Flagstaff Officer Tyler Stewart Shot to Death While Wearing Police Body Camera (VIDEO)

Well, it's definitely up close and personal.

At the Arizona Republic, "Flagstaff police officer's body camera captures fatal shooting":

EDITOR'S NOTE: The video below is graphic and may not be something you want to see. It was released by Flagstaff Police honoring a public records request by media, including azcentral, The Arizona Republic and 12 News. The video will be part of the ongoing discussion about safety for officers and for the people they encounter, which is why we think it is newsworthy.

There's video at that above link.

And see the Los Angeles Times, "Body camera video of Arizona police officer's killing stirs ethical debate":

The video footage is raw, showing Flagstaff, Ariz., police Officer Tyler Stewart chatting with a man accused of breaking a couple things in his girlfriend's apartment a day earlier. That's what body cameras do: capture the daily work of police officers up close.

"Do you mind if I just pat down your pockets real quick? You don't have anything in here?" Stewart, 24, can be heard asking the suspect, Robert Smith, 28, who had his hands jammed in his pockets. They had been talking in the cold for a few minutes outside Smith's home Dec. 27.

"No, no — my smokes," replies Smith, who had been chuckling moments earlier. Smith then draws a revolver so fast that the gun is almost a blur. The video stops. Stewart is shot five times before Smith fatally shoots himself.

The graphic video altered the usual conversation about body cameras and police accountability by capturing — up close — a polite conversation that instantly turned into a deadly encounter in which the officer had little chance to react.

The Flagstaff Police Department released body camera footage this week in response to several media public records requests.

For several months, nationwide calls for police to wear body cameras have grown as activists and some public officials have pushed for answers after several high-profile use-of-force incidents, including the fatal police shooting of unarmed 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson Mo.

In Albuquerque this week, body camera footage was used by prosecutors in their decision to seek charges against two police officers after they fatally shot a homeless man while he appeared to be turning away during a standoff.

"That's what these cameras are for," said Tim McGuire, who teaches ethics at the Arizona State University Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication. "They're for accountability, and they're designed to minimize controversy and educate the public about how these things come down."

But the Arizona footage raises questions about the balance between the public's right to know and privacy concerns for officers and bystanders as authorities around the country wrestle with how to regulate the rapidly spreading technology.

"We are currently crafting or looking at legislation that may very well discuss this," Levi Bolton Jr., executive director of the 14,000-member Arizona Police Assn., said Wednesday shortly before a meeting to discuss body cameras at Arizona's state Capitol.

"We acknowledge that the public and the media should have access to this information," Bolton said of body camera footage. However, he was concerned about the appropriate timing for its release and whether such footage should be regulated so that confidential informants, undercover officers or victims of sex crimes are not identified...

Hmm... Actually, the body-camera genie's not going back in the bottle at this point. There's too much demand for accountability. If folks are worried about the sensitive nature of these recordings, there should be strict protocols for public release. I suspect the public's right to know, especially in the wake of the Michael Brown shooting death in Ferguson, is going to outweigh worries about privacy, however.

Still more at the link.

Holly Williams Reports on the Islamic Reaction to Charlie Hebdo's Latest Issue Featuring Muhammad Cover

A mixed reaction, to say the least. Lots of blame placed on the West.

From CBS Evening News, "Muslims respond to latest Charlie Hebdo issue."

East London Café Owner Gets Death Threat After Placing 'Je Suis Charlie' Sign Outside

Heh, maybe East London's looking to become a "no-go" zone.

At BCF, "East London café threatened for placing #JeSuisCharlie sign outside – owner says he won’t back down."

Obama's Pathetic Bombing Campaign Hasn't Stopped Expansion of Islamic State in Syria

Military and strategic experts hammered the administration's tepid bombing campaign last summer, and now there's evidence that ISIS is not only holding the line, but expanding its presence in Syria.

Military air campaigns as leftist window dressing for appeasement. Seriously. It's come to this.

And by the way, no offense to the honorable U.S. military personnel who're on the front lines of the battle. Your sacrifice is forever appreciated.

At the Wall Street Journal, "Months of Airstrikes Fail to Slow Islamic State in Syria: Militant Group Has Gained Territory Despite U.S.-Led Strikes, Raising Concerns of the Obama Administration’s Mideast Strategy":

WASHINGTON—More than three months of U.S. airstrikes in Syria have failed to prevent Islamic State militants from expanding their control in that country, according to U.S. and independent assessments, raising new concerns about President Barack Obama ’s military strategy in the Middle East.

While U.S. bombing runs and missile strikes have put Islamic State forces on the defensive in Iraq, they haven’t had the same kind of impact in Syria. Instead, jihadist fighters have enlarged their hold in Syria since the U.S. started hitting the group’s strongholds there in September, according to the new estimates.

Islamic State’s progress in Syria is partly the result of the U.S. decision to focus its military efforts on Iraq, where the militant group has seized major parts of the country and declared them part of a new Islamic caliphate. The U.S.-led military effort has pushed the forces out of some key battlegrounds in Iraq.

But Syria still serves as a haven for Islamic State fighters, also known in the West by the acronyms ISIS and ISIL.

“Certainly ISIS has been able to expand in Syria, but that’s not our main objective,” said one senior defense official. “I wouldn’t call Syria a safe haven for ISIL, but it is a place where it’s easier for them to organize, plan and seek shelter than it is in Iraq.”

The assessments come as the Obama administration is considering whether the U.S. should embrace more aggressive ideas for containing Islamic State forces in Syria. Some administration officials have been pushing the U.S. to once again rethink its “Iraq-first” strategy and focus more attention on Syria, including training thousands of Syrian fighters to take on the feared group.

Among suggestions: The U.S. military could help set up a buffer zone along Syria’s border with Turkey that would be protected by American air power. It could start coordinating airstrikes with rebel forces currently fighting in Syria. And it could provide Kurdish forces now fighting in Syria with more sophisticated weapons.

But there is significant opposition within the administration to any idea that would drag the U.S. military deeper into a country where few see options that will make things better, officials say. Military officials say the concerns are understandable. But containing the dangers posed by Islamic State forces will take time and patience, they say.

For now, the U.S. strategy remains focused on pushing Islamic State forces out of Iraq, where they control major parts of the country, including Mosul, its second largest city, and Fallujah, a longtime stronghold of anti-American resistance northwest of Baghdad.

That focus is likely to be questioned in the coming weeks when the new Republican-controlled Congress holds hearings on Mr. Obama’s strategy in the Middle East. Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.), the new chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is likely to challenge the strategy when he holds a confirmation hearing in early February for Ashton Carter, a longtime Pentagon official who is Mr. Obama’s nominee to be his next defense secretary.

Col. Patrick Ryder, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command, which oversees the Middle East military campaign, said the airstrikes weren’t intended to prevent Islamic State fighters from gaining ground in most of Syria.

While the U.S. has stepped in to help Kurdish fighters in Kobani, Col. Ryder said coalition strikes in Syria are primarily “shaping” operations meant to weaken their hold in neighboring Iraq. “Gaining territorial control in Syria has never been our mission,” he said. “That wasn’t the objective of our airstrikes.”

One senior administration official said Wednesday that the strategy remains focused on training Syrian rebels to eventually lead the fight in a complex civil war.

Right. "Training Syrian rebels." What rebels? They've either been exterminated by ISIS or they've sworn fealty to their Islamic State overlords to save their own necks.

Syria is virtually lost. We'd need bombing campaigns to match Dresden in World War II to start having an impact, and that's not something the United States will do, especially under the continued cowardice and appeasement of Barack Hussein.

Still more.

No! You Can't Murder Our Freedom!

Via Daniel Greenfield, at FrontPage Magazine, here's Berliner Kurier getting right to the point:

#CharlieHebdo: Millionen-Reichweite auf Facebook - Netz-Reaktionen auf die KURIER-Titelseite http://t.co/Dfs607MEAc pic.twitter.com/C7Eydl8nAn
— BERLINER KURIER (@BERLINER_KURIER) January 8, 2015

After #ParisAttacks, Obama to Enlist 'Social Service Providers' to Fight Terrorism

Because at base, it's a law enforcement and social welfare issue --- and that's not a joke!

My god we're doomed.

At the Washington Examiner, "After attacks in France, White House enlists 'social service providers' to fight terrorism":

On Sunday the White House announced that President Obama will convene a "Summit on Countering Violent Extremism" on Feb. 18. By "violent extremism," the White House means the Charlie Hebdo and kosher grocery attacks carried out in Paris last week by Islamic jihadists.

The White House has long made a point of leaving the word "Islamic" out of discussions of Islamic terrorism, choosing instead to refer to it as "violent extremism." For example, an April 2010 New York Times article on White House efforts to reach out to Muslims noted that top counterterrorism adviser John Brennan and others "have made a point of disassociating Islam from terrorism in public comments, using the phrase 'violent extremism' in place of words like 'jihad' and 'Islamic terrorism.'" A May 2010 Times article noted that "Mr. Obama avoids the word 'Islamic' in his discussions of 'violent extremism."

