My Photo

Recent Comments

COMMENTS?

  • We love comments, but they are treated like letters to the editor -- only some are permanently published. Comments may be depublished or edited if they contain profanity or personal attacks or if they include statements that are false, defamatory, unethical, immoral, or illogical. Rude or inappropriate comments or spam may result in a permanent website ban (comments auto-deleted), so don't do that. Thanks.
  • Google

Like This Blog?

  • Add this blog to my Technorati Favorites!

    Subscribe in NewsGator Online

    Add to Google

    Subscribe in Bloglines

    Add to My AOL

  • Word of the Day

    This Day in History

    In the News

    Quote of the Day

    Spelling Bee
    difficulty level:
    score: -
    please wait...
     
    spell the word:

    Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11

27 entries categorized "France"

April 04, 2008

Pirates Seize Yacht; What Will France Do About It?

French_yacht_seized Well, what do you know?  A chance for France to test its military might (such as it is):

PARIS - Pirates seized control of a French luxury yacht carrying 30 crew members Friday off the coast of Somalia, the French government and the ship's owner said.

Attackers stormed the 288-foot Le Ponant as it returned without passengers from the Seychelles, in the Indian Ocean, toward the Mediterranean Sea, said officials with French maritime transport company CMA-CGM.

"The Defense and Foreign ministries are mobilized to act as quickly as possible, I hope in the coming minutes or hours to try to win the freedom of these hostages," Prime Minister Francois Fillon told reporters while on a visit to Brussels, Belgium.

He did not elaborate. France has considerable military resources in the region, including a base in Djibouti and a naval flotilla sailing in the Indian Ocean.

A military spokesman said later that a French warship, the frigate Le Commandant Bouan, had been ordered to track the yacht. A helicopter from the Canadian warship Charlottetown also was dispatched, Cmdr. Christophe Prazuck said.

He declined to say if any military operation might be planned, and said he did not know the exact location of the yacht.

The Ponant was in the high seas in the Gulf of Aden, off the coast of Somalia in the Indian Ocean, the French Foreign Ministry said. At least some of the crew members are French, it said.

. . . .  Pirates seized more than two dozen ships off the Somali coast last year.

The U.S. Navy has led international patrols to try to combat piracy in the region. Last year, the guided missile destroyer USS Porter opened fire to destroy pirate skiffs tied to a Japanese tanker.

France, let's see what you can do.

November 11, 2007

A Frenchman Speaks: What Made America Great

Don't miss the encouraging words to America delivered to the U.S. Congress by French President Nicolas Sarkozy (via the Anchoress).

This man loves America better some of our own.  Where others see only imperfection and inadequacy, this man sees dreams -- good, mighty dreams -- that came true.

What a breath of fresh air.

July 21, 2007

Thank You, France

They remember.

France_will_never_forget_2

Volunteers form a human chain to honor fallen U.S. troops in World War Two and form the words "France Will Never Forget" as a symbol of the friendship between France and the U.S. in Omaha Beach, near the U.S. Cemetery in Colleville-sur-Mer, western France, June 30, 2007. (REUTERS/Etienne de Malglaive/Pool)

More at Gateway Pundit.

July 18, 2007

If Al Qaeda Is "Evolving," Why Can't America's Iraq Strategy Evolve Too?

Here's what passes for the conventional wisdom on Iraq:  The war was badly planned and therefore is failing miserably.  As a result, America's only option is to fold up the entire operation and slink away, leaving the Iraqis to whatever bloodbath awaits them.  We've reached the point of no return; the war is irretrievably lost; and no amount of rethinking or redoubling of effort will make any difference.

Meanwhile, Al Qaeda's early losses in the war on terror, including the deaths of major leaders such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and possibly Osama Bin Ladin himself, are completely irrelevant, since Al Qaeda is "evolving" constantly and is planning mass casualty attacks on the U.S.:

Al Qaeda terrorists are rebuilding their capabilities and continuing to plan mass-casualty attacks inside the United States, according to an intelligence assessment made public yesterday.

"We assess [al Qaeda] has protected or regenerated key elements of its homeland attack capability, including a safe haven in ... Pakistan [tribal areas], operational lieutenants and its top leadership," according to the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), a consensus analysis of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies.

"Although we have discovered only a handful of individuals in the United States with ties to al Qaeda senior leadership since 9/11, we judge that al Qaeda will intensify its efforts to put operatives here," the report stated.

