Another attack in Paris: gunman holds hostages in kosher supermarket

January 9, 2015 • 7:27 am

I feel more like a news feed these days than a website writer, but I wanted to report another armed attack in Paris in case it’s part of a concerted terrorist effort. According to the Guardian, which has a live feed on the situation, a gunman is holding hostages in eastern Paris. Here’s the Reuters feed as reported by the Guardian.  From what appears below, it seems to be another extremist Muslim operation related to the Charlie Hebdo murders (my emphasis in the report); and the fact that it occurred at a kosher supermarket substantiates that:

Several people were taken hostage at a kosher supermarket in eastern Paris on Friday after a shootout involving a man armed with two guns, a police source said.

There were unconfirmed local media reports that the man was the same as the one suspected of killing a policewoman in a southern suburb of Paris on Thursday.

A police source had told Reuters earlier he was a member of the same jihadist group as the two suspects in Wednesday’s attack at weekly newspaper Charlie Hebdo.

The exact number of hostages was unclear. Local media spoke of at least five. The police source said the man was equipped with automatic weapons.

Police immediately cordoned off the area and a helicopter was flying overhead. Local media said Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve was rushing to the scene.

This report of religiously-motivated terrorism may be wrong, but if it’s true, I feel sorry for the beleaguered citizens of Paris, which seems likely to have been singled out for jihadist operations. I suspect other European countries are next, especially those with large Muslim populations.

43 thoughts on “Another attack in Paris: gunman holds hostages in kosher supermarket”

  2. Meanwhile the other two murdering bastards seem to be surround now and the police are talking to them as they appear to have a hostage. At the same time they say they want to die, so why the hostage?? Hopefully it will be over soon.

    1. The hostage ensures they will die (and probably the hostage as well). The police will be forced to storm the place to rescue the hostage,and that will result in multiple deaths.

    2. The news reports I heard about a half hour ago from french officials was that it appears to be a coincidence (that it was kosher). It appears the guy targeted the supermarket because there were many people inside it and he wanted to exchange the people in it for the brothers’ freedom. Also there was something on the news about it being somewhat close to where the brothers were holed up, but they didn’t flash a map so I have no idea whether they meant within a mile or within 20 miles.

  5. Given the size of the Muslim population in Europe, this was inevitable. I’m sorry for those there, but what makes me terribly sad is the craven coverage from the UK media, which is parroting the ‘this is not Islam’ line.

    If this is what it is like when the muslim communities form under 10% of the population, how will it be when they have reached 50% of the population? At what point do we sell our houses or businesses and head to Australia or the USA, as large proportions of the non-Muslim population have been forced to do in Egypt, Lebanon and the rest of the Middle East?

    1. At 50% they’ll enforce Sharia law. Taqqiya – the practice of lying for Islam (because Allah knows what’s in your heart) is alive and well in some areas. Moderate Muslims live in genuine fear for their lives if they do so much as start a conversation about the nature of Islam.

  6. I’m going to point this out again (and, Jerry, please chastise me as needed if I’m overdoing this):

    There is a deafening silence (absence) of fatwahs against these killings and killers by the Muslim leadership.

    Remember: Remotely published books and cartoons have been deemed worthy of fatwahs calling for the murder of all associated with them. The Japanese translator of The Satanic Verse was murdered, and several others associated with the book around the world severely injured and nearly killed. Over a flipping novel. And over the Jyllands-Posten cartoons.

    Now, there are their co-religionists perpetrating murder in the name of their religion. Why no fatwah against them? Why have the Imams of France conspicuously not issued a fatwah to all Muslims of France that it is their duty to turn in these people and the ones who are still at large and haven’t struck yet (as surely they are out there)?

    Why is that? And what does it say about Islam?

    (And I’m going to point this out too: Expecting Islamic leaders around the world to publicly condemn mass murder is a really low bar. Pretty much, that’s the bare minimum to be considered a thinking, moral human. I think we can expect more from leaders.)

    1. I’m afraid you do not fully understand what religion, particularly this one, does to people. For the most part they simply are not capable of criticizing the religion, at least not to an degree. They are not alone.

      Take a look at the Catholic church since the truth of all those years of child abuse. Yet it marches on, singing a song. The disease of faith is almost incurable.

      1. I fully agree (except that I do understand).

        However, our expectations should be higher (just as in every other aspect of life). Religion is not a valid excuse.

      2. This is true but I’m very happy with the work of the Muslim Canadian Congress. They may be few, they aren’t Muslim leaders, but they are speaking up. The proclaim that Islam is hate and they are Muslims!

