Home-Made Revolver

Le Monde's Serguei aims at those typical idiotic gun-lovin', cowboy-playin' nuts from rural America…

• I'd like to purchase a .357 Magnum

• Sending it over straight away on your 3D printer

If a time traveler arrived in our age from 1960, he would hardly be able to speak the English language without being pilloried

Do leftists think that they own the English language?

asks Benny Huang with regards to the gay "language police".

 The way they lord over it like their personal fiefdom tells me that they do. They introduce new words, ban old ones, and assign new definitions hitherto unknown. What begins as a suggestion soon becomes an imperative—use the words they want you to use, the way they want you to use them, or pay the price.

 Keeping up with the latest jargon can be difficult. Every once in a while, some well-meaning person will use a word that was innocuous just a short time ago only to discover that it’s now inflammatory. If that person doesn’t understand why the old word is now verboten it’s okay to ask, though it isn’t okay to evaluate the reason and decide for himself whether it’s valid. Edicts of the language police are final.

 … If a time traveler arrived in our age from 1960, he would hardly be able to speak without being pilloried. “Negro” is now a derogatory term, though black is still acceptable, if not optimal. Apparently, the United Negro College Fund has not gotten the message. “Negro” is nothing more than the Spanish word for black. So it’s okay to say black, just not in a foreign language. What do these people have against Español?

 “Colored people” is equally unacceptable, though not “people of color” which is all the rage in academia. For the life of me, I can’t explain why one is okay but the other will get you fired. Maybe we should ask the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. “People of color” means anyone who isn’t white, which is a strange definition because, last time I checked, white is a color. What are we supposed to call those who don’t fall into this category? People of no color?

No, we call them white. White is an acceptable word, though yellow is not. Don’t ask me why. Yellow people are called Asians even if they’re several generations removed from Asia but white people are called white. We don’t call them Europeans, unless they’re actually from Europe. Red is also unacceptable. We call those people Native Americans. It doesn’t matter if you have roots in this country dating back to the seventeenth century, if you aren’t red you can’t claim to be a Native American.

Get it? Black and white are okay, but red and yellow are racial epithets. I get dizzy trying to keep up.

Who knows what changes the future will bring? In all likelihood, the words we use today will be obsolete in a generation. New words will replace old words and we Gen-Xer’s and Gen-Yer’s will be the clueless old farts who inadvertently say offensive things.

One thing is for sure—when these changes occur, they will all be initiated by those on the political left. It’s their language, we just speak it. English is putty in their hands, to be molded as they please. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is just so gay.

Shots All Over Paris, the Capital of One of the Nations Always Berating America for Its Gun Culture; the Élites Blame Some Bitter French Racist Opposed to Blacks and Gays — Shootist Turns Out to Be Muslim

Police officers fanned out in the French capital on Monday in search of the man responsible for a shooting at a newspaper headquarters that left one man gravely wounded and the city on edge 

reports the New York Times' Scott Sayare.

In what may be related episodes, a man opened fire later in the morning outside the headquarters of a major bank and there were reports that an armed individual in the same area had stopped a car and forced its driver to drive him to the Champs-Élysées. 

Related: Witness the Unbelievable Amount of Racism That Exists Among Conservatives and in the Tea Party

A young photographer’s assistant, 23 years old, happened to be standing at the entrance of our daily newspaper Monday morning, 

writes Libération's Annette Lévy-Willard, as she recounts what happened and tries to figure out who was behind the attack. Needless to say, she suggests that it is a bitter, gay-bashing French racist.

when a man armed with a shotgun came through the sliding door, straight off a pleasant street in the Marais.

 

As if this were a horror movie, the gunman, white, wearing a black cap and vest, moved toward the young photographer and shot him at least twice, at near-point blank range. He was struck by blasts in the chest and an arm. 

Our colleague was rushed to a Paris hospital, where he was in the operating room for hours. We hope desperately he will recover.

But why would Libération be the target of such violence? The man-with-a-cap is suspected of being involved in a similar incident on Friday, when a gunman entered the building of the TV news channel BFM, threatened staff members but left without harming anyone. If this is the same man, does he have a grudge against the press? 

Libération is a daily newspaper of the Left founded in 1973 by Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir — this year, almost to the day, we are celebrating our 40th anniversary.  Libération is a “liberal” or “progressive” newspaper, as you might say in the United States. Editorially, it is supportive of gay marriage, a recent controversy in France. Traditionally, Libération also takes positions against racism and xenophobia. Earlier this month, the newspaper ran a long interview with Christiane Taubira, France’s black minister of justice, who had promoted the government’s new law permitting same-sex marriage. 

In October, a candidate for the National Front compared Ms. Taubira to a “monkey.” Picking up on the theme, right-wing demonstrators taunted her with a banana. At first, Ms. Taubira maintained a dignified silence about the abuse, but finally, she told Libération: “These racist attacks are attacking the heart of our democracy.” 