So the upcoming White House summit, spurred by radical Islamist attacks, will be devoted to countering a mysteriously-motivated "violent extremism." The summit will emphasize the soft side of the problem, seeking social scientists and other professionals to address the root causes of what administration officials refer to as a "really negative" ideology.

"Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) efforts rely heavily on well-informed and resilient local communities," White House press secretary Josh Earnest said in the announcement Sunday. "Boston, Los Angeles, and Minneapolis-St. Paul have taken the lead in building pilot frameworks integrating a range of social service providers, including education administrators, mental health professionals, and religious leaders, with law enforcement agencies to address violent extremism as part of the broader mandate of community safety and crime prevention. The summit will highlight best practices and emerging efforts from these communities."

Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed the "root causes" orientation of the summit during an interview with CBS Sunday. "The president has announced that on February the 18th, we will host a summit in Washington, DC," Holder said, "so that we can come up with a way in which we can deal with the root causes of this. Countering violent extremism is what we call it, that we can deal with the new causes of what it is that attracts these young men to these really negative ideological groups."

Yes, let's really nail it down to "root causes," which is of course everything but radical Islam.

American Jihad: FBI Arrests Islamic State Suspect in Terror Plot on U.S. Capitol (VIDEO)

No worries though. The "real" threat is from "militant right-wing extremists."

See Pamela Geller, at Atlas Shrugs, "Islamic State jihadi arrested after allegedly plotting to bomb US Capitol":

An alleged sympathizer of the Islamic State terror group was arrested in Ohio on Wednesday after authorities learned that he was plotting a shooting and bombing attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Christopher Lee Cornell, 20, of Green Township, considered members of Congress as “enemies,” and planned to travel to Washington to kill employees and officers working in and around the U.S. Capitol, according to a criminal complaint. Authorities said he had two semi-automatic rifles and about 600 rounds of ammunition, and planned to build and detonate pipe bombs at and near the U.S. Capitol.

A Justice Department official, however, told Fox News that Cornell was “aspirational and not operational,” adding that the public was never in danger.

The investigation relied heavily on the use of a source, who the criminal complaint said began cooperating with authorities last fall to gain favorable treatment for his prosecution on an unrelated case.

The complaint adds that Cornell said he thought he was fulfilling the directives of the Islamic State group, also known as ISIS, or ISIL.

“I believe that we should just wage jihad under our own orders and plan attacks and everything,” Cornell told the source, according to the papers. “I believe we should meet up and make our own group in alliance with the Islamic State and plan operations ourselves.”

Cornell was charged with the attempted killing of a U.S. government officer and possession of a firearm in furtherance of attempted crime of violence.

French Jews to Consider Immigrating to Israel After #ParisAttacks

As much as I love Claire Berlinski and her bravery, and think the trend among commentators is for the Jews "to get the hell out of France," to quote Paula Stern.

With Israel, Jews have a true home literally dedicated to their people's survival. I think Pamela Geller nailed it with her piece the other day, "The Death of the Jews of France."

The New York Times wrote yesterday on the Jews in France "weighing" an exit to Israel. And now here comes the Los Angeles Times, "Jews worry about their future in France after attack on kosher market":

A pair of soldiers toting submachine guns patrolled Tuesday outside a Jewish school on Rue Pavee in Paris' Marais district, where shoppers and tourists mingled with black-clad, ultra-Orthodox men.

Across the street, the owner of the Pitzman falafel shop eyed customers warily under gray skies and an occasional chilly drizzle in the city's traditional Jewish quarter.

At the school day's end, parents sidestepped the beret-wearing French soldiers in body armor and combat boots to pick up their children in the midst of the bustling neighborhood.

"I don't know if there will be a future for my children here in 10 years," said Joy Bengoussan, a mother of four, holding hands with two daughters, Haya, 4, and Rahal, 3, expressing a sentiment on the minds of many other Jewish people. "This didn't just start now. It has been going on for a while."

Last week's Islamist terrorist attacks included the killing of four people at a kosher market Friday, the latest blow for France's reeling Jewish community, Europe's largest at about 500,000 people. Thousands of Jewish people have left France for Israel or other destinations in recent years, many citing economic reasons and unease related to anti-Semitism.

The attack at the market, which ended with authorities killing the gunman, came two days after a dozen people were slain in an assault by two brothers on the headquarters of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical magazine targeted for lampooning Islam. The militants were at large until Friday, when they were killed by authorities. A policewoman was also killed in an attack last week.

In response to the violence, the government said 10,000 troops and additional police would be ordered to the streets of Paris to guard "sensitive" sites, including more than 700 Jewish schools. Jewish residents in the city and elsewhere generally welcomed the bolstered security presence.

But many in the Jewish community remained angry about what they see as a lapse in protecting the nation against homegrown militants mostly arising from the alienated immigrant enclaves on the fringes of Paris and elsewhere in France. A demonstration Sunday that featured more than 1 million people marching in a show of unity did little to quell some people's discontent.

"I respect the values of liberty. I am French. But the government needs to do something about this or everything will be lost," said one Jewish student, who, like many others, declined to give his name for privacy reasons. The march against terrorism "was a positive thing," he said.

The market attack victims were laid to rest Tuesday in Jerusalem, where Israeli authorities called on French Jews to return to their "historic home."

Many are taking the advice.

France has become the major country of origin for Jews returning to Israel, and the numbers are on the rise. A record of almost 7,000 immigrants from France arrived in Israel last year, according to the Israeli government, double the previous year. The figure is expected to exceed 10,000 in 2015. Experts say that a perception of growing anti-Semitism in France only partially explains the flight, which is also related to economic, personal and other reasons that may prompt French Jews to emigrate.

Some government officials are alarmed...

Yeah, "alarmed," blah blah.

Still more at the link.

Sky News Cuts Away as Charlie Hebdo Writer Holds Up Muhammad Magazine Cover (VIDEO)

I mean, seriously. Won't somebody over there stand up to genocidal Islam?

Via Hot Air, "Video: Sky News cuts off Charlie Hebdo writer when she tries to display Mohammed cartoon."

My stomach literally sucked in --- like a punch to the gut --- as the cameraman flinches and then the network cuts away to the anchorwoman. The fear --- pure terror in the anchorwoman's eyes --- is so palpable. We're surrounded by cowards. Political correctness will be the death of us.

Funeral in Israel for Jews Slain in #ParisAttacks

At the Weekly Standard, "4 Jews Killed in Paris Attack Buried in Israel."

And video from AFP, "Israel funeral for four Jews killed in France attack."

The Death of Supermodels: Cindy Crawford Bemoans Fashion Magazines Putting Pop Culture Stars on Their Covers

Movie stars and reality show queens. They're the ones making the magazine covers these day, wails Cindy Crawford, now 49 and clearly perturbed. I dare say that the industry has changed, however (take Victoria's Secret's success model, for example). And perhaps she missed out on the key trends.

Whatever. It's a beautiful photo roundup, at London's Daily Mail, "The death of the supermodel: Cindy Crawford complains models no longer become big stars as magazines want celebrities for their covers instead."

Chilling New Video Shows Images from Inside Kosher Market #ParisAttacks

At London's Daily Mail, "EXCLUSIVE: First chilling footage from inside Paris deli shows jihadist killer herding terrified customers and forcing them to deactivate security cameras as corpses lay around them."

And Brianna Keilar reports for CNN:

Leftist Open-Borders Vigilantes Attack Santa-Barbara News-Press for Accurately Identifying Illegal Aliens

Radical open-borders thugs have laid siege to the Santa Barbara News-Press, after the newspaper ran a completely accurate report headlined, "Illegals Line Up for Drivers Licenses."

That's it. But in this age of manufactured "micro-aggression" perpetual outrage, publishing the truth on the front page of the daily news is likely to bring down the the left's fascist thought police, to say nothing of graffiti vandals and violent anarcho-communists. Unfortunately, the French jihadist attack on Charlie Hebdo has given the left a successful template on how to shut down speech and exterminate political enemies.

At NewsBusters, "Santa Barbara Newspaper Building Vandalized for 'Worst Ever' Headline on 'Illegals'."

And see KEYT-TV Santa Barbara, "Protestors Rally Against Santa Barbara News-Press: Paper Defends Use of "Illegals" in Front Page Story on Undocumented Immigrants":

Thursday afternoon, News-Press Director of News Operations Don Katich released this statement:

"It has been the practice for nearly 10 years at the Santa Barbara News-Press to describe people living in this country illegally as “illegals” regardless of their country of origin. This practice is under fire by some immigration groups who believe that this term is demeaning and does not accurately reflect the status of “undocumented immigrants,” one of several terms other media use to describe people in the Unites States illegally.

