[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse"

"Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD"

"Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy"

Woodworking and Construction Hacks

"CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination"

"NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law"

"Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing"

Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine

Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn.

After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning

Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate

Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending.

Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar”

"Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny"

"Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is"

Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner.

Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him

South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien

GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis

Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash

New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms

Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania

Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally

"It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala

Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump

Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive'

(Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl

"Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race"

He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage

The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom!

"Kamala’s Inane Talking Points"

"The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics"

Easy Drywall Patch

Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast

In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind"

Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’

Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens

Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer?

hurricanes and heat waves are Worse

'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic

Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump

IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons

Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training

The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses

Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists

Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general

Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep

Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA.

Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report

Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Bible Study
See other Bible Study Articles

Title: Croquembouche Lie, People Die
Source: Steyn Online
URL Source: http://www.steynonline.com/7300/croquembouche-lie-people-die
Published: Nov 21, 2015
Author: Mark Steyn
Post Date: 2015-11-21 15:49:21 by nativist nationalist
Keywords: None
Views: 2757
Comments: 17

I've never seen John Oliver's HBO show, but Scaramouche draws my attention to his reaction to the Paris attacks:

"So here is where things stand. First, as of now, we know that this attack was carried out by gigantic fucking assholes, unconscionable, flaming assholes, possibly, possibly working with other fucking assholes, definitely working in service of an ideology of pure assholery," he said. His audience began to laugh. "Second, and this goes almost without saying, Fuck these assholes!" The audience began to cheer. "Fuck them, if I may say, sideways!" He made some definitive hand gestures. Third, he said, nothing these assholes attempt is going to work. "France is going to endure. And I'll tell you why. If you are in a war of culture and life style with France, good fucking luck!" More cheering. "Go ahead, go ahead. Bring your bankrupt ideology. They'll bring Jean-Paul Sartre, Edith Piaf, fine wine, Gauloises cigarettes, Camus, Camembert, madeleines, macarons"—images of these appeared behind him as he spoke—"Marcel Proust, and the fucking croquembouche!" An image of what looked like a glazed-cream-puff Christmas tree popped up. He waved his hands and pointed at it. "The croquembouche! You just brought a philosophy of rigorous self-abnegation to a pastry fight, my friends. You are fucked! That is a French freedom tower!" The crowd howled with delight.

The New Yorker was impressed by this. Not so long ago they would have spotted the obvious problem with it, but these days they're just a legacy masthead and a classy font. So their correspondent, Sarah Larson, filed a love letter headlined "Vive John Oliver":

If you happened to be up late watching John Oliver before bed, you, like me, might have found yourself laughing and crying, having the first cathartic emotional response you'd had since Friday, and grateful for it...

For clarity of expression and comedic effectiveness, John Oliver's show may be the best and purest show on television.

But in what sense is it "effective"?

This is telly "edginess" - edginess with no edge. The "fucks" and "assholes" function as euphemism, piling up profanity as a form of polite evasion - as a way of avoiding saying anything. It's the residual pose of edginess in a craven culture. Thus the paradox of our times: to say anything other than "fuck" might offend someone. And it surely doesn't get much more pathetic than that. What a croque.

As for bringing a suicide bomb to a pastry war, I like a croquembouche as much as the next fellow. But take it from a notorious Islamophobe: one of the least worst things about the Muslim world are the pastries.

~On Stuart Varney's show yesterday, Stuart asked yours truly, Steve Forbes and the rest of the gang whether Paris was a game-changer in the war on terror. You can see the video here. The reaction of Mr Oliver, among many others, suggest that this will not be a turning point. It's easier to cheer the guy saying "Fuck these assholes!" than even to identify these particular assholes, never mind do anything that would seriously "fuck" them.

~Also from yesterday's Varney show, the Democrats' court eunuchs continue to be much exercised over my mordant observation re Bernie Sanders' terrorism- causes-Isis argument. In their ongoing audition to be the jihad's lead prison bitch, the left is, of course, far more upset about hypothetical decapitations than any real ones.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: nativist nationalist (#0)

Paris IS a game changer in the war on terror, and not because the Anglo-Saxons have a cheerleader in John Oliver, and the American people are (rightly) angry at another major attack on the West, or because Obama "has it under control" (he doesn't).

It's a game changer because France and Russia, together, are bombing ISIS directly, bombing the capital, bombing supply lines, bombing oil infrastructure.