Retired Vice Adm. Michael McConnell, the director of national intelligence whose office produced the NIE, said the United States will face a "persistent and evolving terrorist threat" in the next three years.

The seven-page public summary of the classified report said the United States is in a "heightened threat environment."

"They're working as hard as they can in positioning trained operatives here in the United States," Mr. McConnell said. "They have recruitment programs to bring recruits into [the tribal] region of Pakistan [who] could come to the United States, fit into the population and then use some of the training that they receive in the Pakistani area for explosives and so on."

Is the contrast between the defeatism of the media in viewing America's chances in the Iraq war and the endless optimism for Al Qaeda's chances stark enough for you?

Al Qaeda remains a threat because it is "continuing to plan" further attacks and "will intensify its efforts" and its members are "working as hard as they can."

But when it comes to the Iraq war, working harder, intensifying efforts, rethinking, and continuing to plan are off the table for the United States.  The only option we have is to rip our leaders from limb to limb, metaphorically speaking, for having started the war.  Since things look bleak now, they're going to stay that way no matter what America does, and its only option is to turn tail and run.

Don't tell me we've tried long enough and hard enough in Iraq and there's no point in continuing any longer.  Nonsense.  Al Qaeda's attacks on the U.S. predate the Iraq war, but nobody seems to be pulling out a stopwatch and insisting that Al Qaeda's chances of striking a mortal blow at the U.S. or the West are forever lost.

What a fitting metaphor is Harry Reid's surrender slumberthon in the Senate tonight.  Harry Reid knows how to lose a war he has already declared lost.  The solution is quite simple:  Lie down, accept defeat, and make no effort to prevail.

In the real world, the margin between victory and defeat is rarely great, but the outcome matters a great deal.  The margin of victory usually turns on one thing:  motivation.  If we are motivated to win; if we are determined; if we are constantly "rebuilding our capabilities" and "continuing to plan" and "intensifying our efforts  and "working as hard as we can," then there are very few forces on earth that can stand in our way.

By the same token, if we are frequently announcing that we've already lost and that our cause is hopeless, and holding slumberthons to protest our own nation's continued effort to prevail, then we certainly can bring about our own defeat.

Update:  Today brings a stunningly important speech from Senator John McCain (via Captain's Quarters):

Mr. President, we have nearly finished this little exhibition, which was staged, I assume, for the benefit of a briefly amused press corps and in deference to political activists opposed to the war who have come to expect from Congress such gestures, empty though they may be, as proof that the majority in the Senate has heard their demands for action to end the war in Iraq. The outcome of this debate, the vote we are about to take, has never been in doubt to a single member of this body. And to state the obvious, nothing we have done for the last twenty-four hours will have changed any facts on the ground in Iraq or made the outcome of the war any more or less important to the security of our country. The stakes in this war remain as high today as they were yesterday; the consequences of an American defeat are just as grave; the costs of success just as dear. No battle will have been won or lost, no enemy will have been captured or killed, no ground will have been taken or surrendered, no soldier will have survived or been wounded, died or come home because we spent an entire night delivering our poll-tested message points, spinning our soundbites, arguing with each other, and substituting our amateur theatrics for statesmanship. All we have achieved are remarkably similar newspaper accounts of our inflated sense of the drama of this display and our own temporary physical fatigue. Tomorrow the press will move on to other things and we will be better rested. But nothing else will have changed.

In Iraq, American soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen are still fighting bravely and tenaciously in battles that are as dangerous, difficult and consequential as the great battles of our armed forces’ storied past. Our enemies will still be intent on defeating us, and using our defeat to encourage their followers in the jihad they wage against us, a war which will become a greater threat to us should we quit the central battlefield in defeat. The Middle East will still be a tinderbox, which our defeat could ignite in a regional war that will imperil our vital interests at risk there and draw us into a longer and far more costly war. The prospect of genocide in Iraq, in which we will be morally complicit, is still as real a consequence of our withdrawal today as it was yesterday.

During our extended debate over the last few days, I have heard senators repeat certain arguments over and over again. My friends on the other side of this argument accuse those of us who oppose this amendment with advocating “staying the course,” which is intended to suggest that we are intent on continuing the mistakes that have put the outcome of the war in doubt. Yet we all know that with the arrival of General Petraeus we have changed course. We are now fighting a counterinsurgency strategy, which some of us have argued we should have been following from the beginning, and which makes the most effective use of our strength and does not strengthen the tactics of our enemy. This new battle plan is succeeding where our previous tactics have failed, although the outcome remains far from certain. The tactics proposed in the amendment offered by my friends, Senators Levin and Reed – a smaller force, confined to bases distant from the battlefield, from where they will launch occasional search and destroy missions and train the Iraqi military – are precisely the tactics employed for most of this war and which have, by anyone’s account, failed miserably. Now, that, Mr. President, is staying the course, and it is a course that inevitably leads to our defeat and the catastrophic consequences for Iraq, the region and the security of the United States our defeat would entail.