You have to look no further than the White House website to see the term “illegal” used when describing the 2 million illegal immigrants President Obama has deported since taking office for being in the U.S. illegally.

It is an appropriate term in describing someone as “illegal” if they are in this country illegally.

The colossal mess that describes the U.S. immigration policy is a product of unenforced laws, conflicting legislation, unsecured borders, executive action and political pandering. However the most egregious aspect of the U.S. immigration condition is the appearance of lawlessness that subjects millions of people living in this country illegally as pawns in a never-ending game of political posturing.

The outrage voiced by immigration advocates should be directed at the current immigration system that takes years of bureaucratic red tape to complete. This outrage is shared by those who go through the process legally and stand at the end of the line of those who skirt U.S. law.

Ours is a system of laws, a system so valued that people from around the world – including many from lawless nations – flock here to be a part of it. The United States of America affords those seeking it a lawful immigration process; it also affords the politically persecuted a haven from persecution. With this freedom comes responsibility. As history has shown, some choose to wait out the process, while others choose to come here on their own terms. The latter are illegal in the eyes of this valued system and the Santa Barbara News-Press calls them so.

When breaking the law becomes the norm, America is no better than other lawless nations."

Remember, truth is the new hate speech. And leftists will enforce their ideological prohibitions against truth with violence and destruction.

The Attack on Truth in San Francisco: CBS News Bay Area Libels Pamela Geller's AFDI Ads as 'Hateful'

"This political correctness will be the death of us..." — Judge Jeanine Pirro.

As Pamela Geller has observed many times, "truth is the new hate speech."

And now it's CBS News San Francisco that substantiates Pamela's verities.

See Atlas Shrugs, "CBS News: 'Hitler Appearing In Ads On SF Muni Buses'":

The attack on truth is full-on in San Francisco. Even now, after Jews were taken captive and slaughtered in a kosher supermarket by a devout Muslim, the usual suspects and their goosestepping shills are attacking free speech.

Fight the machine. CONTRIBUTE to our ad campaigns here.

AFDI is running these ads in order to raise awareness about the nature and magnitude of Islamic antisemitism — a grim reality that is nearly universally ignored, and which led to the murders of four Jews in the Hyper Cacher kosher supermarket in Paris several days ago. The massacre in the Paris supermarket shows how accurate, and urgently needed, these ads are.

“Hitler Appearing In Ads On SF Muni Buses”, CBS News, January 12, 2015":

Winning the Culture War

An interesting discussion, at FrontPage Magazine:

Below are the video and transcript to the panel discussion “Winning the Culture War,” which took place at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s 20th Anniversary Restoration Weekend. The event was held Nov. 13th-16th at the Breakers Resort in Palm Beach, Florida.

Check it out, at the link.

White-Out: Where #Democrats Lost the House

From Ron Brownstein, at National Journal, "In 2009, 76 Democrats represented primarily white working-class congressional districts. Just 15 of them are still in the House today":

Beautiful RT @BlakeSeitz: Zero to 100, real quick. pic.twitter.com/tgetbB22LR

— Kemberlee Kaye (@KemberleeKaye) November 5, 2014

Republicans have surged to their largest majority in the House of Representatives since before the Great Depression by blunting the Democratic advantage in districts being reshaped by growing racial diversity and consolidating a decisive hold over the seats that are not.

Compared with 2009 and 2010, when Democrats last controlled the House, the Republican majority that takes office this week has essentially held its ground in districts where minorities exceed their share of the national population, a Next America analysis has found. Aided by their control of redistricting after the 2010 census, Republicans over the past three elections have simultaneously established an overwhelming 3-1 advantage in districts where whites exceed their national presence, the analysis shows. Those white-leaning districts split between the parties almost equally during the 111th Congress, in 2009-10.

A majority of the GOP gains since then have come from the Democrats' near-total collapse in one set of districts: the largely blue-collar places in which the white share of the population exceeds the national average, and the portion of whites with at least a four-year college degree is less that the national average. While Republicans held a 20-seat lead in the districts that fit that description in the 111th Congress, the party has swelled that advantage to a crushing 125 seats today. That 105-seat expansion of the GOP margin in these districts by itself accounts for about three-quarters of the 136-seat swing from the Democrats' 77-seat majority in 2009 to the 59-seat majority Republicans enjoy in the Congress convening now.

The GOP dominance in these predominantly white working-class districts underscores the structural challenge facing Democrats: While the party has repeatedly captured the White House despite big deficits among the working-class white voters who once anchored its electoral coalition, these results show how difficult it will be to recapture the House without improving on that performance. "The question is: Are we at rock bottom here?" says Tom Bonier, CEO of the Democratic voter targeting firm TargetSmart Communications.

These trends present Republicans with a mirror-image challenge. The vast majority of their House members can thrive without devising an agenda on issues—such as immigration reform—that attract the minority voters whose growing numbers nationally have helped Democrats win the popular vote in five of the past six presidential elections. "When you can go out screaming 'amnesty' and not get any pushback in your districts, you are more prone to scream 'amnesty,' " says veteran GOP pollster Whit Ayres. "It leads to an attitude of: 'problem, what problem?'"...

Keep reading.

The way things are going it could be a decade before the Democrats are competitive in congressional elections --- that is, they're not likely to retake the majority in the House for quite some time. Thus, even if the GOP can't retain their Senate majority, Republicans will still have a legislative check on the White House should the Democrat Party continue its dominance in presidential elections. And keep in mind, the Democrats are the party of old white people (as seen in their top-tier candidates for the 2016 nomination). If Republicans remain disciplined, and select an excellent candidate for the GOP nomination, look out.

It's going to be fascinating.

Charlie Hebdo's New Issue Flies Off Newsstands

At WSJ, "Satirical Weekly’s First Issue Since Attacks Features Caricature of Prophet Muhammad on Front Cover":

PARIS—French commuters rushed Wednesday morning to newsstands to buy copies of Charlie Hebdo, the first issue of the satirical magazine since eight of its staff members were killed by Islamist gunmen last week.

Even though it has become a cause célèbre, the weekly—known for mocking all forms of authority, including some that have rushed to its defense—stayed true to form by printing a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad holding a “Je suis Charlie,” or “I am Charlie,” sign on its cover. Several cartoons inside the issue mocked Islamist fighters.

As early as 6.30 a.m., it was difficult to find copies of the magazine in the few newsstands already open, even though the weekly’s distributors had said they were ready to print as many as 3 million copies—50 times the normal circulation.

David Beghin, who runs one of the stands in Gare de Lyon in eastern Paris, said the 75 copies he received Wednesday—up from eight on a normal week—had vanished 20 minutes after he opened at 6 a.m. “People came to buy copies by the dozen,” he said...

PREVIOUSLY: "Here's Who Is and Isn't Publishing the New Charlie Hebdo Cover Image."

America's Men Describe Their 'Perfect Woman' as Blonde with Blue Eyes

My wife's the one with blonde hair and blue eyes. I'm the one with the graduate degree, heh.

At London's Daily Mail, "It's not just about looks! America's men describe their 'perfect woman' as blonde, with blue eyes - and a graduate degree."

Heart-Wrenching First-Hand Report on the D.C. Metro Fire

Someone dying right before your eyes, you offer help. But sadly it's too late.

At the Washington Post, "Metro rider who helped dying passenger: 'I told her she was going to be okay'":

Jonathan Rogers said he was in the second or third car of a Yellow Line train Monday when it stopped abruptly in a tunnel just outside of the L’Enfant Plaza station. Soon, smoke filled the car and some passengers began having breathing problems. On Tuesday, Rogers, who works at the D.C. Department of Transportation, said he was still recovering from a difficult afternoon and remembering a woman he and his fellow passengers tried to help.

Rogers recalled that after several minutes aboard the smoke-filled train, passengers began having difficulty breathing, including a woman, who was identified Tuesday afternoon as Carol Glover, sitting in one of the seats facing the door. But unlike others who were very vocal about their discomfort, “She was kind of stoic.”

“She was just sitting,” he said. “You wouldn’t have even noticed that anything was wrong. ”

But there was something seriously wrong. Rogers watched through the smoke as the woman slid out of her seat and sank slowly to the floor. Eventually, she got down on all fours, he recalled.

“It wasn’t like she was demanding help,” Rogers said. “She was too short of breath.”

He and other passengers rushed to her side to help...

Keep reading.

Colorado Lesbian Vanessa Collier Died of Self-Inflicted Gunshot Wound

The woman died while cleaning her gun.

That very interesting tidbit of information was literally buried at the last line of this report from KUSA 9NEWS Denver, "Protest after church rejects funeral photos of lesbian":

Collier, 33, died when her gun went off while cleaning it. She is survived by her wife and two children.