This is important, because two sovereign nations, which hold two of the vetoes on the UN Security Council, are de facto allies in a shooting war, on the doorstep of Europe, cooperating militarily to destroy an enemy with airstrikes.

It is significant because neither the United States nor the United Kingdom, the two Anglo-Saxon Security Council veto-wielders, would veto the action were it come to a vote - both are cheering on the French (and silent about the Russians).

It's not a NATO operation, and it's not a joint operation with the Americans. The British are not in the mix. France and Russia are in a defacto military alliance actually fighting (and killing) ISIS in the Middle East.

This means a lot in a lot of ways. The "croquembouche" response is definitely not coming from Paris. They eat croquembouche in Paris, but they're spitting fire and bullets at ISIS in Syria and Iraq. And their doing it with the help of a big ally. The fact that that ally is Russia, and not the United States, is not a little thing.

Fact is, Obama is out of the picture. Fact is, France is not going to wait for the US elections. Fact is, France can militarily ally with Russia, on its own, without US "permission" to militarily eradicate a threat. Fact is, that makes Russia far more likely to get better treatment from the EU than Obama, or Merkel, would like to see. Fact is, France has the warplanes hammering the terrorists, Germany has none. Which means that the attack on Paris has changed more than meets the Anglo-Saxon eye.

What John Oliver said is actually true: France is not going to wilt. They're fighting already, and they're allying with RUSSIA to do it, because the Americans won't do anything.

Nobody really EXPECTS the British to do anything alone, because they're America's poodle and they don't deploy forces unless it's alongside of the US. Also, Britain is experiencing harrowing internal politics. France certainly doesn't expect the British to send forces.

But the US? Yes, France would like the US to send forces. And maybe after the next election that will happen. Trump will send forces. But by the time the next election comes, the Franco-Russian alliance may have already pulverized ISIS such that American (and British) force can be safely deployed as a mop-up crew.

The net-net of the Paris attacks may end up being the re-creation of the historical Franco-Russian alliance that dominated European security politics from 1870 to 1917.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-11-21   19:16:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Vicomte13 (#1)

France is not going to wilt. They're fighting already, and they're allying with RUSSIA to do it, because the Americans won't do anything.

Sumtymes, Vicomte13, you say the most STUPID things. Point of FACT: France has restricted Muslim zones to non-Muslims that are on-going; even their own police can not enter because of established Sharia Law.

buckeroo  posted on  2015-11-21   19:22:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: buckeroo (#2)

Point of FACT: France has restricted Muslim zones to non-Muslims that are on-going; even their own police can not enter because of established Sharia Law.

Buckeroo, that is a stupid thing you have just said. Point of FACT: NO, France has NOT done any such thing.

There is no "no-go" zone in France that police are barred by the French government from entering because of Sharia Law.

Somebody has fed you a load of bull, and you have believed the lie you were told, and that has caused you to come to erroneous conclusion based on false information. That's the truth.

So, you went ahead and insulted me and my intelligence based on a "fact" that you "know" because you read it somewhere - from a source who was a liar.

I tell you the truth and you insult me because you believe some shithead who has lied to you, because the lie he told you fits your worldview.

That's the truth. Now you will insult me again, rather than go and corroborate the truth. The French government has not conceded anything to Sharia Law. In fact, it does things that are very obnoxious in the eyes of Muslims specifically to make the point that France is France, and Sharia does not run there.

If private parties to a contract want to specify arbibtration under Sharia law, that is available everywhere in the free world - people set their own rules in arbitration. But that has nothing at all to do with the nonsense you said about "no go" zones for French law, etc.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-11-21   19:50:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Vicomte13 (#3)

The French government has not conceded anything to Sharia Law.

It is EU law. Great Britain is changing the score card.

buckeroo  posted on  2015-11-21   20:02:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: buckeroo (#4)

Sharia is not EU law. France bans the hijab in public spaces.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-11-21   20:05:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Vicomte13 (#5)

Nope

buckeroo  posted on  2015-11-21   20:06:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: buckeroo (#6) (Edited)

Yep.

Loi interdisant la dissimulation du visage dans l'espace public (Law prohibiting the covering of the the face in the public space) passed September 13, 2010.

Upheld by the European Court of Human Rights in a decision of July 1, 2014.

You are misinformed.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-11-21   20:10:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Vicomte13 (#7)

BAH! The French People are tolerant to Sharia Law. So are the English and the rest of the EU.