So we have two stories here: first, it turns out that gun control countries like France are hardly as safe from gun violence as they claim to be — as they claim to be in their usual tirades against the clueless idiot cowboys over in the lawless United States.

Second, contrary to the (desperate) wishes of the bien-pensant, the perpetrator turns out, as it happens, not to be a typical bitter white Frenchman clinging to his religion (and to his guns). He is a Muslim.


Since Annette Lévy-Willard's tirade came out, indeed, the shootist has been captured; as the BBC reports:

French authorities have named a man taken into custody on suspicion of carrying out recent gun attacks in Paris as Abdelhakim Dekhar

The suspect threatened a TV station last Friday, and attacked a newspaper office and a bank HQ on Monday.

 … The intruder emptied the chamber of his gun in the reception area without firing, saying: "Next time, I will not miss you."

 

The World Turned Upside Down: "Tonight I Am Eating French Fries"

It's the world turned upside down

writes Corine Lesnes in Le Monde and on her blog.

After the failure of the Geneva negotiations on Iran's nuclear program, America's neoconservatives cannot praise France highly enough, while various defenders of the Obama administration are full of resentment againt the United States' "oldest ally" for having railroaded the agreement through its "stubbornness".

 … "Vive la France" wrote John McCain on his Twitter account [while] Rick Grenell sent out the message: "Tonight, I'm eating French fries".

Corine Lesnes:

Après l'échec des négociations de Genève sur le programme nucléaire iranien, samedi 9 novembre, les néoconservateurs américains n'ont pas assez de louanges pour la France, alors que certains défenseurs de l'administration Obama sont remplis d'amertume envers « le plus vieil allié » des Etats-Unis pour avoir fait capoter l'accord par son « intransigeance ».


« Dieu soit loué pour la France », a déclaré le sénateur de Caroline du Sud Lindsey Graham sur CNN. « Les Français sont en train de devenir de très bons leaders sur le Proche-Orient. » Ce n'est pas la première fois que M. Graham, qui fait partie des faucons républicains, prend le parti de la diplomatie française. Fin octobre, lors du dîner annuel de l'ambassade de France à Washington en l'honneur de Raymond Aron, il a exprimé plus de sympathie pour les pays alliés ayant fait l'objet d'écoutes de la NSA que n'en a jamais fait l'administration.

John McCain, l'ancien candidat à la Maison Blanche, a lui aussi rendu hommage à la position française. « La France a eu le courage d'empêcher un très mauvais accord avec l'Iran », a-t-il salué, sur Twitter, avant d'ajouter en français : « Vive la France ! »

Dès la fin de la session à Genève, l'un des pratiquants de la première heure du french bashing de 2002-2003, ex-porte-parole de la délégation américaine lors de la bataille sur l'Irak à l'ONU, Rick Grenell, a lancé un mot d'ordre : « Ce soir, je mange des french fries [des frites]. » Avant de se féliciter : « Contrairement à Obama et Kerry, la France ne veut pas adoucir les six résolutions précédentes sur l'Iran. »

"DEAL DU SIÈCLE" POUR LES IRANIENS ?

 … Le républicain Bob Corker a regretté que l'administration ait « toujours l'air prête à se jeter dans les bras des gens » au risque de « diminuer nos moyens de pression ».

C’est quand même fou, qu’à chaque fois que les faucons ou les « néo-conservateurs » (houlà, quelles expressions à vous faire peur!) (ré)agissent d’une manière ou d’une autre, on doive les décrire par des phrases pleines d’émotion (ébahir « Tous ceux qui ont arpenté les couloirs de l’ONU en 2002-2003″, « s’est pris de passion pour l’Hexagone », etc), suggérant que ce sont des badauds…

Personne ne semble se dire que les néo-conservateurs aient — tout simplement — pu faire (je ne dis même pas « ont fait ») preuve d’intelligence, de bon sens et — surtout — de consistence, et cela tout au long de leur présence sur la scène américaine :

• En 2003, disaient-ils (à l’attention de Chirac), les démocraties doivent s’unir face aux dictatures sanglantes et aux forces de l’obscurantisme ;

• En 2013, disent-ils (à l’attention d’Obama), les démocraties doivent s’unir face aux dictatures sanglantes et aux forces de l’obscurantisme

Rien d’inconsistent (ou d’effrayant) là-dedans…

N’est-ce pas ?

Ach Du Lieber: It Iss (or It Vaz) a Cherman Infashun off Amerika!

Check out the census map in Jessica Jerreat's Daily Mail article (Dankeschön für Instapundit):

• Census data shows heritage of 317 million modern Americans
• Clusters show where immigrants from different nations chose to settle
• Largest ancestry grouping in the nation are of German descent with almost 50 million people
• African American or Black is the second largest grouping with just over 40 million people
• Almost 20 million people claim to have 'American' ancestry for political reasons and because they are unsure of their family's genealogy

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2408591/American-ethnicity-map-shows-melting-pot-ethnicities-make-USA-today.html#ixzz2kFROGNTW