        Their Twitter
        Their web site.

        So, they at least are trying to make a change.

        1. “we renounce the doctrine of armed jihad and follow the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the Canadian constitution as our guiding principles”

          This is good and clear. Well done MCC.

          Should we expect one iota less from any civilized person?

          1. There is a deafening silence (absence) of fatwahs against these killings and killers by the Muslim leadership.

            If a fatwah were issued against them it would have to be for something like taking Islamic law into their own hands.
            Much of the condemnation I’ve heard from Muslims is similar to the condemnation you might hear when a father kills the man who raped, and murdered his daughter. What he did was wrong, and he should be prosecuted, but we understand why he did it.

          2. “If a fatwah were issued against them it would have to be for something like taking Islamic law into their own hands.”

            They don’t seem to mind doing it over cartoons and novels.

            And how could telling people to turn in murderers possibly be a violation or re-writing of Islamic law?

            Oh, wait, Islamic law is different from civil law on these subjects. /snark

        2. I notice they even had the courage to tw**t the ‘Charlie Hebdo’ cover in question! Excellent!

    2. Here is a partial list of muslims and muslim groups speaking out against them.

      I think you’re banging the fatwa drum merely because you know if you ask for other evidence of repudiation by muslims, it will be easy to find. Fatwas are pretty much the only form of repudiation we haven’t seen yet, so that’s where you’ve set the bar.

      Your whole position is darkly absurd in a sense. We nonbelievers spend post after post, year after year pining for the day when theists will throw off the shackles of argument from religious authority and use their rationality, their critical thinking, to make their choices. But the moment this happens, you want a fatwa. You want them to listen to and give weight to religious arguments from authority. Shouldn’t the proper response to this event be: stop listening to fatwas. Stop giving so-called divine messengers and messages the credibility you give them in the past. Why do you want to see a fatwa so bad when what we’d really like is for the muslim public to stop paying attention to fatwas?

      In any event, it may surprise you to know that muslim leaders did issue a general fatwa against terrorism, back in 2005. Now let me guess: that isn’t good enough for you, is it?

      1. I think you’re missing the point, eric. The reason for setting the bar at “fatwah” is not that we think religious arguments from authority are legitimate. It is because the believers think it is. It is a measure of what a Muslim believer actually thinks is the position he is compelled, by faith, to follow.

        Of course faith is idiotic. But do you seriously think that Muslim believers are going to give a good allah-damn for an atheist telling them to ignore fatwahs? Get real.

        The absence of fatwahs of the kind jbillie suggests is telling because it measures the depth of commitment in the Muslim community for freedom of expression and other similar values.

        1. The reason for setting the bar at “fatwah” is not that we think religious arguments from authority are legitimate. It is because the believers think it is.

          And you’re going to take advantage of that irrationality, you’re going to use it to sway them to your ethical position. Nice.

          If you don’t think people should be using fatwas to make arguments, you shouldn’t be hoping some Imam can use a fatwa to make this argument. At best that’s treating the symptom while helping the disease progress.

          Dude, stand on your principles. If it’s fundamentally wrong and unsound to use religious authority to reach bad decisions, then its fundamentally wrong and unsound to use religious authority to reach good ones too. So stop calling and asking for people to use that fundamentally wrong and unsound logic to reach a decision you agree with.

          1. I’m not hoping for fatwahs. I’m observing the absence of them. The absence says something.

            Emulating an ostrich isn’t helpful.

  7. These actions did not develop in a vacuum. There is at least one imam and mosque somewhere where the beliefs of these terrorists were inculcated.

    Should these imams ,if found, be prosecuted for murder or should we (still) consider their speech to be Constitutionally protected?

    See where free speech absolutism gets us?

    1. These imams should be identified and publicly identified. And mercilessly ridiculed. Their beliefs should be granted absolutely zero respect. They, and their followers, should be made to suffer legal consequences if they violate the law. That’s where constitutionally protected speech gets us.

      1. I’m afraid one of the individuals you may be looking for is already dead. They know that one of these guys spent time in Yemen in 2011 and probably trained under that one, who’s name escapes me. He was an American citizen. Anyway they got him with a drone some time back.

          1. The guy was Anwar Al-Awlaki. At the time the leader of Al Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula.

    1. I cite one of the comments:

      The poll was done by a Russian state-owned news agency, not a reliable source, probably false.

    2. This is looking to be a seriously horrific story, but as it’s happened way up in the northeast of Nigeria where Boko Haram are pretty much in control anyway, it’s not getting much media coverage. With Boko Haram, every time you think they can’t get any worse, they do.

Comments are closed.