Yes, we have heard quite a lot about the folly of “staying the course,” though the real outcome should this amendment prevail and be signed into law, would be to deny our generals and the Americans they have the honor to command the ability to try, in this late hour, to address the calamity these tried and failed tactics produced, and salvage from the wreckage of our previous failures a measure of stability for Iraq and the Middle East, and a more secure future for the American people.

I have also listened to my colleagues on the other side repeatedly remind us that the American people have spoken in the last election. They have demanded we withdraw from Iraq, and it is our responsibility to do, as quickly as possible, what they have bid us to do. But is that our primary responsibility? Really, Mr. President, is that how we construe our role: to follow without question popular opinion even if we believe it to be in error, and likely to endanger the security of the country we have sworn to defend? Surely, we must be responsive to the people who have elected us to office, and who, if it is their wish, will remove us when they become unsatisfied with our failure to heed their demands. I understand that, of course. And I understand why so many Americans have become sick and tired of this war, given the many, many mistakes made by civilian and military leaders in its prosecution. I, too, have been made sick at heart by these mistakes and the terrible price we have paid for them. But I cannot react to these mistakes by embracing a course of action that I know will be an even greater mistake, a mistake of colossal historical proportions, which will -- and I am as sure of this as I am of anything – seriously endanger the people I represent and the country I have served all my adult life. I have many responsibilities to the people of Arizona, and to all Americans. I take them all seriously, Mr. President, or try to. But I have one responsibility that outweighs all the others – and that is to do everything in my power, to use whatever meager talents I posses, and every resource God has granted me to protect the security of this great and good nation from all enemies foreign and domestic. And that I intend to do, Mr. President, even if I must stand athwart popular opinion. I will explain my reasons to the American people. I will attempt to convince as many of my countrymen as I can that we must show even greater patience, though our patience is nearly exhausted, and that as long as there is a prospect for not losing this war, then we must not choose to lose it. That is how I construe my responsibility to my constituency and my country. That is how I construed it yesterday. It is how I construe it today. And it is how I will construe it tomorrow. I do not know how I could choose any other course.

I cannot be certain that I possess the skills to be persuasive. I cannot be certain that even if I could convince Americans to give General Petraeus the time he needs to determine whether we can prevail, that we will prevail in Iraq. All I am certain of is that our defeat there would be catastrophic, not just for Iraq, but for us, and that I cannot be complicit in it, but must do whatever I can, whether I am effective or not, to help us try to avert it. That, Mr. President, is all I can possibly offer my country at this time. It is not much compared to the sacrifices made by Americans who have volunteered to shoulder a rifle and fight this war for us. I know that, and am humbled by it, as we all are. But though my duty is neither dangerous nor onerous, it compels me nonetheless to say to my colleagues and to all Americans who disagree with me: that as long as we have a chance to succeed we must try to succeed.

I am privileged, as we all are, to be subject to the judgment of the American people and history. But, my friends, they are not always the same judgment. The verdict of the people will arrive long before history’s. I am unlikely to ever know how history has judged us in this hour. The public’s judgment of me I will know soon enough. I will accept it, as I must. But whether it is favorable or unforgiving, I will stand where I stand, and take comfort from my confidence that I took my responsibilities to my country seriously, and despite the mistakes I have made as a public servant and the flaws I have as an advocate, I tried as best I could to help the country we all love remain as safe as she could be in an hour of serious peril.

July 11, 2007

Today's Comic Relief

Terrorist_garbage

Clintons_on_the_pardons

Global_warming_panic

May 31, 2007

Reforming the French Work Ethic

Clearly, workers in France live on an entirely different planet from American workers:

PARIS, France (Reuters) -- Their new president wants to get the French to work harder to compete in global markets, but some traditions are likely to endure -- including long holidays, a kiss for colleagues in the morning, and a decent lunch.

Going out for a proper lunch is characteristic of French culture and on an average weekday, just a few steps from the Louvre museum, the streets swell with hungry workers seeking empty spots at crowded cafes.