Literally buried at the last line. This woman was by no means at typical lesbian radical. Gun ownership is a conservative principle, guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Screw the church that kicked them out.

Image Credit: The Heavy.

Hat Tip: Memeorandum.

#ParisAttacks: Death of the Jews of France

From Pamela Geller, at Breitbart, "THE DEATH OF THE JEWS OF FRANCE":

In the wake of the slaughter of four Jews in a Paris kosher supermarket by an Islamic jihadist, a Parisian Jew said: “In the past year, 7,000 Jews have already left France and after this there will be many thousands more. We are not safe in France any more. There is no future for Jews here in France. We are finished in France.”

Europe loves to memorialize dead Jews, even to the point of fetishizing them – it’s live ones that they cannot tolerate. The idea that French President Francois Hollande did not want Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu at a memorial march for Jews who were slaughtered in exactly the same way as Jews were in 2012 in Toulouse —where he said they were murdered because they were Jews, and even more importantly, in the same way as the Germans murdered Jews — speaks volumes. Inviting the head of a terror movement,

Mahmoud Abbas, because Netanyahu was coming, was depraved. With Muslims now accounting for 10% of France’s population, Jew-hatred is at a fever pitch...

RTWT.

WSJ's Not Big on a Romney Run in 2016

The third time's not a charm.

See, "Romney Recycled":

If Mitt Romney is the answer, what is the question? We can think of a few worthy possibilities, though one that doesn’t come immediately to mind is who would be the best Republican presidential nominee in 2016.

Mr. Romney told donors last week he is mulling a third run for the White House, confirming cheering whispers from his coterie of advisers. The question the former Massachusetts Governor will have to answer is why he would be a better candidate than he was in 2012.

The answer is not obvious. The logic offered by his admirers is that voters have a case of remorse about rejecting Mr. Romney in 2012, he can raise money and knows how to run a campaign, and even Ronald Reagan didn’t win until his third try.

The Gipper analogy is a stretch. Reagan’s first effort was belated in 1968, he nearly upset President Gerald Ford for the Republican nomination in 1976, and when he did finally win the nomination in 1980 he also won the general election. Mr. Romney lost the nomination decisively to John McCain in 2008, and he defeated a historically weak field in 2012 thanks mainly to his ability to raise more money and then pound his competitors with negative ads.

Mr. Romney is a man of admirable personal character, but his political profile is, well, protean. He made the cardinal mistake of pandering to conservatives rather than offering a vision that would attract them. He claimed to be “severely conservative” and embraced “self-deportation” for illegal immigrants, a political killer. But he refused to break from his RomneyCare record in Massachusetts even though it undermined his criticism of ObamaCare. A third campaign would resurrect all of that political baggage—and videotape.

The businessman also failed on his own self-professed terms as a superior manager. His convention was the worst since George H.W. Bush ’s in 1992, focusing more on his biography than a message. This left him open to President Obama ’s barrage against his record at Bain Capital, which Mr. Romney failed to defend because that would have meant playing on Democratic turf, as his strategists liked to put it. The unanswered charges suppressed GOP turnout in key states like Ohio.

Mr. Romney’s campaign team was notable for its mediocrities, led by a strategist whose theory of the race was that voters had already rejected Mr. Obama so the challenger merely needed to seem like a safe alternative. He thus never laid out an economic narrative to counter Mr. Obama’s claim that he had saved the country from a GOP Depression and needed more time for his solutions to work.

And don’t forget the management calamity of Mr. Romney’s voter turnout operation, code-named Orca. Mr. Romney likes to say he reveres “data,” but Mr. Obama’s campaign was years ahead of Mr. Romney’s in using Big Data and social media to boost turnout. The Romney campaign was so clueless on voter mobilization that well into Election Night the candidate still thought he would win. He lost a winnable race 51%-47%, including every closely contested state save North Carolina...

That's pretty hard hitting, and undeniably frank.

And I'm intrigued by another Romney run. But we'll see. It's still early. Lots of things could happen. For example, perhaps Rick Perry can catch fire this time, especially if he's learned the soft-on-immigration lessons from his 2012 disaster. Yep, we'll see.

Keep reading.

Watch: Unedited Video Shows Islamic State 'Child Soldier' Executing Two Suspected Russian Spies (GRAPHIC)

Update on the Religion of Peace.

See Long War Journal, "Islamic State uses a child to execute alleged Russian spies."

And Vice News, "Islamic State Video Purports to Show What Happens to Russian Spies Who Infiltrate Its Ranks."



And watch the unedited clip at the Argentine news outlet Infobae: "Otro horror del Estado Islámico: utilizó a un niño como verdugo de dos prisioneros rusos (Another horror of the Islamic State: used a child as executioner of two Russian prisoners)."

Wild Elephant Crushes Tourist Car in Thailand National Park (VIDEO)

Heh, a mating season rampage.

Radical Islam and Multicultural Suicide

From VDH, at Pajamas, "Multicultural Suicide":

Fueling the Western paralysis in dealing with radical Islam is the late 20th century doctrine of multiculturalism.

Multiculturalism is one of those buzzwords that does not mean what it should. The ancient and generic Western study of many cultures is not multiculturalism. Rather, the trendy term promotes non-Western cultures to a status equal with or superior to Western culture largely to fulfill contemporary political agendas.

On college campuses, multiculturalism not so much manifests itself in the worthy interest in Chinese literature, Persian history, or hieroglyphics, but rather has become more a therapeutic exercise of exaggerating Western sins while ignoring non-Western pathologies to attract those who see themselves in some way as not part of the dominant culture.

It is a deductive ideology that starts with a premise of Western fault and then makes evidence fit the paradigm. It is ironic that only Western culture is self-critical and since antiquity far more interested than other civilizations in empirically investigating the culture of the other.  It is no accident that Europeans and Americans take on their own racism, sexism, and tribalism in a way that is not true of China, Nigeria or Mexico. Parody, satire, and caricature are not Chinese, African, or Arab words.

A multicultural approach to the conquest of Mexico usually does not investigate the tragedy of the collision between 16th-century imperial Spain and the Aztec Empire. More often it renders the conquest as melodrama between a mostly noble indigenous people slaughtered by a mostly toxic European Christian culture, acting true to its imperialistic and colonialist traditions and values.

In other words, there is little attention given to Aztec imperialism, colonialism, slavery, human sacrifice, and cannibalism, but rather a great deal of emphasis on Aztec sophisticated time-reckoning, monumental building skills, and social stratification. To explain the miraculous defeat of the huge Mexican empire by a few rag-tag, greedy conquistadors, discussion would not entail the innate savagery of the Aztecs that drove neighboring indigenous tribes to ally themselves with Cortés. Much less would multiculturalism dare ask why the Aztecs did not deploy an expeditionary force to Barcelona, or outfit their soldiers with metal breastplates, harquebuses, and steel swords, or at least equip their defenders with artillery, crossbows, and mines.

For the multiculturalist, the sins of the non-West are mostly ignored or attributed to Western influence, while those of the West are peculiar to Western civilization. In terms of the challenge of radical Islam, multiculturalism manifests itself in the abstract with the notion that Islamists are simply the fundamentalist counterparts to any other religion. Islamic extremists are no different from Christian extremists, as the isolated examples of David Koresh or the Rev. Jim Jones are cited ad nauseam as the morally and numerically equivalent bookends to thousands of radical Islamic terrorist acts that plague the world each month. We are not to assess other religions by any absolute standard, given that such judgmentalism would inevitably be prejudiced by endemic Western privilege. There is nothing in the Sermon on the Mount that differs much from what is found in the Koran. And on and on and on.

In the concrete, multiculturalism seeks to use language and politics to mask reality. The slaughter at Ford Hood becomes “workplace violence,” not a case of a radical Islamist, Major Nidal Hasan, screaming “Allahu Akbar” as he butchered the innocent. After the Paris violence, the administration envisions a “Summit on Countering Violent Extremism,” apparently in reaction to Buddhists who are filming beheadings, skinheads storming Paris media offices, and lone-wolf anti-abortionists who slaughtered the innocent in Australia, Canada, and France.

The likes of James Clapper and John Brennan assure us of absurdities such as the Muslim Brotherhood being a largely secular organization or jihad as little more than a personal religious journey. Terrorism is reduced to man-caused violence and the effort to combat it is little more than an “overseas contingency operation.” The head of NASA in surreal fashion boasts that one of his primary missions for the hallowed agency is to promote appreciation of Muslim science and accomplishments through outreach to Islam. The president blames an obscure film-maker for causing the deaths of Americans in Benghazi (when in reality, it was a preplanned Al-Qaeda affiliate hit) — and then Obama makes it a two-fer: he can both ignore the politically incorrect task of faulting radical Islam and score politically correct points by chastising a supposedly right-wing bigot for a crime he did not foster.

