiths would face scrutiny in many corners,although I concede the PC Left would likely fight that uproar.

Internationally free expression,press and speech is routinely squashed by those who grabbed onto the symbolism of the Paris unity love in. As noted above reporting facts in some places will get you dogged. Let’s add the places that sent representatives yet jail and lash those deemed blasphemous for asking questions for thinking and tweeting.

In closing I think we should not give a pass to either side of inflammatory speech. Don’t get me wrong a cartoon or an essay should not get people killed. On the flip side satire and sharp commentary should be as credible as it is biting otherwise it’s really just gratuitous douche-baggery and of zero benefit to anyone other than society’s arsonists.We really do need to value free speech,expression and thought. It is what makes being human worth something. Inflammatory speech etc can be constructive in my opinion;however,there is a line where one crosses into destructive. This line should be a barrier. I don’t have the answers as to how to patrol the DMZ on this one but I think it should be sought.





  1. Rutherford says:

    Great analysis and David Brooks made the same observation about our institutions of higher learning and their “tolerance”.

    One other observation. In the immediate aftermath of Benghazi we threw a hissy fit over the video that supposedly triggered the event yet now we are defending Charlie Hebdo? Seems inconsistent to me.

  2. Alfie says:

    If there is one consistency in life it is the presence of inconsistency. The free thought concept is one that should be protected and handled in a manner that promotes the image that is done with extreme credibility. In France they are losing on this front right out of the gate. As the latest Charlie Hebod hits the racks the law continues its pursuit of a comedian whose body of work is deemed anti-Semitic.
    Thanks for popping in.

Comments are closed.