"It's quite typical," says Gerome Jeusselim, a waiter at Cafe Pistache. "I don't think things will ever change."

Newly elected president Nicolas Sarkozy may not agree. With unemployment hovering above 8 percent and the economy barely growing 2 percent, at issue is whether France can keep up its lifestyle and be competitive.

"France is really going downhill," said Jeremy Salomon, a Frenchman working as a project manager at optical manufacturer GrandOptical in the southwest suburbs of Paris.

"If there is no change, France will be at the end of the queue in terms of productivity."

Conservative Sarkozy has promised to tackle this problem, with reforms aimed at restoring the values of hard work and rewarding people who "get up early". He wants to make the 35-hour work week a minimum, not maximum, requirement, allowing people to work more.

"Sarkozy wants to make it possible for people who work overtime to be paid for it," Salomon said. "I think he wants to try to change the French mentality in terms of work ethic."

While Americans focus on productivity, Salomon said the French waste time with meetings. He joked that another big time-drain was the tradition of greeting everyone in the morning by kissing them twice on cheek: "That's like 20 minutes gone by."

While cheek-kissing is not an American work custom, morning chats and refilling coffee cups are.  Obviously, everyone can be more productive.  By the same token, there's something to be said for working at a liveable pace.

The problem in France isn't the work ethic per se.  It's the laws and regulations that make it difficult for companies to fire workers who are not productive.  If the free market is left to work without interference, it can easily find a reasonable balance between work and play that benefits both employers and workers. 

For France, thanks to excessive regulation, it's been one long holiday -- almost literally:

Salomon is not paid overtime, even though he usually works from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m., with an hour for lunch. Instead, he gets extra vacation -- which adds up to so many days off it is hard to find time to work.

"We get 48 days off, not including national holidays," he said. "So much vacation time makes it hectic to work."

There are only about 250 work days in a year after 10 holidays are taken into account.  A worker who is absent 48 days is missing 19% of the available work days in a year.  No wonder the French are struggling.

May 09, 2007

World's Smallest Comics Page

Friendship_france

Hillary_stain_iraq

May 08, 2007

Violence in France Worse Than Reported

The violence in France after Sarkozy's election was worse than the AP reported.  From Little Green Footballs:

Not only did the Associated Press bury their report that 367 cars had been torched in France, now it turns out that the media have been lying about the violence.

Because the actual number of cars destroyed by “youths” last night was 730—about twice the number reported by the AP.

From Reuters:

Hundreds of people were arrested in France overnight in clashes between police and protesters angry over conservative Nicolas Sarkozy's victory in Sunday's presidential election, police said.

Official figures released on Monday said demonstrators set fire to 730 cars and injured 78 policemen across France, with 592 people arrested in the violent protests against the tough-talking former interior minister.

The tally was revised sharply upwards after an initial report appeared to downplay the clashes and was at odds with local police figures and eyewitness reports, which suggested widespread troubles in numerous French cities.

The AP is belatedly catching up with the true story:

French police have arrested a total of 592 people across the country as bands of rioters protested conservative Nicolas Sarkozy's presidential election victory Sunday, French media reported.

The police said a total of 730 vehicles were torched and 28 police officers were injured in violent incidents from Sunday night to Monday morning.

As LGF notes:

This comes as no surprise, because French media have openly stated that they will cover up the true extent of the violence. And the French Constitutional Council recently passed a law criminalizing the reporting of acts of violence by anyone other than professional journalists.

Paris_car_ablaze_sarkozy_protest
Gina Cobb caption:  French thugs demonstrate their preferred method of "voting" against their country's newly elected president.  Isn't democracy fun without effective law enforcement to back it up?!  Marshmallows, anyone?
Reuters caption:  A firefighter works to control a car set ablaze in Clichy-sous-Bois outside Paris May 6, 2007 after demonstrations against the election of France's new President Nicolas Sarkozy. (Gonzalo Fuentes/Reuters)

May 07, 2007

Reaction to Sarkozy Victory

There's no shortage of reaction to Sarkozy's victory in the French presidential race.

The Telegraph says the victory for Sarkozy is a victory for France

Socialists are looking for someone or something to blame other than their own failed policies.