What is the ultimate political purpose of multiculturalism? It certainly has contemporary utility, in bolstering the spirits of minority groups at home and the aggrieved abroad by stating that their own unhappiness, or failure to achieve what they think they deservedly should have, was due to some deep-seated Western racism, class bias, homophobia, or sexism otherwise not found in their own particular superior cultural pedigree that was unduly smothered by the West.

For the useful idiot, multiculturalism is supposedly aimed at ecumenicalism and hopes to diminish difference by inclusiveness and non-judgmentalism. But mostly it is a narcissistic fit, in which the multiculturalist offers a cheap rationalization of non-Western pathologies, and thereby anoints himself both the moral superior to his own less critical Western peers and, in condescending fashion, the self-appointed advocate of the mostly incapable non-Westerner.

Multiculturalism is contrary to human nature. Supposedly if Muslims understand that Westerners do not associate an epidemic of global terrorism and suicide bombing with Islam, then perhaps Muslims — seeing concession as magnanimity to be reciprocated —  will appreciate such outreach and help to mitigate the violence, all the more so if they also sense that they share with the more radical among them at least some legitimate gripes against the West.

So multiculturalism is the twin of appeasement. Once Americans and Europeans declare all cultures as equal, those hostile to the West should logically desist from their aggression, in gratitude to the good will and introspection of liberal Westerners. Apologizing for the Bush war on terror, promising to close down Guantanamo, deriding the war in Iraq, reminding the world of the president’s Islamic family roots — all that is supposed to persuade the Hasans, Tsarnaevs, and Kouachis in the West that we see no differences between their cultural pedigrees and the Western paradigm they have chosen to emigrate to and at least superficially embrace. Thus the violence should cease.

At its worst, multiculturalism becomes a cheap tool in careerist fashion to both bash the West and simultaneously offer oneself as a necessary intermediary to rectify Western sins, whether as a -studies professor in the university, an activist journalist or politician, or some sort of community or social organizer.

Heh, "Aztec imperialism, colonialism, slavery, human sacrifice, and cannibalism..."

You gotta love VDH. (Which is why the left's gotta hate on him, lol.)

Still more.

Sienna Miller at the Golden Globes

She stars in "American Sniper," which is out in general release on Friday.

At London's Daily Mail, "Sienna Miller shows off her toned sun-kissed legs in a daring thigh-high split dress as she prepares to co-host Golden Globes."

BONUS: Lots of additional photos here, "It's a Brit invasion as Rosamund Pike, Sienna Miller, Keira Knightley and Emily Blunt walk the red carpet in glamorous gowns at the 72nd annual Golden Globes," and "Kate Hudson, Rosamund Pike and Sienna Miller dare to bare as they lead the trend for cutaway gowns at the Golden Globes."

National Playoff Game Lifts College Football to New Level of Popularity

Well, I like the Rose Bowl in News Year's Day, which sometimes got messed up under BCS.

So, yeah. A national playoff works better for me.

But see the Los Angeles Times, "College football's breakout performance":

The show Monday night was forecast to draw the largest audience in cable television history. A 30-second advertising spot was going for as much $1 million.

The cause of all this attention: the first-ever College Football Playoff championship game.

Ohio State upset Oregon, 42-20, before 85,639 fans in a game that failed to follow anything resembling the anticipated script. The champion Buckeyes were the last team to earn a spot in the four-team playoff field, and they fell behind almost immediately as high-powered Oregon bolted 75 yards in 11 plays for a touchdown the first time they had the ball.

In the end, however, it was Ohio State celebrating on the field amid a shower of confetti, the first champions of a new era in college football.

The championship, at AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas, the most modern and palatial of professional football venues, concluded one of the most scrutinized seasons in history. It was the first time that a major college football championship was settled by a playoff.

On New Year's Day, semifinal matches between Ohio State and Alabama in the Sugar Bowl and Oregon and Florida State in the Rose Bowl, like Monday's game on ESPN, each drew record cable audiences of more than 28 million.

The game capped a season in which an already popular sport enjoyed a renaissance, scaling new heights in fan interest and flexing ever-building financial clout.

The playoff at least temporarily settled a rocky championship history that spanned decades.

For many years, teams from college football's highest competition level were awarded national titles in votes by associations of reporters and coaches. Then came the Bowl Championship Series, a 16-year era in which computer data were added to voting tabulations in a vexing formula that resulted in the two highest-rated teams at the end of the regular season meeting in a winner-takes-all final game.

It was a controversial — and, it turns out, flawed — system. Had the BCS been used this season, Alabama and Florida State would have been the top-ranked teams and met in the title game. Instead, they lost in the semifinal round.

This season, the final four teams were selected by a 12-member committee of college officials and other dignitaries — former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice among them — who met weekly near Dallas and, beginning in the ninth week of the season, issued a weekly top-25 ranking.

"The anticipation of the weekly rankings, the crescendo that built … is something I hadn't seen in my experience," said Pat Haden, a committee member who played quarterback at USC, was a broadcaster for Notre Dame and is currently USC's athletic director.

The new system, like the old, has stirred debate — right from the start. College football's top teams are spread over five "power conferences," and with only four semifinal spots available, at least one champion is always going to be left out.

This season, Texas Christian and Baylor, co-champions of the Big 12 Conference, were the odd teams out. It was particularly disappointing for TCU, which was No. 3 in the next-to-last ranking but was jumped by Florida State, Ohio State and Baylor on the final list even after a 52-point win in its last regular-season game.

"No matter what the system, the teams that finished outside the cutline are going to feel they were treated unfairly," Haden said. "No system, even this one, is going to be without critics."...

You Mad Muhammad?

Heh, that's pretty good.

Via Caleb Howe:

Former Cracked Editor Lampoons Muhammad And Media In One AWESOME Cover http://t.co/Gn4TdsXkTS #CharlieHebdo pic.twitter.com/uKe0xjCuj9

— Caleb Howe (@CalebHowe) January 13, 2015

#Paris Attacks: New Footage of Charlie Hebdo Jihadists Firing on Police (VIDEO)

A Reuters video below.

And a report at Sky News, "New Footage of Charlie Hebdo Gun Attack." And at London's Daily Mail, "Dramatic new footage of Islamist gunmen's rampage emerges, showing the killers calmly stopping to reload their weapons before firing at police as they drive towards them."

When confronted, the police put it in reverse like lickety-split!

Rabbi Schmuley Boteach Debates Rula Jebreal on Islamic Anti-Semitism in Europe

The Rabbi just destroys this terror-enabling Rula Jebreal.

At CNN, "'You're excusing violence, and that's very..."

Jeremy Scahill Transforms Anwar al-Awlaki Into a Modern-Day Mahatma Gandhi!

On Democracy Now!

Scahill's extremely knowledgeable, but by the second half of this interview he turns Awlaki into some kind of saint. I had to giggle a couple of times. He's almost tripping over his tongue while spinning the now dead-and-gone anti-American hate preacher into a Gandhi-esque figure of global justice and benign inspiration.

Really good for some lulz if you stay with it to the end, heh:

Oregon Ducks Crushed by Ohio State Buckeys

Although the score wasn't that lopsided, there was obviously little hope for Oregon. Ohio State was clearly dominant.

From Bill Plaschke, at LAT, "Those fast Oregon Ducks are sped to their doom by Ohio State Buckeyes":

The speed was stopped. The tempo was trampled. The coolest team in college football was punched in its shiny, swoosh-adorned jaw.

At the sweaty, painful end of their national championship nightmare Monday at AT&T Stadium, the only thing the Oregon players dominated was their aluminum bench.

It sat at the rear of their sideline. As Ohio State finished off a 42-20 pounding to win the inaugural College Football Playoff national title, that bench was full of Oregon players. Some were staring glassy-eyed at the giant overhead scoreboard. Some were quietly crying. Some covered their faces in towels.

"Get up!" shouted linebacker Torrodney Prevot, stalking in front of his teammates, wildly waving his hands. "Get up, get up, get up."

Nobody moved. It was the final indignity. Oregon had been more than just beaten. The fastest team in sports had been rendered motionless.

The dozen or so Ducks left the bench only when the final seconds had disappeared and the gold confetti had begun raining mercilessly down upon their spoiled parade. By the time they had trudged off the field, gold strands struck to their sleek cleats, slowing them one final time.

"It's definitely shocking," Prevot said later, shaking his head. "We had everything in store for them. There was nothing else we could do."

Ohio State wasn't even supposed to be here. Under the old Bowl Championship Series system, the Buckeyes would not have been here. Oregon was supposed to win here. After showing both strength and savvy in wiping out defending champion Florida State in the semifinals, this was supposed to be both coronation and affirmation for the blindingly fast spread system that had dominated college football's regular season for several years.

This was supposed to be all about the Ducks, a fact that was seemingly confirmed after Oregon had driven for a touchdown in less than three minutes on the game's opening drive.