In America, the President loves the stuff, too. Collectively, as world government your opinion is worthless.

buckeroo  posted on  2015-11-21   20:12:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: buckeroo (#8)

You are misinformed. The French are completely intolerant of Sharia Law, and intolerant of Islamicisation. They have taken many steps, legislatively and judicially, to establish the unquestioned supremacy of French culture within France.

What they ARE tolerant of, is foreigners, including Muslims. The French believe in assimilation: that one comes to France and becomes French.

Unlike the Americans, who publish things in multiple languages, and who give citizenship exams in foreign languages, the French require French language ability to grant citizenship, and they have imposed laws to strangle the aspects of conservative fundamentalist Islam that are incompatible with the ideals of the republic.

The law against face coverings and the burqa in public comes to mind.

So does the court decision whereby it is not a breach of contract under French law for a woman to lie about her virginity to her husband. A Muslim man married a woman who told him she was a virgin. Virginity was important to him, so he made her swear it. She swore it. She wasn't, and it came out after the marriage. He sought to annul the marriage based on fraud. He stressed the importance of virginity in his culture. The French courts ruled that sexual liberty is a fundamental right of French people, and that therefore it is not fraud and not grounds for an annulment if a woman signs a contract of marriage and lies about the status of her virginity. Her right to privacy and sexual liberty is sacrosanct, and cannot be defeated by contract, or oath. If she lies, there is no action possible under French law.

The British do seem to bend over backwards to accomodate the Muslims. But the French? Not hardly. The British (and American) and French approach to such things are practically diametrically opposite.

You seem to feel otherwise. Your feeling isn't based on fact, however. France is far more stubborn about its culture than either the Americans or the British.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-11-21   21:18:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Vicomte13 (#9) (Edited)

I wouldn't want a non-virgin bride if I was a man. Screw that "sexual liberty" nonsense. That is logically gross. That is the only matter I will strongly side with them with.

Speaking of the headscarfs and coverings, it IS REQUIRED by Muslim religion; no exceptions. and Allaah seems to be a different way in his punishments than YHWH so that is very difficult for Islam to be in Western society.

ebonytwix  posted on  2015-11-21   21:51:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: ebonytwix (#10)

Headscarves may be required by Islam, but covering the face is forbidden by French law.

Perhaps men don't want non-virgin brides, but the French state is not going to enforce their desires through force of law. France is a free country, and sexual liberty is a core freedom.

Another thing on which the French are very keen is the right of privacy. In the US, when you are at work, any message you send on the computer is subject to monitoring. In France, no. In France, the right of privacy in private communications extends into the workplace. Employers do not have the right to read employees' private e-mails.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-11-21   23:09:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: ebonytwix (#10)

I wouldn't want a non-virgin bride if I was a man.

Well, then you'd probably either accept something you didn't want, or end up celibate for life, because there are not all that many virgin brides left in this world.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-11-22   22:27:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Vicomte13 (#12)

There will be no sacrifices of virgins in this nation.

Psalm 37 PRAY FOR PARIS

Don  posted on  2015-11-22   22:32:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: Vicomte13 (#12)

go to third world countries first (easy to do) or remain celibate and take castration pills. not so hard

ebonytwix  posted on  2015-11-22   22:47:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: ebonytwix (#14)

go to third world countries first (easy to do) or remain celibate and take castration pills. not so hard

To chemically castrate one's self rather than marry a non-virgin? That's nonsense.

The only Third World countries where one is likely to find a lot of virgins are the Muslim ones.

Where is the "Third World" anyway? Africa. Parts of India. New Guinea. Latin America is not the Third World anymore, and you're not going to find many virgins there.

Nor are you going to find many virgins in non-Muslim Africa. Some? Sure. Very young ones.

It's an arbitrary standard that says that women should be virgin at marriage but that it doesn't matter for men. The actual divine standard is that you ARE married to the virgin you sleep with. This is not enforced anywhere, however.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-11-23   7:32:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Vicomte13 (#15)

Maybe. But then my desire to have such a thing isn't strong enough so it can overcome those feelings. Though if I was a male it would probably be different.

I know some adult virgin girls with low desires (they are my siblings) so it's clear they exist; albeit celibate and very recluse. I didn't say men don't have to be virgins; I'd prefer it if a man was.

ebonytwix  posted on  2015-11-23   7:58:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: ebonytwix (#16)

Ok, but here we speak of preferences. My standard concerning preferences is simple: I don't really care what people do, as long as they don't do it in the street and disturb the horses.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-11-23   8:54:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com