John Fund refers to Sarkozy as L'Adulte, and notes a hopeful pattern in Europe:

With the victory last year of Angela Merkel, the pro-U.S. leader of Germany, and the impending changeover in power in Britain from pro-American Tony Blair to equally pro-American Labor leader Gordon Brown, there is also at least a chance that Europe will begin to address its problems straight on and avoid needless scapegoating of the U.S. With Mr. Sarkozy's victory, France's government looks like it will finally have some energetic adult supervision.

As a reminder of why adult supervision is indeed called for, Taliban terrorists seem to think they're still in a position to dictate terms to France in Afghanistan.

As usual, the forces opposed to Sarkozy and in favor of ruin are already seeking to attain through violence what they could not achieve at the ballot box.

Despite the terrorists, thugs and socialists, France finally has a chance.  But the French can't just sit back and expect Sarkozy to do all the heavy lifting.  Day by day, the French will need to choose economic freedom instead of socialism and security instead of excessive political correctness.  France will have to make better choices not just in one presidential election, but again and again.   

May 06, 2007

Election Day in France (Updated)

The U.K. Telegraph pulls no punches:  It's Sarkozy or ruin.  I tend to agree.

This is not necessarily France's last chance, but it is one of them, and France has already used up quite a few.

Update:  Sarkozy won.

May 04, 2007

Crunch Time in France's Presidential Election

France's presidential election is coming up this Sunday.

The Los Angeles Times reports fairly objectively (by its standards) on the debate between socialist candidate Ségolène Royal and frontrunner Nicolas Sarkozy.

The polls are tight at the moment, with Sarkozy having just extended his slight lead over Royal.

Neo-Neocon does an excellent job of comparing and contrasting Hillary Clinton and Ségolène Royal.

March 09, 2007

Chirac Opposes U.S. Missile Shield

France's Jacques Chirac is at it again, undermining U.S. national security and the security of Europe to boot:

U.S. plans to base a missile defense system in eastern Europe could reopen old divisions on the continent, French President Jacques Chirac said on Friday.

The United States wants to base the system in Poland and the Czech Republic so that any missiles fired by what it calls "rogue states" such as Iran and North Korea can be shot down.

"We should be very careful not to head toward new lines of division in Europe and a return to an out-dated order," Chirac told a news conference after a summit of EU leaders in Brussels.

Because France has been such a (cough) loyal ally, I think we should take the advice of its brave (cough) president and leave ourselves and our allies completely defenseless against nuclear attack.

Surrender has always worked well for France, after all.

October 21, 2006

There's a Place in France, Where --

-- things are not going well with Islamists.

It doesn't rhyme, but it's accurate!

For starters, 112 cars are being torched every day by disaffected "youths."  The youths happen to be from places like Tunisia (Muslim population, 98%) and Mali (Muslim population, 90%).

Oh, and as Little Green Footballs points out, France's airports seem to be at risk, too.  French authorities have rescinded the security clearance of 43 baggage handlers at France's main international airport, Charles de Gaulle, due to suspicions that they were connected with "radical organizations."

“There were specific elements that made us forbid them entry” to sensitive areas at Paris’ largest airport, [French Interior Minister Nicolas] Sarkozy said.

“I cannot accept that people with radical practices” work in an airport, the minister said, adding that it was his “duty to ensure that (workers) do not have any kind of links with radical organizations.”

He did not elaborate on what specific information authorities had received about the 43 workers. Some of the employees concerned are known to be Muslims.

So if cars aren't safe in France, and airplanes aren't safe in France, what's left? 

Trains?

Uh . . . no.

There's a place called France . . .

. . . where the misery is palpable.

C'mon France!  How about a little French resistance?

September 25, 2006

And a Fine Monday to You!

Coffee_1 Here are a few things to help get your week started well. 

For best results, browse while sipping a nice cup of coffee (or your favorite beverage).

John Hinderaker, Powerline -- Pigs Won't Fly, and Hillary Won't Be President

Jules Crittenden -- Does AP Stand for Al-Qaeda Propaganda?

Scrappleface -- Intel Report: Fighting Terrorists Creates Terrorists

Raging Muslims.  Election-year-crazed Democrats.  Hugo Chavez.  Iraq.  Iran.  What could happen next? Someone took the last doughnut. It

Point Five -- Reality-Based Community Sponsors Giant Spinach Salad Buffet

Jacques_chirac_bush

But wait! -- There's MORE!! . . .

Senatorial Candidate Challenges Opponent To Drop Out Of Race

And, last but not least . . .

Barker_1 (carnival barker:)  Step Right Up, Folks! . . . Right this way! . . .