"Then things just went wrong," said Oregon running back Thomas Tyner.

Things like a powerful Buckeyes attack that steamrollered the Ducks for 538 yards, including 246 yards rushing by Ezekiel Elliott. Things like a crushing Buckeyes defense that smothered a Ducks offense that couldn't sufficiently capitalize on four Ohio State turnovers. Things like an overwhelming Buckeyes culture with fans filling much of the stadium with red shirts and ominous cries of "Ohhhhh."

"You know," admitted Tyner, "they played a helluva game."

Once again, being overpowered and outfought has happened to an Oregon team that has long fought the perception it is not big or strong enough. Once again, college football's funkiest uniforms have been stained with blood and flattened against turf. Once again, Nike's team didn't do it.

Oregon is still looking for its first national championship, the Pac-12 Conference has once again been scolded and sent to its room to beef up, and yeah, for the umpteenth time, bring on the bad metaphors.

They were duck soup. They were duck, duck goosed. They had the quack beat out of them. They spent three rocky hours on the Oregon Fail.

Heh.

Plaschke's pulling no punches.

Still more at the link.

What the Paris No-Show Says About the Obama Administration — #CharlieHebdo

At the Wall Street Journal:

The failure of the U.S. government to send a high-level representative to the historic Paris march against Islamist terror on Sunday is being roundly criticized, even by anchors at CNN. We share the sentiment, but this is no mere diplomatic snafu.

Press secretary Josh Earnest said Monday that President Obama regretted not joining more than 40 world leaders at the rally in defiance of the Charlie Hebdo killers and their al Qaeda sponsors. “I guess what I’m saying is that we agree that we should have sent someone with a higher profile,” Mr. Earnest added, which we guess passes for contrition.

Yet as recently as Sunday night officials dismissed criticism by noting the presence of Jane Hartley, the U.S. Ambassador to France nominated in June and an Obama campaign bundler. On Monday Mr. Earnest gestured at “security challenges.” Presumably the same risks attended the German Chancellor, the British and Israeli Prime Ministers, the Middle Eastern royals and African presidents.

If Mr. Obama was too much of a distraction, then surely someone else of cabinet rank was available. Secretary of State John Kerry claimed a previous commitment in India, but then why not Vice President Joe Biden or Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel ? None would have to fly commercial. Attorney General Eric Holder was in Paris but still chose not to go.

A fair conclusion is that the White House didn’t think it mattered. This fits Mr. Obama’s generally dismissive attitude toward Europe. He was happy to use the symbolism of a speech before tens of thousands of adoring Berliners in 2008 to burnish his theme of restoring America’s image in the world. But as President he has treated foreign policy like a distraction from his work of, well, going to Tennessee to pitch “free” college. America’s image has worsened.

The other signal sent by his French omission is this Administration’s continuing failure to appreciate the nature and scope of the Islamist threat. The murders at Charlie Hebdo and the kosher deli were attacks on innocents and our ally France. But they also represent a political ideology that threatens Western freedom and civilization. The ostensible leader of the free world should want to show solidarity against such a profound menace that will require Western unity to defeat...

Reprehensible.

I'd thought by now my disgust with this administration had bottomed out. But no. Obama's shamelessness is a bottomless pit.

#ParisAttacks: The Search for Hayat Boumedienne

Holly Williams reports, for CBS Evening News.

Hamas-Linked CAIR Demands Fox News Drop 'Islamophobes' Who Speak Truth About Islam

From Robert Spencer, "Hamas-linked terror org CAIR demands that Fox drop those who speak the truth about the jihad threat."

Read it at the link --- and remember, it's a war of ideas in the information battlespace. Truth is the ultimate weapon. Muslims and their leftist terror-enablers cannot stand the light of decency and truth shone upon them.

'Hello, everybody! There is no global warming!'

I love this!

At Breitbart, "WEATHER CHANNEL FOUNDER: 'HELLO, EVERYBODY THERE'S NO GLOBAL WARMING!'"

Here's Who Is and Isn't Publishing the New Charlie Hebdo Cover Image

At BuzzFeed. Click through for the list.

I noted earlier that the Wall Street Journal published Charlie Hebdo images in their first editorial on the attacks. The New York Times? Not so much.



And from Glenn Reynolds, "WELL, THAT’S NOT HOW WE ROLL HERE AT INSTAPUNDIT..."

The cover reads "All is forgiven." See Twitchy, "‘Le brass balls, y’all': Charlie Hebdo not backing down with new cover art [photo]."

The Scandal of Free Speech

From Bret Stephens, at WSJ, "A year from now none but the unfeint of heart will still be with Charlie":

Last May, sex-advice columnist Dan Savage gave a talk at the University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics in which he used a term so infamous that it caused members of the audience to walk out “in a state of distress.” Later, a petition was put forward to demand that the institute apologize “for failing to stop” Mr. Savage from using the term, and to “assert a commitment to preventing the use of slurs and hate speech in the future.”

The word in question? To adapt the old joke: I could tell you but they’re going to kill me.

Well, OK, here goes. The word is “tranny,” meaning a transgender, or transsexual, or transvestite person. So hideously offensive is this word nowadays that, when I arrived at an Institute of Politics event a few weeks later, a group called Queers United in Power—or QUIP, minus the humor—held a protest outside and handed out fliers denouncing (without spelling out) the use of the “T word.” I had to ask around to find out just what the word was; I got the answer in a whisper.

Attention all of you logicians of Hyde Park: If words are to be forbidden, must they not first be known?

I was reminded of this small episode following last week’s massacre of journalists in France, after which it has become fashionable to “be” Charlie Hebdo. Sorry, but QUIP is not Charlie Hebdo: QUIP is al Qaeda with a different list of moral objections and a milder set of criminal penalties. Otherwise, like al Qaeda, it’s the same unattractive mix of quavering personal sensitivity and totalitarian demands for ideological conformity.

To which one can only reply: tranny-tranny-tranny; Muhammad-Muhammad-Muhammad; de-da-da-da. Free speech—at least speech that is truly free—is always a scandal to someone or other. Chill out and deal with it.

But deal with it we won’t. People forget just how radical is the idea of free speech. For more that 2,000 years—between, say, the executions of Socrates and Giordano Bruno —the story of the West was the story of killing blasphemers. Enlightenment began when we started to repent the practice; modernity survives under the shield of the First Amendment and equivalent laws in the free world. But the arrows always keep coming.

I doubt the Charlie Hebdo murders will do much to shake loose the array of campus speech codes or change the incentive structures for their enforcers in sundry administrative offices and multicultural-affairs departments...

No surprise, of course, that the radical left is Islam's partner in tyranny, terror, and oppression.

But continue reading.

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Get the Hell Out of France

From Paula Stern, at A Soldier's Mother:

We went into Shabbat praying for the hostages and their families in Paris. We knew very few of the details - two killed, though this was denied by the French. At least 6 held hostage.

My youngest is about to turn 15, she has several friends whose parents came from France. The cousin of one was in the store just minutes before the attack; another wasn't able to find a cousin and was afraid she might be inside. This is how we began the Sabbath. "They won't leave," my youngest said to me in sadness. "They won't leave."

As soon as the Sabbath ended, I heard the devastating news that four innocent Jews had been killed and another 15 had been rescued in the hostage situation. Among the dead, was the son of the chief Rabbi of Tunis. They were part of a killing spree that cost France a total of 17 lives during the past week. At least five of those were Jews; the policeman gunned down in cold blood was a Muslim.

I am filled with pain and anger. Some for the Jews themselves. I do not believe in blaming the victim. That is something almost instinctive when you have low opinions of the killers, you naturally think that perhaps there is something the victim could have done - it's wrong.

And yet...I want to shout at the Jewish community in France. Enough already. Get the hell out of France now. I don't care how hard it is - the reality of what France is becoming is harder.

I don't care what it costs - would you place your money above the lives of your children? You have just paid the highest price. God Almighty, what more do you need?

Pack your stinking bags, please please please. The pain tears at our hearts - that is what it is to be a Jew. To feel, to the core of your being, the agony of a Jew, no matter where. All Shabbat, we held you in our prayers, in our hearts, desperate to hear of a miracle; deeply saddened that two had been murdered; terrified that even as we were praying more would have died.

There are a thousand reasons why moving to Israel is hard - the economy, leaving behind roots that have grown over centuries, the comfort of speaking the language of your birth, even if it isn't really the language of your fathers. Grandparents, elderly parents, relatives that can't come now and may never leave. Jobs, homes, stores...a thousand reasons to stay and but one major one to leave - the time has come...

Keep reading.

It's an interesting question. Remember, Claire Berlinski would rather fight the Islamists than have have the Jews flee France for a second time.

The Death-Cult Ideology That France Prefers Not to Name

An essay from Israel's David Horovitz, via Blazing Cat Fur:

France rallied on Sunday like its life depended on it. Three and a half million people took to the streets in an unprecedented show of solidarity with the 17 victims murdered by three Islamist gunmen last Wednesday, Thursday and Friday. “I am Charlie,” “I am a police officer,” “I am a Jew,” their placards asserted, identifying in turn with each category of victim — the journalists, the cops, the Jews. “We will not be divided,” “We will not be terrorized,” “We will not give up our freedom,” they declared.

We will fight Islamist terrorism with every sinew of our being, in order to ensure the protection of the freedoms that we cherish and that it seeks to destroy? That, they didn’t say...

Naturally.

Click through to RTWT, at Blazing Cat Fur.

ISIS Hacks Pentagon Social Media

They're killing us here.

At the Washington Post, "U.S. military social media accounts apparently hacked by Islamic State sympathizers."

CNN's Brianna Keiler: Terrorism Isn't Obama's 'Issue'; He's Not 'Comfortable' Standing Against Terrorism with Other World Leaders (VIDEO)

From Noah Rothman, at Hot Air, "CNN: Terrorism really isn’t Obama’s ‘issue’":

On Monday, White House Press Sec. Josh Earnest conceded that Barack Obama’s White House should have sent a figure of more stature to attend the historic march in protest of the attacks on Charlie Hebdo than America’s ambassador to France. After much prodding from the press corps, Earnest conceded that the president was at home in the White House on Sunday.

The political press has been finding it difficult to make excuses for the president’s absence from this event. Many members of the media have, in fact, confessed that they are uncomfortable with the president’s decision to largely ignore the historic march.

One intrepid CNN reporter offered her theory for why Obama declined to attend the rally in Paris when so many of heads of state around the globe did: Politics.

Brianna Keiler's a good lady. Watch:

Geert Wilders: Charlie Hebdo Attack 'An Act of War'

At Britain's Channel 4 News:



I saw Wilders speak in New York, on September 11, 2010.

New York Magazine Surveys 53 Leftist 'Historians' on Barack Obama's Legacy

The first thing to note about this totally unscientific "survey," conducted by Thomas Meaney of the Columbia University History Department, is that it employs no systematic methodology to generate even the semblance of an unbiased "sample."

Indeed, looking over the report, I see no statement or disclaimer on the methodology. Shoot, these aren't even "historians" at all. It's a hodgepodge of non-fiction writers, historians, journalists, and political scientists. Included is the notorious anti-Semitic Stephen Walt, of Harvard's JFK School of Government, and author of "The Israel Lobby" infamy.

All efforts to rank presidents using "experts" will be horribly prone to bias, but New York Magazine's attempt is even more silly than usual.

In any case, here's the write-up at Newsmax, "Historians on Obama Legacy: 'Polarizing,' Not 'Transformative'."

Then, at New York Magazine, "53 Historians Weigh In on Barack Obama’s Legacy." (At Memeorandum.)

And also the partisan reactions, from Jonathan Chait, "History Will Be Very Kind," and Christopher Caldwell, "History Will Eviscerate Him."

Obama may not be history's worst president. It's too soon to tell, in any case. Perhaps he hasn't hit bottom yet. But it's highly doubtful he'll manage ultimately to escape the ignominy of "average" to "below average" categories. If Obama somehow manages to get credit for putting a floor in the collapsing economy in 2008, despite six years of less-than-middling economic growth, then it's likely he'll be saved from the final indignity of the "failed" category. But we'll see. We'll see.

Here's the "sample" of "historians," FWIW:

Jeffrey Alexander, Yale University, co-author of Obama Power (2014)

Joyce Appleby, UCLA, author of The Relentless Revolution: A History of Capitalism (2011)

Andrew Bacevich, Boston University, author of The New American Militarism: How Americans Are Seduced by War (2005)

Edward Baptist, Cornell University, author of The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism (2014)

Kai Bird, author of The Good Spy: The Life and Death of Robert Ames (2014)

Robin Blackburn, author of The American Crucible: Slavery, Emancipation, and Human Rights (2011)

Gordon Chang, Stanford University, author of Chinese American Voices (2006)

Jonathan Darman, author of Landslide: LBJ and Reagan at the Dawn of a New America (2014)

Mike Davis, UC Riverside, author of City of Quartz (1990) and Planet of Slums (2006)

Mary Dudziak, Emory University School of Law, author of Cold War Civil Rights: Race and the Image of American Democracy (2011)

Joseph Ellis, author of Revolutionary Summer: The Birth of American Independence (2013)

Crystal Feimster, Yale University, author of Southern Horrors: Women and the Politics of Southern Rape and Lynching (2009)

Beverly Gage, Yale University, author of The Day Wall Street Exploded: A Story of America in Its First Age of Terror (2009)

Samuel Goldman, the George Washington University, writer for The American Conservative
Annette Gordon-Reed, Harvard Law School, author of The Hemingses of Monticello: An American Family (2008)

Aram Goudsouzian, University of Memphis, author of Down to the Crossroads: Civil Rights, Black Power, and the Meredith March Against Fear (2014)

Alexander Gourevitch, Brown University, author of From Slavery to the Cooperative Commonwealth (2014)

David Greenberg, Rutgers University, author of NixonÕs Shadow: The History of an Image (2003)

David Hollinger, UC Berkeley, author of After Cloven Tongues of Fire: Protestant Liberalism in Modern American History (2013)

Thomas Holt, University of Chicago, author of Children of Fire: A History of African Americans (2010)

Paul Kahn, Yale Law School, author of Putting Liberalism in Its Place (2004)

David Kennedy, Stanford University, author of Freedom From Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945 (1999)

Charles Kesler, Claremont McKenna College, editor of the Claremont Review of Books, author of I Am the Change: Barack Obama and the Future of Liberalism (2012)

Stephen Kinzer, author of The Brothers: John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, and Their Secret World War (2013)

James Kloppenberg, Harvard University, author of Reading Obama: Dreams, Hope, and the American Political Tradition (2011)

Kevin Kruse, Princeton University, author of White Flight: Atlanta and the Making of Modern Conservatism (2005)

Matthew Lassiter, University of Michigan, author of The Silent Majority: Suburban Politics in the Sunbelt South (2006)

Jackson Lears, Rutgers University, editor of Raritan, author of Rebirth of a Nation: The Making of Modern America 1877-1920 (2009)
Jill Lepore, Harvard University, author of The Story of America: Essays on Origins (2012)

Mark Lilla, Columbia University, author of The Stillborn God: Religion, Politics, and the Modern West (2007)

James Livingston, Rutgers University, author of Against Thrift: Why Consumer Culture Is Good for the Economy, the Environment, and Your Soul (2011)

James Mann, author of The Obamians: The Struggle Inside the White House to Redefine American Power (2012)

Alfred McCoy, University of Wisconsin-Madison, author of Torture and Impunity: The U.S. Doctrine of Coercive Interrogation (2012)

Lisa McGirr, Harvard University, author of Suburban Warriors: The Origins of the New American Right (2002)

John McWhorter, Columbia University, author of Losing the Race: Self-Sabotage in Black America (2000)

Samuel Moyn, Harvard Law School, author of The Lost Utopia: Human Rights in History (2010)

Khalil Gilbran Muhummad, director of the Schomberg Center for Research in Black Culture, author of The Condemnation of Blackness: Race, Crime, and the Making of Modern America (2011)

Nell Painter, Princeton University, author of The History of White People (2010)

Miriam Pawel, author of The Crusades of Cesar Chavez: A Biography (2014)

Kimberly Phillips-Fein, NYU, author of Invisible Hands: The BusinessmenÕs Crusade Against the New Deal (2009)

Thomas Powers, author of The Killing of Crazy Horse (2011)

Daniel Rodgers, Princeton University, author of The Age of Fracture (2011)

Jeffrey Rosen, The George Washington University Law School, author of The Unwanted Gaze: The Destruction of Privacy in America (2000)

Stephen Sestanovich, Council on Foreign Relations, author of Maximalist: America in the World From Truman to Obama (2014)

Theda Skocpol, Harvard University, co-author of The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism (2012)

Nikhil Singh, NYU, author of Black Is a Country: Race and the Unfinished Struggle for Democracy (2005)

Harry Stout, Yale University, author of Upon the Altar of the Nation: A Moral History of the Civil War (2007)

Thomas Sugrue, University of Pennsylvania, author of The Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit (reissued 2014)

Jeffrey Tulis, University of Texas, author of The Rhetorical Presidency (1987)

Stephen Walt, Harvard University, co-author of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (2007)

Mason Williams, Williams College, author of City of Ambition: FDR, La Guardia, and the Making of Modern New York (2013)

Robert Williams, University of Arizona College of Law, author of The American Indian in Western Legal Thought (1990)

Gavin Wright, Stanford University, author of Sharing the Prize: The Economics of the Civil Rights Revolution in the American South (2013)

Queen of Hollywood: Kate Hudson Rocks a Plunging White Gown at the Weinstein and Netflix Golden Globes After-Party

She's so lovely.