. . . See the World's Smallest Monkey!

O.K. -- NOW we're done. 

Go have a good week!

September 19, 2006

France. Iran Nukes. Sigh.

France has decided that, since Iran has openly defied the U.N. by continuing to move forward with uranium enrichment and its nuclear program, and has ignored every entreaty to stop, the solution is . . .

. . . to remove any threat of sanctions:

President Jacques Chirac has broken ranks with the US and Britain by calling for the suspension of UN Security Council action against Iran during negotiations over its nuclear programme.

In a radio interview yesterday before flying to New York for the UN General Assembly, the French President provoked a diplomatic storm by backing Iran's demand that the Security Council should halt its involvement in the nuclear dossier.

When Iran detonates its first nuclear weapon -- or if any nation of the world acts independently to stop Iran before it does -- remember this.

Remember who was responsible for preventing the international community from acting promptly, responsibly, and effectively to stop Iran before it achieved nuclear weapons capability. 

Remember Jacques Chirac.  Remember France.

September 14, 2006

The Thanks France Gets for Appeasing Terrorists

"All the praise is due to Allah for the blessed union which we ask Allah to be as a bone in the throats of the Americans and French Crusaders and their allies, and inspire distress, concern and dejection in the hearts of the traitorous, apostate sons of France."  (Al-Qaida's No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahri)

And with those words, Al Qaeda has announced that it is adding one of the terrorist appeasing European nations -- FRANCE -- to its list of mortal enemies, along with the United States and other nations.

That's how much gratitude France has received from Islamic terrorists for having stayed out of the Iraq war, having refused to allow its peacekeeping soldiers to actually shoot anyone in Lebanon if necessary, etc., etc., etc.

PARIS - Al-Qaida has for the first time announced a union with an Algerian insurgent group that has designated France as an enemy, saying they will act together against French and American interests.

Current and former French officials specializing in terrorism said Thursday that an al-Qaida alliance with the Salafist Group for Call and Combat, known by its French initials GSPC, was cause for concern.

"We take these threats very seriously," Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy said, adding in an interview on France-2 television that the threat to France was "high" and "permanent," and that "absolute vigilance" was required.

Al-Qaida's No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahri, announced the "blessed union" in a video posted this week on the Internet to mark the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks in the United States.

France's leader have repeatedly warned that the decision not to join the U.S.-led war in Iraq would not shield the country from Islamic terrorism. French participation in the U.N. peacekeeping mission in Lebanon could give extremists another reason to strike.

The national police had no immediate comment on the announced alliance, but officials have long regarded the GSPC as one of the main terror threats facing France.

French experts agreed, but also noted the group has been severely weakened by internal divisions, security crackdowns and defections in Algeria, a former French territory still working to put down an Islamic insurgency that reached its most murderous heights in the 1990s.

"The GSPC is losing speed and has suffered very significant losses in recent months," said Louis Caprioli, former assistant director of France's DST counterterrorism and counterintelligence agency.

Some GSPC fighters took advantage of a recent Algerian amnesty for Islamic insurgents and others have been killed, said Caprioli, who works for Geos, a risk management firm.

Of the 800 combatants that GSPC was estimated to have had last year, probably no more than 500 remain, and the group has had no operational cells in France since the late 1990s, he said.

But Caprioli and others also said an alliance of GSPC and al-Qaida could increase the terror risk for France — not least because al-Zawahri's designation of the country as a worthy target could inspire extremists to take action.

In his video, Al-Zawahri hailed "the joining up" of the GSPC with al-Qaida as "good news."

Is it beginning to dawn on Europe yet that appeasing Islamic terrorists is not a safe option?  No country on earth is safe from this cancer. 

There is but one option:  For all decent, civilized nations to stand and fight the terrorists, as long as it takes and as hard as it takes, until victory is attained.

NEWS & BUZZ

DAILY CARTOON click to enlarge
ANDERTOONS.COM DAILY CARTOONS

WEBSITES TO EXPLORE

  • Blogroll Me!

    "New!" websites were updated within the last 6 hours

SUPPORT OUR ADVERTISERS

GINA COBB

  • The 2006 Weblog Awards
  • "This is a great blog." (Jack Jones)
  • ". . . Gina Cobb is proof that not all lawyers deserve the death penalty." (Gringoman.com)(Gee -- thanks!)
  • "Let the charming and talented Gina Cobb show you how important rhetorical argument can be." (No-Pasaran.blogspot.com)