At London's Daily Mail, "Kate Hudson rocks a plunging white gown as she enjoys a girls' night out with Hollywood's finest at Golden Globes afterparty."

BONUS: At Egotastic!, "Heidi Klum, Kate Beckinsale, Jessica Chastain And Other Hotties at the 2015 Golden Globe Awards Red Carpet."

So, No Air Conditioning at the Golden Globes?

A Beverly Hilton spokesperson denies it, but celebrities were dripping with sweat, with some stars even stripping off their clothing to beat the heat.

At Vanity Fair, "Why Everyone at the Golden Globes Looks So Uncomfortably Sweaty."

ADDED: At E!, "Um, Did Katherine Heigl Just Call Herself Full-Figured on the Golden Globes Red Carpet?!!"

And at London's Daily Mail, "Katherine Heigl and husband Josh Kelley kiss on the red carpet at Golden Globes afterparty."

A Warning From the Paris Attacks

From David Horowitz, at the Washington Times, "Obama’s stubborn denial of the terror threat endangers Americans":

The Islamic terror attack on the magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris was carried out by Muslim criminals who were apparently trained in Yemen.

Meanwhile, national security officials are warning of an imminent threat to Europe and the United States from jihadi soldiers who are returning from the wars in Syria and Iraq. According to the head of the FBI and other first responders, there is no way to stop their re-entry because, after all, they have American passports. Nor is there any way to stop them in Syria and Iraq since President Obama has surrendered both countries to our enemies.

The Democratic mayor of New York — ground zero for the Islamic war — has even stopped the surveillance of jihadi mosques, the breeding grounds for domestic “lone wolves.” And with our southern border shredded by Mr. Obama and the Democrats, it’s not going to be difficult even for foreign jihadis to reach their infidel targets. Of course, the president doesn’t like the word “terror” to begin with, let alone “Islamic terror.” Thanks to him, the Islamic war against the United States is officially referred to as an “overseas contingency operation,” while domestic Islamic mayhem is filed under the category “workplace violence.”

Fourteen years after Sept. 11, 2001, it is tragically clear that President Bush was right about the threat we faced and the Democrats were suicidally wrong. The Sept. 11 attacks were indeed a salvo in the war Islamists have declared on us but even now, 14 years later, Democrats still want to regard such attacks as acts of individual criminality. They insist on dealing with them through the legal justice system, affording American rights to those who want to destroy American rights. Why, you may ask yourself, is the Boston Marathon bomber being tried in a criminal court of law, where he will be able to make propaganda for his cause underwritten by his victims? Because Democrats want it that way. It shows we’re superior to everybody else.

Nine days after Sept. 11, Mr. Bush addressed both houses of Congress to outline his response to the terror attacks. This is what he said about states that harbor Islamic terrorists, such as Yemen and Syria: “We will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. [Applause.] From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.”

When the president had completed his remarks, these were precisely the sentences that were singled out for attack by the political left. To progressives, Mr. Bush was a tyrant in the making and they took his warning personally: “Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.” Unfortunately, even though Mr. Bush was not referring the left in uttering these words, he might as well have been. When Mr. Bush decided to take on the terrorist-supporting, U.N.-defying regime of Saddam Hussein, Democrats went into full war mode against him, against the “war on terror,” and against America’s mission to defeat the al Qaeda armies that had assembled in Iraq. Their sabotage of the war went on for five years, making it impossible for Mr. Bush to take on the terror-supporting regimes in Syria, Iran and elsewhere.

The Obama administration is the product of this momentous Democratic defection from America’s purposes, from a robust defense of the American homeland, and from a militant response to the war that Islamists have declared on us. Why is there still a free flow of immigration from nations like Yemen that support or tolerate the Islamist armies ranged against us? Why isn’t our southern border secure? It is because the Obama administration, with support from Democrats in Congress, regards security measures against terror supporting states to be “Islamophobic,” and regards securing our southern border to be xenophobic. Why isn’t Mr. Obama embracing President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi and his Egyptian regime that has declared the Islamists to be enemies of the Islamic world? It is because Mr. Obama is committed to the Muslim Brotherhood — the fount of al Qaeda — and against this same Egyptian regime...

Still more.

Rosie Gray in Paris

Ms. Gray, a BuzzFeed reporter, was in Paris yesterday for the unity rally.

It's amazing how uplifting La Marseillaise sounds, considering the fact that it's about, like, spilling your enemies' blood

— Rosie Gray (@RosieGray) January 11, 2015

Bosch Fawstin's Muhammad

For a while, I had reposting privileges from Mr. Fawstin, but then he started making so much money for his drawings, he had to rescind the offer.

He's good:

Islam got your tongue? Or-after this devastating attack in France- r you Finally going to join the fight against it? pic.twitter.com/vuoqrhykkH

— Bosch Fawstin (@BoschFawstin) January 7, 2015

Muslims, in essence: "We will Murder you if you draw our Mass-Murdering Prophet!" Here's one of my Mohammad drawings pic.twitter.com/hmeR3LhnXN

— Bosch Fawstin (@BoschFawstin) January 7, 2015

'The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam...'

As lots of folks have been reminding us over the weekend, recall the president's infamous prophecy of doom, delivered at the United Nations, September 25, 2012:



And at Politico, "Barack Obama’s French kiss-off":

Barack Obama n’est pas Charlie — or at least, he wasn’t this weekend.

Don’t look for the president or vice president among the photos of 44 heads of state who locked arms and marched down Boulevard Voltaire in Paris. Nor did they join a companion march the French Embassy organized in Washington on Sunday afternoon.

Indeed, Obama’s public reactions to the attacks in Paris last week have been muted. His initial response Wednesday to the killing of 12 people at the Charlie Hebdo newspaper offices was delivered as he sat calmly in an armchair in the Oval Office speaking about the “cowardly” acts and defending freedom of the press. Two days later, as a gunman took hostages and went on to kill four people in a kosher grocery, Obama took a few seconds away from a community college proposal roll-out in Tennessee because he said with events unfolding, “I wanted to make sure to comment on them” — but never then or afterward specifically condemned that attack.

Obama wasn’t far from the march in D.C. on Sunday that wended silently along six blocks from the Newseum to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial. Instead, he spent the chilly afternoon a few blocks away at the White House, with no public schedule, no outings.

Joe Biden was back home in Wilmington, Delaware.
\
Neither they nor any high-level administration official attended either event.

France’s top American diplomat, diplomatically, tried to make the best of it.

“Thank you to Victoria Nuland, assistant secretary at the Department of State, who has represented the U.S. Authorities at the demonstration in DC. A friend,” Ambassador Gérard Araud tweeted Sunday evening, as criticism of the administration mounted.

And though it’s symbolism—Obama made several statements last week condemning the terror, and the government has been supporting French efforts throughout—the symbolism has caught a lot of attention.

“I wish our US President had gone to Paris to stand with our European allies,” tweeted James Stavridis, the retired Navy admiral and current dean of Tufts University’s Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.

“It’s stunning, truly stunning,” said Aaron David Miller, who among other responsibilities during his time at the State Department under both Republicans and Democrats, helped deliberate over which officials to send to which events. “It’s a poster child for tone deafness.”...

It's literally unforgivable. I'm ashamed for my country, for the American people, who are without representation at a time like this. Victoria Nuland just doesn't cut it.

Not a "profiles in courage" moment, to put it mildly.

So, Jimmy Fallon Totally Missed Nicole Kidman's, Ahem, Enticements in 2005

Big mistake.

And Ms. Kidman hasn't seen him since then. He's just now finding out about his epic douchenozzle fail.

Pretty hilarious.

Watch, from last Tuesday's Tonight Show, "Jimmy Fallon Blew a Chance to Date Nicole Kidman."

George Clooney Salutes Charlie Hebdo at Golden Globes: 'We Will Not Walk in Fear'

ICYMI, video at Mediaite. Text (and unbridled swooning) at WaPo.

Some not so insignificant folks are not pleased with the Clooneys. See previously: "Lee Radziwill Disses George and Amal Clooney."

And see Red Nation Rising, "Clooney, Clinton, Hollywood-the Anti-American Globalists."

U.S. GOES MISSING IN ACTION IN PARIS

Ouch.

At NYDN, "Obama, Biden and cabinet bigs shun Paris, send Holder, who ditches rally that drew millions in France."



Previously: "World Leaders, Sans Barack Hussein, March in Paris — #CharlieHebdo."

Agent Orange Live in the O.C.!

Amazing.

I think I saw these guys play 35 years ago. They're currently on tour and will be playing the World Famous Doll Hut in Anaheim, on January 17th.

What a trip.